Description of the Interaction of Processes - Para 4.2.2 c) - Seeking Examples

[C123456]

Thanks very much for your help, its very easy to understand and says it all. Much appreciated.
Cora.

 

[jasminphyu]

Dear All,

Thanks for your attachment "interactions of processes matrix"
Let me kindly know what the meaning of
MOP
COP
SOP

Best regards,

 

[harry]

Dear All,

Thanks for your attachment "interactions of processes matrix"
Let me kindly know what the meaning of
MOP
COP
SOP

Best regards,

Welcome to the Cove.

COP: Customer Oriented Processes
SOP: Support Oriented Processes
MOP: Management Oriented Processes

You don't have to adapt/use these for ISO 9001.

For further understanding, check the discussions/threads here.

 

[dsanabria]

Here is another example of a small company that has implemented a flowchart to describe to the working force their participation, requirements and understanding in the process.

We have also incorporated a detailed flow diagrams with input / outputs and links to which procedures / documents required.

 

[Big Jim]

This is always a lively topic. It seems that no two people agree on what makes up a good interaction of processes description. No matter how perfect you may think yours is, someone will criticize it.

In that way, it is a little like a resume.

 

[michellemmm]

Roger

Another of my hobby horses ... There is a widespread belief that drawing a simple diagram is sufficient, but this approach can indicate that management has not understood the essential concepts required for managing a “business process”. Whilst it is true that a typical business has a small number of “core” processes, and of other processes which support them, you are not giving a complete picture by merely listing “sell – make – deliver – send the invoice” (for example) in sequence, with a few arrows to indicate that they are supported by “manage equipment, manage suppliers etc”.
.

Peter,
We are not all as talented as you are....
A diagram or a chart is a simple construction of the system architecture. It is a tool that speaks to some of us. The blue print of a house does not contain all the pertinent information and specifications.

Recently, I was hired to help with documentation of design and development of a product that needed to meet the most stringent criteria (DO-178B and DO-254). The product was stuck in planning phase for two years. I started by mapping the life-cycle process and the light was turned on for my group....

Best to define the process interactions within individual processes, and to structure your system to show the logical groupings of processes, with a logical process numbering convention which implies relationships. Your system is for your staff - do they understand it? Perhaps ask an assessor what value and increased understanding your average member of staff is supposed to take from the "model" in the standard - I bet you can't find anyone who says that they understand better how the business runs after they have seen the picture.

Sorry - but it really annoys me when folk feel that they have no option but to regurgitate stuff from the standard for no benefit other than to keep an assessor happy.

I personally prefer a map over a process. Maps help me analyze the process and manage process interaction with other processes. I have a difficult time performing impact analysis of a change on other processes at a micro level. A map is a TOOL for improving "PERFORMANCE" and as far as I am concerned, "CONFORMANCE" to the written directives does not always produce results.

 

[kgott]

I posted the matrix above years ago as an example of how a matrix could be used. It does only what the standard requires: describes the interactions between the various processes of the QMS.

Generally the matrix is not the method I use in quality manuals though. In another thread I posted an example of the type of process map I usually prefer: Sample process map2.ppt. It describes, at a very high level, what the interactions are between the processes. It also identifies process sequence and where standard requirements are met.




Since you asked for feedback, I have two concerns with the graphic you posted. First, it seems to me that it describes documents and activities done within each process, but doesn't describe the interactions between the processes as required by 4.2.2c.

Second, the only processes that are listed are product realization processes. Note 1 under 4.1 in ISO 9001 states: "Processes needed for the quality management system referred to above include processes for management activities, provision of resources, product realization, measurement, analysis and improvement." The graphic is missing the management, resource provision, measurement, analysis and improvement processes that are important to an effective QMS.

"Generally the matrix is not the method I use in quality manuals though. In another thread I posted an example of the type of process map I usually prefer: Sample process map2.ppt. It describes, at a very high level, what the interactions are between the processes. It also identifies process sequence and where standard requirements are met."

Your graphic is very good but why do I find myself thinking that if it's that good why dont I simply and and paste this into my Q manual. After all; if its very good it should fit many organsiations.

The obvious answer is that I would need to tailorise it fit my company but again how, that it the crux of the issue many of us seem to have. For it to be asy for staff and or management to read, learn and use it still neds to fit the ciriteria I mentioned above, i.e to be at a high level, must able to be read with ease, is easy to understand and grasp.


This criteria seems to limit options for flowcharts.

cheers

 

[howste]

Your graphic is very good but why do I find myself thinking that if it's that good why dont I simply and and paste this into my Q manual. After all; if its very good it should fit many organsiations.

The obvious answer is that I would need to tailorise it fit my company but again how, that it the crux of the issue many of us seem to have. For it to be asy for staff and or management to read, learn and use it still neds to fit the ciriteria I mentioned above, i.e to be at a high level, must able to be read with ease, is easy to understand and grasp.


This criteria seems to limit options for flowcharts.

cheers

I've never used the same diagram with more than one organization that I've helped because each system really does have different processes. Often they have some common processes too. Definition of each process usually is done in separate documents.

 

[kgott]

I've never used the same diagram with more than one organization that I've helped because each system really does have different processes. Often they have some common processes too. Definition of each process usually is done in separate documents.

Howste; sorry for appearing dump but can you please suggest how I and for that matter, others in the same position as me, might go about trying to draw our organsiations processes. This seems to be the start point to me?

Is there any free software out there for this??

thanks

 

[howste]

Howste; sorry for appearing dump but can you please suggest how I and for that matter, others in the same position as me, might go about trying to draw our organsiations processes. This seems to be the start point to me?

Is there any free software out there for this??

thanks

I like the diagram that you posted, it's just missing some things. I agree that the start point is the organization determining its own processes. There are some processes that are required by ISO 9001 that aren't included. It also needs to describe what the interactions are between the processes.

I'm not aware of any free software specifically designed to do this. OpenOffice.org is free and includes software that can be used.