Informational Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1/4.2

[AMIT BALLAL]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

The documents I shared specifies review date and next review date. On that date, this document will be reviewed and revised if required. If no change is required, we'll specify the date on which the document was reviewed. We'll add comments that "Reviewed on XX-XX-XXXX, but no revision required". This will be at the bottom of the document.

For automotive magazines, and news paper, we've subscribed to it. And this way it is made available so that important information can be tracked from it and will give inputs to issues. If there is any change in issue, we'll revise the issue register accordingly. No need to keep any record, you can simply state to auditor what you do. After all, there is no mandatory documented information asked by the standard for 4.1 and 4.2 .

In management review, you can simply say "No change in issues and needs and expectations of interested parties".

Do whatever makes sense to your organization, don't get into too much documentation.

 

[qualprod]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

Amit
Last question.
In interested parties, you say to monitor this for suppliers:Vendor meets / Supplier audits
Internal meetings / Suggestions.
My question , could it be the suppliers evaluation which is done quarterly?
Please explain.
Thanks

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

qualprod, it can be anything. You can define any source from which you can gather needs and expectations of interested parties.

 

[qualprod]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

Thanks Amit

At analizing external/internal issues (CTX) by using a SWOT
and interested parties (external and internal) IP by a brainstorming session, I could noticed the next regarding to what has to be monitored and revised.
For example:

CTX (negative issue, considered as a risk)

Goverment compliments, here is seen more in a strategic way, what to monitor?, magazine , news, goverment websites,etc.

IP
Goverment compliments, here is regarding to specific requirements,
Payments, legal compliments,etc, is it ok?

CTX
In the case of Internal, (negative ,as risk)
People, poor competency, what to monitor? well could be, perfomance measurements, or kpi, regarding to training.

But in Interested parties, at including People, and their needs and requirements which are, good payment, be trained,etc.
and when defining what to measure, I think it can be again measurement, or kpi regarding training.

So, the elements to be used to monitoring and revising are the same in CTX and IP, does it sound ok for you?

Could you send again your list with a little more data in order to understand it well?

Thanks again Amit for your help

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

For issues, you can define the sources from which you identified the issues of the organization. For external issues, generally the sources would be external such as news, magazines, etc. For internal issues, generally, the sources would be internal such as KPI data, Meetings, employee satisfaction surveys, internal audit findings, etc.

For needs and expectations of people, you can include suggestion scheme / internal meetings as the source / whatever you feel right.

Its up-to you how you define it as long as it is beneficial to your organization.

Sorry, but I can't share the complete document, since the data is sensitive. Hence earlier I sent the list removing sensitive data. I would suggest to go with some basic context, don't do too much. Once you implement it, you will get to know what to do next.

 

[qualprod]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

Thanks Amit
One last question

If a Identified a risk in internal issues (poor competence in employees)and is included in a list.
But if this risk, has Been treated, and is not a risk anymore, it was closed effective.

Should I remove this issue from my list?
I think will apply also to opportunities or strengths.
What do you think?

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

qualprod, you can choose any option. Its upto you.

When you take action on an issue, measure effectiveness of that action and after finding the action effective, you can revise the list to remove the issue from list. Or you can just update the status of issue as "Closed" in the list- keeping the issue on the list.

 

[qualprod]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

Thanks Amit for your patience.
I appreciate too much your support
Have a good time

 

[maria12]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

URGENT HELP!!!
I´m in the middle of the IATF audit for transition, and the auditor is putting a non conformity bacause I haven´t a range/score table of severity x occurance for interested parts requirements.
I have identified interested parties and risks associated with their requirements and actions to manage those risks. Is it mandatory to score in terms of priority?

 

[dsanabria]

Re: Context of the Organization & Interested Parties Evidence - ISO 9001:2015 Cl. 4.1

URGENT HELP!!!
I´m in the middle of the IATF audit for transition, and the auditor is putting a non conformity bacause I haven´t a range/score table of severity x occurance for interested parts requirements.
I have identified interested parties and risks associated with their requirements and actions to manage those risks. Is it mandatory to score in terms of priority?

Ask the auditor to show you in the standard that requirements - also let him know that you will appeal that NCR.

I have not seeing that requirement.


4.2 Understanding the Needs and Expectations of Interested Parties

Due to their effect or potential effect on the organization’s ability to consistently provide products and services that meet customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, the organization shall determine:

a. the interested parties that are relevant to the quality management system;

b. the requirements of these interested parties that are relevant to the quality management system.

The organization shall monitor and review information about these interested parties and their relevant requirements.