Completely Revising Documentation - Start Over as Initial Release?

#11
Just a few questions to ask....

gheghe said:
Just an example, in document control procedure, he indicated there that "all documents must have the originators name", if you take a look at our document template /format there's no alloted space for orignator, there's only the approving bodys. When I asked him this is exactly what his answer was " the approving body and originator are the same, I'm the originator and I'm the one who will approved it, even if the document is created by Purchasing dept, I am the originator and that will not be changed".
Well, that's interesting... What about the following?

4.2.3a) to approve documents for adequacy prior to issue,
Is he really competent to judge if a written procedure is adequate in each and every case? Somehow I strongly doubt that, but imo that is exactly what he's saying by putting his name on the document. If he approves the document, that also suggests to me that he owns the process in question.
Does this match what your management has to say about
5.5.1, Top management shall ensure that responsibilities and authorities are defined and communicated within the organization?

4.2.3b) to review and update as necessary and re-approve documents,
He hogged ownership of the entire system, did he? How interested will the true originators and process owners be when it comes to update as necessary? What will happen when he leaves?

/Claes
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#12
gheghe said:
I perfectly agree with you Bucey, we're always surprise in here. This ISO coordinator just told us what to do without even explaining why we have to do it, and then the next day he'll change his mind. That's the reason why even little things I post it in here, because this ISO coordinator of ours get me confuse every day.

When I asked him this is exactly what his answer was " the approving body and originator are the same, I'm the originator and I'm the one who will approved it, even if the document is created by Purchasing dept, I am the originator and that will not be changed".
It necer ceases to amaze and disgust me. Most of us can reach into our pocket and call someone thousands of miles away, or e-mail a document to someone on the other side of the planet, all in a matter of seconds. Yet internal communication within the four walls of an organization is sometimes so poor that the folks thousands of miles away literally know more about what is going-on than most of the internal folks. I call it gross mismanagement and stupidity. Mike's Law on Internal Communication: Internal communication will take place. It will either be done "officially" by Management or it will be done "unofficially" by the "grapevine". The quiet from Management is extremely effective fertilizer for the "grapevine".

Regarding the second point: I would have a serious problem with one person, even if that person were an employee (not consultant), being the approving authority for all QMS documents. I have not seen one such case, aside from very small (like 3 person) organizations, where one person was the most knowledgable about everything.

JMO.
 
G

gheghe

#13
putting the history on history

Claes Gefvenberg said:
Well, that's interesting... What about the following?

4.2.3a) to approve documents for adequacy prior to issue,
Is he really competent to judge if a written procedure is adequate in each and every case? Somehow I strongly doubt that, but imo that is exactly what he's saying by putting his name on the document. If he approves the document, that also suggests to me that he owns the process in question.
Does this match what your management has to say about
5.5.1, Top management shall ensure that responsibilities and authorities are defined and communicated within the organization?

4.2.3b) to review and update as necessary and re-approve documents,
He hogged ownership of the entire system, did he? How interested will the true originators and process owners be when it comes to update as necessary? What will happen when he leaves?

/Claes
Yeah, you said it right, he hemmed in the entire system. And the big problem is that the management doesn't have much involvement, what we knew is that he is assigned as ISO coordinator, so whatever he says people should follow, except me. I'm not sure if he has an adequate knowledge about ISO. He bought this canned system(some sort of quick starter kit), and he insist to use that(just change the company name and Bam! its done.. he said) without considering what we currently do here. Well, I'm asking the same questions, but I don't get a valid answer from him. What I do right now, I make sure that I highlited to them my concerns, and if they don't consider it, well, they cant go back telling me that I didn't tell them.

By the way, about this thread, I told him that there should be in anyway somehow a way of explaining why HE put initial revision level for those QMS documents, and have a traceability that will link the new QMS from old QMS, his answer is this "Look at the old QMS and add the history for each...".
Why should I put the history in the history???
 
G

gheghe

#14
Never seen like this

Mike S. said:
It necer ceases to amaze and disgust me. Most of us can reach into our pocket and call someone thousands of miles away, or e-mail a document to someone on the other side of the planet, all in a matter of seconds. Yet internal communication within the four walls of an organization is sometimes so poor that the folks thousands of miles away literally know more about what is going-on than most of the internal folks. I call it gross mismanagement and stupidity. Mike's Law on Internal Communication: Internal communication will take place. It will either be done "officially" by Management or it will be done "unofficially" by the "grapevine". The quiet from Management is extremely effective fertilizer for the "grapevine".

Regarding the second point: I would have a serious problem with one person, even if that person were an employee (not consultant), being the approving authority for all QMS documents. I have not seen one such case, aside from very small (like 3 person) organizations, where one person was the most knowledgable about everything.

JMO.
Yeah mike, I never seen it before either. I'm surprised on how they do this ISO cert. process. I'm not sure either if we can make it, because we're not even half ready. It will be this coming May and as of this moment, we're still in the documentation process, and me, I'm trying to resolve the conflicting requirements HE put in our document which he doesn't want to be changed(the reason it because it is not in the canned system they bought, anything outside this canned system, they won't accept any changes).
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#15
Is this "ISO coordinator" an employee of the company or is he an outside consultant? If the latter, what was the selection process your management used to select him? Sounds like a quack to me. Have you voiced your concerns to your boss or the Top Dog? You know, cover your... butt.
 
