Business process map - Please Review my Process Map and Turtle Diagram

[JJ H20]

Howard,

I changed the Interrelationship Diagram format to PDF. Hopefully, that will help you see the document. For clarification, this diagram fulfills section 4.2.2 in ISO 9001:2000 or ISO/TS 16949. We are hyperlinking each of the segments of the Interrelationship Diagram to supporting procedures which are hyperlinked to work instructions and to forms. From a documentation perspective it is very efficient.

Joe

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Howard,

I changed the Interrelationship Diagram format to PDF. Hopefully, that will help you see the document. For clarification, this diagram fulfills section 4.2.2 in ISO 9001:2000 or ISO/TS 16949. We are hyperlinking each of the segments of the Interrelationship Diagram to supporting procedures which are hyperlinked to work instructions and to forms. From a documentation perspective it is very efficient.

Joe

I like the diagram. It is a bit unique, but makes the connection, as far as the manual and procedures go. However, and very importantly, you need to have something like this that addresses the processes, rather than the procedures. It is the interrelationship between the processes that is required by cl 4.1, and forms the basis for the ISO/TS process approach. Do you have something for the processes as well?

 

[JJ H20]

HJ,

The Interrelationship Diagram shows a "linked system" of procedures. A procedure has always described a process; who, what and when (flow charts). I see them as interchangeable terms. Some other participants in this forum have provided slightly different flow diagrams which describe the same. The key distinction in 4.1 is section "e" - "monitor, measure, analyze".

ISO 9001/2000 & TS/QS can use "turtle" diagrams which contain a flow diagram, inputs, outputs, owners and metrics. Our "procedures" describe processes using flow diagrams. Each flow diagram has inputs and outputs defined, who is handling the inputs and outputs and the metrics which monitor process effectiveness.

This new standard is refreshing.

Joe

 

[ccdizon]

hi,

As the name imply " Business Process Map", it deals with the processes of how you do your company's business in relation or compliance with the requirements of your quality management system. I am attaching the Business Process Map, we have developed in preparation for the TS 16949 certification. Using the so called "Turtle Diagram" you can establish the relation of each processes.

I hope this will help.
Comments/suggestions for improvement are most welcome

Thanks,

CCD
from Philippines

 

[Anthonyl]

Thankyou CCD.
I posted the question some time ago and in that time have acheived the TS2 standard. (In fact we have our second full audit, not counting the initial book audit, booked for next week.)

The maps I finally settled on and which have been approved by the BSI, are as attached. They are written using "smartdraw version 7". You can get a free reader download on the web.

Although the attachments look simplistic, in actual fact I find that they take just as long to raise as your example because you have to identify the key steps just the same and the definitions you use have to briefly convey each indivual process. These maps are then hyper-linked & supported with work instructions, which can be process maps, photographs or written word, in addition to documentation such as COSHH and H & S info and finally the forms required by the operator.

I discovered through a training course that the standard expects flow maps that show the process. (The key was the fact that the standard asked you to identify the process steps only. Our trainer explained, over lunch, that this was the most important thing.) You have to show a link to the next step but you do not have to define how you do it. The more you define the more an auditor has to audit.

This is now established by the auditor, who identifies the process itself through the documentation trail. For example - our auditor now looks in much greater depth at our training records and interviews more operatives to verify that they are fully conversant with the process. (Much greater depth than when he auditted our ISO9000:2000 & QS9000 where he seemed to concentrate on documented records, which is still a large part of the audit).

I wish you the very best of luck in your quest to gain the standard and thank you for the info that you provided. :

As a company we have definately benifitted from the change in style. The guys actually take notice of the maps and the pictorial WI's. It's worth the effort.


Best regards,

Anthonyl

 

[Caronv]

The Turtle in concept is correct, but should also include the risks for each input, I will send you mine as an example, was just audited by TUV Germany and they were happy with it.

Regards

Caron

 

[kbliese]

Could some one please offer me a simple explanation of how to use the turtle diagram when performing an internal audit.
Thanks!!!!!

 

[Anthonyl]

Hi,
You seem not to have had a reply regarding auditing a turtle diagram..
I was told I had to have training or get a non-conformance for not being suitably qualified to audit the TS2 standard. Training to ISO & QS9000 was not considered to be adequate by my auditor.
The course recommended to me was, Auditing to the Automotive Process Approach, a BSI course.
It was very helpful and I have since had all of my auditors trained on the same course. By the end of it the audit to a turtle process makes perfect sense and the number of improvements to our processes and systems has more than paid for the training.

It's not cheap but it is well worth it.

If interested, it can be found on the web: www.bsi-global.com/training

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Thankyou CCD.
I posted the question some time ago and in that time have acheived the TS2 standard. (In fact we have our second full audit, not counting the initial book audit, booked for next week.)

The maps I finally settled on and which have been approved by the BSI, are as attached. They are written using "smartdraw version 7". You can get a free reader download on the web.

Although the attachments look simplistic, in actual fact I find that they take just as long to raise as your example because you have to identify the key steps just the same and the definitions you use have to briefly convey each indivual process. These maps are then hyper-linked & supported with work instructions, which can be process maps, photographs or written word, in addition to documentation such as COSHH and H & S info and finally the forms required by the operator.

I discovered through a training course that the standard expects flow maps that show the process. (The key was the fact that the standard asked you to identify the process steps only. Our trainer explained, over lunch, that this was the most important thing.) You have to show a link to the next step but you do not have to define how you do it. The more you define the more an auditor has to audit.

This is now established by the auditor, who identifies the process itself through the documentation trail. For example - our auditor now looks in much greater depth at our training records and interviews more operatives to verify that they are fully conversant with the process. (Much greater depth than when he auditted our ISO9000:2000 & QS9000 where he seemed to concentrate on documented records, which is still a large part of the audit).

I wish you the very best of luck in your quest to gain the standard and thank you for the info that you provided. :

As a company we have definately benifitted from the change in style. The guys actually take notice of the maps and the pictorial WI's. It's worth the effort.


Best regards,

Anthonyl

Please bear in mind. You are not creating documents for the auditor, they should be for your benefit. Secondly, ISO and TS audits are not just auditing the steps of a process, but are to audit the "effectiveness in implementation."

In other words, if the whole audit time is spent writing down the steps and links, then the value of the audit has little benefit. After the first couple cycles, it will plow the same audit trails.

A better approach may be to document the turtles and /or flow charts into the QMS. Then, they, along with the metrics, are available to auditors to use to evaluate the effectiveness of each process, rather than the existence of each process.

 

[Anthonyl]

Have just read your response. Thanks but I was already aware and even my internal audits are turtle based as are the external ones.

As I understand it the standard is business based, looking towards eutopia with no defects,rejects or errors. To me at least the external auditor is just another of my customers, that we pay, and for whom our Quality System must satisfy by addressing the needs.

At the end of the day the system has to be of (real) benefit to the company/employer and it really does not matter if others do not like it. It may not meet the requirements of their own institution, but as long as the measurables meet your own and show that it is functioning and improvements are being instigated, where deemed necesary, whilst at the same time meeting the standards requirements then it is fine by me.

I always remember the guy I worked with as a junior saying "KISS" over and over until I got it. He made the wind tunnel models for the development of the Spitfire, they worked and they were simple too.