Changes in ISO9001:2015 to the requirements for a management representative

#1
Hi, Just joined the forum (having lurked in the background for some time!)
To introduce myself:
1. Name. Dave
2. Quality Assurance Manager
3. Worked mostly in 1st and 2nd tier automotive but some aftermarket and off highway too.
4. Caterpillar Inc (UK) at the moment
5. Various Quality / Environmental management rols since 1991 (!)
6. Drive a Caterham 7 and love climbing mountains (not at the same time)
7. Pet peeve is NOT designing for manufacture and NOT considering packaging on NPI
8. If Icould change something in the business world, that would be........number 7

I would like to solicit thoughts on the effect of possible changes in 2015 to the requirements for a management representative on the QM profession??
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

hogheavenfarm

Quite Involved in Discussions
#2
Re: Changes in 2015 to the requirements for a management representative

Hi Dave,
2015 is pretty straightforward in that there is no requirement for an MR, this position apparently being spread among the top management (in theory), however do not expect the role to evaporate, as in my experience TM likes the MR to act as a shield between them and all that 'quality stuff'.
Like the Quality Manuals, the MR will probably continue regardless of changes in the 2015 version.
 

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
#3
Re: Changes in 2015 to the requirements for a management representative

:)

The role of management representative is designed such that he's the guy who goes to jail if things get screwed up badly enough.

I tell my management team that when I do my job properly, they all get to come with me such that we can run our own corner of the cell block, so I don't have to get married to the guy with the most cigarettes.

;-)
 

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#4
<snip>

I would like to solicit thoughts on the effect of possible changes in 2015 to the requirements for a management representative on the QM profession??</snip>
Nice introduction, Dave and I like 'The Cats Clause' moniker.:bigwave:

Re the changes in 2015 edition they are just reflecting the fact that the 2000 edition failed! :)

The idea in 2000 was that TC 176 was introducing a whole load of 'Leadership' stuff and wanted top management to take it seriously. MR was introduced to raise the quality game and top management were required to nominate one of their own Exec Team / Board - call it what you will - and this individual took what the top team wanted and designed a QMS to suit. S/he then reported back to the team on how well the system they asked for was working through Management Review. The logic being that this individual would understand and speak their (business) language.

Now the problem was that many companies didn't take this requirement seriously and instead of appointing 'one of their own' just nominated their current QM and allowed him / her the same amount of time to report to the top team at a management review because they were told they had to (I'm told that at these meetings the CEO / President sometimes even turned up! :cool:). The rest of the time they just did their own thing and allowed the QM to maintain the system and talk his quality language with the auditors. :lol: The quality profession and 3rd party certification industry allowed this to happen and hence nothing changed. :frust:

So roll forward to 2015 and the MR role is dropped from the standard and the expectation is that the approach will be totally different .... I think not. But then again I tend towards cynicism. :notme:
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#5
Nice introduction, Dave and I like 'The Cats Clause' moniker.:bigwave:

Re the changes in 2015 edition they are just reflecting the fact that the 2000 edition failed! :)

The idea in 2000 was that TC 176 was introducing a whole load of 'Leadership' stuff and wanted top management to take it seriously. MR was introduced to raise the quality game and top management were required to nominate one of their own Exec Team / Board - call it what you will - and this individual took what the top team wanted and designed a QMS to suit. S/he then reported back to the team on how well the system they asked for was working through Management Review. The logic being that this individual would understand and speak their (business) language.

Now the problem was that many companies didn't take this requirement seriously and instead of appointing 'one of their own' just nominated their current QM and allowed him / her the same amount of time to report to the top team at a management review because they were told they had to (I'm told that at these meetings the CEO / President sometimes even turned up! :cool:). The rest of the time they just did their own thing and allowed the QM to maintain the system and talk his quality language with the auditors. :lol: The quality profession and 3rd party certification industry allowed this to happen and hence nothing changed. :frust:

So roll forward to 2015 and the MR role is dropped from the standard and the expectation is that the approach will be totally different .... I think not. But then again I tend towards cynicism. :notme:
Undoubtedly your scenario is true much of the time, but I have noticed more and more organizations where the title of management representative has been retained by top management. There is clearly a trend showing that top management, in general, is paying more attention to their QMS.