G

gheghe

#16
voiced out my concerns

Mike S. said:
Is this "ISO coordinator" an employee of the company or is he an outside consultant? If the latter, what was the selection process your management used to select him? Sounds like a quack to me. Have you voiced your concerns to your boss or the Top Dog? You know, cover your... butt.
He's an employee of the company. I believed he was sent by the company to attend the ISO orientation which makes him the ISO coordinator. Yeah, that's what I do right now, I voiced out all my concerns(&in writing, i don't want to be blame because of that guy)that's the reason why we're not through with our documentations yet. Yeah, I think he's a quack, just pretending he knows something, he cannot make up his mind (even him he's confused of what he's doin, or probably because he doesn't really know what to do).
 
R

Rachel

#17
Okay, this has got me really worried now. I'm "restarting" a lot of key documents too. I can't figure out how to get around it - the last documents were named after the QS 9000 clauses, and I'm really trying to get away from that. I've completed the six required SOPs and numbered them accordingly (i.e., 8.3-R is "Control of NCP" - the "R" notes that it's *required* by ISO). Next, I'm rewriting the process SOPs in flowchart form and breaking them up into the divisions that my manager and I determined would be most feasible for internal auditing. Those are named SOP PRO.X - "PRO" for processing, and "X" for the process number in the logical sequence of product flow.

In doing so, I've given these new documents all rev0 status. We're likely keeping most of our Level II SOPs (i.e., SOP.008, SOP.204 - each department gets its own series of numbers). Those already exist. I had a "history of change section" in the rev0 documents, stating that they were adapted from old QS 9000 documents (i.e. SOP 8.3-R is newly created, but was adapted from SOP 4.13 under QS 9000).

Am I just messing everything up??
-R.
 
S

SteelWoman

#18
Rachel, we ended up doing some of the "adapting" you're talking about - to document it I added a couple columns in my master list of procedure revisions that had "old QS Document #" and "New Document #". It's the only way I could keep MY head straight - I was starting to LOSE IT trying to remember what used to be what and now was what?!
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#19
Rachel and Steel,

Doesn't sound to me like you've messed anything up. If it works for you, do it! JMO.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Informational US FDA – Ethicon Recalls Circular Staplers for Insufficient Firing and Failure to Completely Form Staples Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
Marc Over 2,300 MS-DOS games now completely free to play at Internet Archive Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
L Where to Start to Completely overhaul a QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
J Completely Lost in QA - Not equipped for QA, QC, ISO, etc. Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 16
R Possible to have a completely electronic archival system that meets FDA requirements? Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 17
L Can you exclude ISO 9001 Clause 7.3 completely from QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
M Layered Process Audit (LPA) - Discipline in completely filling in the reports Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 3
Hershal A2LA has completely terminated involvement in NACLA General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0
apestate I feel this statement in a quality manual is completely regurgitive Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 14
Z Ford Requirement - Annual Layout - Completely re-validate parts on an annual basis? Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
D FDA Information - Revising the Instructions for Use US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 0
M Risk/Benefit vs. benefit-risk - Revising an SOP covering Risk Management with the MDR in mind EU Medical Device Regulations 10
A ISO/IEC process of revising the ISO IEC 20000 standards - Your chance to have a say IT (Information Technology) Service Management 1
A How best to start revising an existing ISO 9001:2008 system in a company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
M Revising Declaration of Conformity and Classification Rationale EU Medical Device Regulations 2
C Updating (Revising) Documents with a New Logo Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
J Revising a management manual, who should be the author? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
K Revising Procedures, Process Documentation and Forms - Questions about ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
Y Question from a practice paper while I was revising for an exam (OC curve) Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
U Revising Our Internal Audit Form - Suggestions Appreciated Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 12
P 7.3 Design And Development - Revising old QAM to TS16949 - No design responsibility Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
C Current Receiving Inspection activities - Reviewing, revising and improving Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
D Revising Forms referenced in the body of our procedures Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 10
D Revising Our Quality Policy - Any advice to meet the ISO 9001 requirements? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
H MD Technical Documentation and SALES possibility EU Medical Device Regulations 0
A DMDIV-Variants : definition and technical documentation CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
NDesouza COTS Items CoC for FAI Documentation AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 12
P MDR/IVDR Annex III - Technical documentation on PMS EU Medical Device Regulations 1
I IATF Lab Scope Testing Qualification and Competency Documentation IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
C Documentation hold during submissions? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 0
K SOUP (Software of Unknown Provenance) Anomaly Documentation IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 2
C Gobys for operations documentation plan Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 4
C Refreshing an old and boring topic - Job descriptions and Roles vs Process Documentation ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 38
C Documentation for items used for Design Verification 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P Does anyone have a API Q1 Documentation Package? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 1
J Documentation structure - Do I need Work Instructions? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 23
J Where to Place Process Maps in our Documentation? Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 4
C Manufacturing overages & nonconforming material documentation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Robert Stanley Required Documentation Templates ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
I Maintaining Technical Documentation under MDD and MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 1
M Basic UDI and technical documentation EU Medical Device Regulations 1
I Control of Documentation Distribution - Document Control ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
M What is the average time needed for process documentation? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
was named killer CLOUD BASED QUALITY DOCUMENTATION vs. SERVER BASED Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
S How to start with ISO process in project based team - Documentation Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
K ITAR Visitor Documentation of Citizenship AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
R Design Verification Documentation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 19
A Process Documentation for ISO 9001:2015 Internal Auditing 2
F Process Review - What is the ISO requirement for reviewing SOPs and quality documentation? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
J Good Documentation Practices Self Test? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom