Continual (Continuous) Improvement - Effectiveness of the Quality Management System

[Hooman]

Continual improvement

I have a question about this clause of standard:

(( The organization shall continually improve the effectiveness of the quality management system through the use of the quality policy, quality objectives, audit results, analysis of data, corrective and preventive actions and management review. ))

improving the effectiveness of the quality management system through the use of the quality objectives, audit results, analysis of data, corrective and preventive actions and management review is clear .
how we can improve the effectiveness of the quality management system through the use of the quality policy?

 

[M Greenaway]

This is an excellant question.

You will find ISO9001:2000 littered with these nebulous statements.

It would be impossible to find a direct link between use of the documented quality policy statement and continuous improvement.

My advice - dont worry about it.

 

[Howard Atkins]

If the policy is a "living document" to use QS terms then it can be used as a fulcrum for change.
If it is just hung on the wall and not used as a real policy to live by then there is no chance.
The real question is " What is the quality policy and what does it really mean to the organisation?"

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Policy -> Objectives & Management Review

I agree Howard,

The objectives are supposed to reflect the intent of the policy and the management review shall asses both policy and objectives...

That's how it's connected to improvement.

/Claes

 

[M Greenaway]

Howard and Claes are correct in their description of the purpose of the quality policy, however the ISO9001:2000 statement quoted is pretty un-auditable.

I am sure an auditor will not ask the direct question 'how does the use of your quality policy ensure continual improvement'.

He will undoubtedly look at how you address continual improvement, and if you cannot demonstrate it he may look at why you have not improved. But to be able to directly identify that the documented quality policy was not used would be difficult, unless the company had not systems for continual improvment. In this instance the NC would be against the large clause of the standard related to continual (or is it continuous) improvement, not the little bit on 'use of the quality policy'.

Wasnt the 1994 standard much better !!

 

[Howard Atkins]

5.3 Quality policy
Top management shall ensure that the quality policy
a) is appropriate to the purpose of the organization,
b) includes a commitment to comply with requirements and continually improve the effectiveness of the quality
management system,
c) provides a framework for establishing and reviewing quality objectives,
d) is communicated and understood within the organization, and
e) is reviewed for continuing suitability.

The Quality Policy directly bears on the subject of improvement, if you can be asked to show that you are applying b and e.

This is getting a little esoteric

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Wasnt the 1994 standard much better !!

Well, I don't know... It was certainly easier to audit against the 1994 version, but I don't really think that being easy to audit against is the main objective of the standard (Even though it is desirable ). In the end I think the new version will prove to be better when it comes to using it to build a QMS.

/Claes

 

[energy]

Esoteric?

Howard, I had to look up esoteric. Don’t that to us. That’s worse than trailing eggs.

I may be way off base here, but here’s my take on the original question. We developed a “Quality Policy” based on Section 5.3 of the standard. Shall ensure that the Quality Policy…..then goes on to say “includes a commitment to comply with requirements and continually improve the effectiveness of the Quality Management System……..is communicated…..We took that literally to mean that we had to have a company specificic Quality Policy (a tangible thing-not an ideal), like a mission statement, that addressed a), b), c), d), e) of 5.3. We did that. The policy mentions, in some way, the requirements of this section. There is nothing in the policy that you don’t have to do anyway, therefore you can say with comfort, "The organization shall continually improve the effectiveness of the quality management system through the use of the Quality Policy." What do you think? To me, it's kind of silly, but maybe the intent is to have everybody looking at the policy and seeing more than "We make good stuff"

 

[M Greenaway]

Good point again Claes.

Like you say I guess the inclusion of this type of statement in the standard is to show that all this stuff is not just words on paper, but has to actually be used for a purpose.

But how you can demonstrate that use of your quality policy actually produces continual improvement, other than the mandatory statement in it that supposedly shows a companies commitment to continual improvement, is beyond me.

Would you cite in your N/C, if you found that continual improvement wasnt addressed, that the quality policy was not being used ? Personally I wouldnt.

 

[Hooman]

Thanks M Greenaway, Howard ,Claes , energy .

I get my answer .
So bafore anything we commit to continually improve the effectiveness of the quality
management system in Quality policy document. and this commitment is the first thing to continually improvement.
Am I right ?