Moving the duties from an appointed member of management to top management is a step in the right direction.

Generally, top management is more able and more willing to step up to the role today than they were in 1987.
 

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#7
Thanks for your post, Big Jim. I'll be interested if you have any facts / examples to substantiate the statements.

BTW the MR role only came in in 2000. From 1987 onwards there have been requirements for top management but 2000 was the game changer for their engagement - or should have been. :)
 
Last edited:

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#8
Thanks for your post, Big Jim. I'll be interested if you have any facts / examples to substantiate the statements.

BTW the MR role only came in in 2000. From 1987 onwards there have been requirements for top management but 2000 was the game changer for their engagement - or should have been. :)
Hi Paul,

I have not seen any studies on top management retaining the title for management representative, it has just been my observation. I would be curious as to if others have noticed it too.

I must admit that I was not aware that the title of management representative was not a requirement until 2000. The 1994 version was pretty much done when I got involved in 2004. In that time though, I have seen greater interest in top management though. I don't see as many instances where everything is piled on the quality manager. Generally speaking, top management is both more knowledgeable and more involved.

Another related trend that was pointed out to me recently is that today's MRP and ERP systems tend to drive companies to meeting many of the ISO 9001 requirements, and that might be part of where top management's greater involvement comes from.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#9
Hi, Just joined the forum (having lurked in the background for some time!)
To introduce myself:
1. Name. Dave
2. Quality Assurance Manager
3. Worked mostly in 1st and 2nd tier automotive but some aftermarket and off highway too.
4. Caterpillar Inc (UK) at the moment
5. Various Quality / Environmental management rols since 1991 (!)
6. Drive a Caterham 7 and love climbing mountains (not at the same time)
7. Pet peeve is NOT designing for manufacture and NOT considering packaging on NPI
8. If Icould change something in the business world, that would be........number 7

I would like to solicit thoughts on the effect of possible changes in 2015 to the requirements for a management representative on the QM profession??
Dave,

The quality profession often fails to engage top management in the development of their organizational management system so it continues to help the employees to create successful customers.

Calling the QMS an ISO System prevails. Often certification or retaining the certificate is the goal. Keeping auditors happy and "passing" audits tells employees what the priorities are.

System standards are meant to specify what already is widely accepted as good practice. It looks as if FDIS 9001 is no different in this regard, although we may question the auditability of "risk-based thinking".

The management system has to be process-based with the business processes delivering quality services and products - instead of a separate QMS. This being the case, those in charge of the organization (a system in itself) are also in charge of its management system.

So, quality professionals should already have evolved to become system professionals with expertise in business process management. To earn the respect of top managers they need to show they understand the way their organization interacts with suppliers and customers to understand and fulfill customer requirements today and in the future. In other words, turning the needs of customers into cash in the bank.

Quality professionals who already are into process-based management systems will determine what additional processes and controls are specified by ISO 9001:2015 and work with top management and process owners to bring their organizational management system into conformity. They may find the processes, such as designing services, already exist or the new processes need to be designed, resourced, trained operated and monitored into being.

Quality professionals presiding over sets of documents instead of process-based management systems will have a lot of work to do. Many may choose to retire.

