COP, MOP, SOP - ISO 9001:2000 requirements?

[ISOPete]

Cops, Mops and Sops are highly unnecessary catch phrases. This is nice little lingo that 3rd party auditors are trained. NOWHERE in the TS or ISO standards is this language used. All you need to do is identify your core processes. In other words what processes do you have that if not present would cause the system to fall apart.
Pete

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Cops, Mops and Sops are highly unnecessary catch phrases. This is nice little lingo that 3rd party auditors are trained. NOWHERE in the TS or ISO standards is this language used. All you need to do is identify your core processes. In other words what processes do you have that if not present would cause the system to fall apart.
Pete

Well, you are intitled to feel they are not necessary, but there are many of us who think they are indeed very beneficial. I find them to be useful tools, not just catch phrases. We do agree they are not mandatory.

As I stated earlier,

"They can be applied to TS or ISO, but are not required. They are generally taught in TS classes. Personally, I think they are beneficial."

They certainly are not mandatory, but we think they're useful.

 

[Don Palmer]

Cops, Mops and Sops are highly unnecessary catch phrases. This is nice little lingo that 3rd party auditors are trained. NOWHERE in the TS or ISO standards is this language used. All you need to do is identify your core processes. In other words what processes do you have that if not present would cause the system to fall apart.
Pete

Keeping in mind that TS and ISO's claim to fame is Customer Satisfaction and Continual Improvement of your QMS, perhaps, COPs, MOPs, and SOPs are viable tools. Can an organization forego COPs, MOPs, and SOPs. Sure! Some organizations already have enough on their plate to digest just achieving registration and holding the line until they catch a second wind. As the QMS matures, maybe these catch phrases will resurface.

 

[AlbanyC]

Attached is an arcticle about COP's, Mop's, and SOP's. I've read several different threads here about this topic, internal auditing, and using the Turtle diagram to map the sequence of process and indicate COP's.

First, you only have to ausit your COP's. MOP's and SOP's will get audited as they relate to the COP being reviewed.

Second, the Trutle diagram should be used to help devleop the questions for your internal audits.

 

[AlbanyC]

A more complete Turtle diagram is attached

 

[Helmut Jilling]

...using the Turtle diagram to map the sequence of process and indicate COP's.

First, you only have to ausit your COP's. MOP's and SOP's will get audited as they relate to the COP being reviewed.

1. Turtles do not map the sequence. They are very useful ways to describe the workings and details of the processes, however.

2. It may be compliant to just audit COPs and the linkages to SOPs/MOPs. However, that usually means the SOPs/MOPs get secondhand auditing. I find there is a great deal of value lost in the SOPs/MOPs, even if the COPs are functioning effectively. They get little attention. Not auditing them leaves a LOT of profit and improvement on the table.

 

[AndyN]

I wish those Plexus people had never invented them.............

Andy

 

[Helmut Jilling]

I wish those Plexus people had never invented them..........(COP, MOP, SOP )...

Andy

You know, I just don't understand why people resist these so much? TS even refers to primary (COPs) and support processes (SOPs) in:

[FONT=Arial,Bold]

5.1.1 Process efficiency​

[/FONT]

Top management shall review the product realization processes and the support processes to assure their effectiveness and efficiency.

It makes sense to deliniate between them. It just is not required to do so.​

 

[langtaoim]

Yes, this is correct for TS16949

Excuse me, SOP/MOP, Which standard expatiate it? ISO/TS 16949:2002? or CQI-7?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Excuse me, SOP/MOP, Which standard expatiate it? ISO/TS 16949:2002? or CQI-7?

Read through the thread, starting at the beginning. The answers are given.