B
ben
I have been asked to explore the deployment an "ISO9000-ready" quality management system for a three-plant facility. No decision has been made on whether to seek registration.
At present, there is no overall system: each plant has a variety of procedures and work instructions. Each uses a different approach in their systems and processes. The plants come on-line about one year apart, hence the lack of common systems/processes.
I am trying to come up with a way to the structure the documentation that might be acceptable should we seek registration. For example, would we write a procedure on corrective action (level 2), then have each plant provide a work instruction (level 3) on how corrective action is handled in that particular plant. Or would we kick up everything up one level to quality manual and three procedures.
Another approach would be to sit everyone down and hash out common systems and processes for all three plants. This might be more painful, but the commonality of approach is appealing, especially when it comes to managing the QMS.
Organizationally, each plant is managed by a separate director, who reports to a VP. There are some common systems/process across all three plants: HR, calibration, finance, etc.
Would appreciate your thoughts.
Ben Royal
Reynosa, Mexico
At present, there is no overall system: each plant has a variety of procedures and work instructions. Each uses a different approach in their systems and processes. The plants come on-line about one year apart, hence the lack of common systems/processes.
I am trying to come up with a way to the structure the documentation that might be acceptable should we seek registration. For example, would we write a procedure on corrective action (level 2), then have each plant provide a work instruction (level 3) on how corrective action is handled in that particular plant. Or would we kick up everything up one level to quality manual and three procedures.
Another approach would be to sit everyone down and hash out common systems and processes for all three plants. This might be more painful, but the commonality of approach is appealing, especially when it comes to managing the QMS.
Organizationally, each plant is managed by a separate director, who reports to a VP. There are some common systems/process across all three plants: HR, calibration, finance, etc.
Would appreciate your thoughts.
Ben Royal
Reynosa, Mexico