As I see it,

John
 
Q

qualityboi

#10
What are the changes in 2015 to Management Rep? I saw the IRCA roadshow and read the ASQ interpretation and they almost contradict one another. One says the MR is no longer in the requirements but there will still be work of people that occupy that position. ASQ said the role exists with enhancements, it just that the term has been removed. I have not read the DIS but many Quality Professionals infer that the role now exists within Top Management, the title is gone but the duties remain.
My take is that someone will have to educate that person in top management, most likely the Quality Manager. Or they will be hiring quality VPs that already have the knowledge based on experience...see now there could be a promotion in it for you! In any case top management in any enterprise corporation will not be nor will ever be doing the tactical items of facilitation of the actual Management Reviews ie., reporting on metrics/KPI etc and tracking improvement actions. It still will be some poor schmuck doing it, just someone else will get the credit. :lol:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S ISO9001:2015 6.3 - Planning of Changes - OFI from auditor ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 20
S Identifying Changes to Documentation - ISO9001 Clause 4.2.3 c ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
A ISO 11607-1: 2019 main changes Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
L Process changes and biocompatibility (ISO 10993-1) Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
E ASTM F2118 - Fatigue testing of bone cement - Changes between the 2003 and the 2014? Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
qualprod Documented actions and changes in the QMS by COVID 19 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
B ASTM E18-2020 - Rockwell testing standard changes? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
D Recent changes to ISO 14971 - SOP required for managing standard revisions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
I Dating controlled documents after changes - Revision History Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 13
F Medical devices_hong kong_post approval changes regulation (China's MOH) Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 3
F Medical Devices-South Africa _Post approval changes and Software Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
K Changes in process dispersion, and location hypotheses tests Using Minitab Software 3
NDesouza When Customers Make Changes to Orders Contract Review Process 24
S Managing specification changes on standard parts purchased through trading companies Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
I MSA requirement for 5 Micrometers + CP changes need customer approval? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
A ISO13485:2016 name and ownership changes questions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
R What are the changes in 5th Edition of FMEA manual? FMEA and Control Plans 6
S Examples of software changes that required a 510k US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
D 510K and Changes to Verification and Validation US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
V IATF 16949 9.2.2.1 Internal Audit Program - "Process Changes" IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
M What are the changes in supervising according to ISO17025? ISO 17025 related Discussions 7
U Changes to Internal Processes and Risk Evaluation - Mitigations Risk Management Principles and Generic Guidelines 10
M Informational New Zealand – Changes to Medical Device Adverse Event Reporting process Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
R Rationale for changes to ISO Standards Other Medical Device Related Standards 4
M Informational TGA Consultation: Proposed changes to medical device essential principles for safety and performance Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
A Changes to an already certified product (IIb, MDR) EU Medical Device Regulations 1
I Tracking Protoype Changes; 8D or simple document revision? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
C What if the foreign manufacturer of a medical device changes the Authorized Representative in Saudi Arabia? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
A The latest revision number and changes in automotive core tools IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
M Informational EU – MDCG 2018-1 v2 Guidance on basic UDI-DI and changes to UDI-DI Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
J Ethicon suture box design changes - 2019 Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2
E Changes to medical device submitted through a variation? EU Medical Device Regulations 1
T AS9100 Maintain Approval When Business Ownership Changes AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
M Informational TGA – Several proposed changes to classification to better align with the EU MDR Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Medical Device News TGA Consultation: Changes to a number of definitions and the scope of the medical device regulatory framework in Australia Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
F Device Standards - Managing Changes to existing standards that apply to our devices Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
S Ballooned Drawings and Engineering Changes Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 0
supadrai Changes to QMS - Contract Term ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
R ISO 9001:2015 6.2 - Planning Changes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
C Significant Organizational Changes - Documented Responsibilities Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
M Medical Device News Health Canada - Proposed Changes - List of Recognized Standards for Medical Devices Canada Medical Device Regulations 3
Marc 9 September 2018 - Upcoming User Group Changes Forum News and General Information 1
J Class 1 Medical Device ECR (Engineering Change Request) Changes 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
Douglas E. Purdy ISO/IEC 17025:2017 3rd Ed. Changes from 2nd Ed. ISO 17025 related Discussions 6
M Notifying Registrar of Significant QMS changes ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S Medical Device Changes and How to Assess Their Impacts to Essential Requirements EU Medical Device Regulations 2
S Design changes a week after regulatory submission 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
L Verifying training effectiveness for procedure changes ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
2 First Article Requirements for Revision Changes of Engineering AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
C Partial Design Validation and changes to a critical supplier 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom