Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Do Procedures Require Application, Scope, etc.?



Is it needed

When writing procedures do we need to put the scope, Application, Purpose etc.. at the start of each one?

Or can one just write it.

Is it a must?


Captain Nice
Staff member
Nope - not a requirement. Those are hangovers from the old days of text only procedures. That does NOT mean they are a bad idea.


Food for thought

Thanks for that reply, it has given me something extra to think about, shall I or shall I not.


Numbering Procedures

Is it at all necessay to number the procedures as follows:


James Gutherson

What works for YOU!

I'll be first in here thanks to the time zones.

Tom, you can call your procedures Apples, Oranges, Pears, etc as long as it makes sense to you. There is no numbering requirement in any of the Quality or Environmental Standards.
A good idea however for External Auditors is to create a matrix to cross reference the procedures you have created with the elements of the standard(s) you are applying.
Apples and Pears - Stairs

I like the idea! Just to agree it is what works for you. I would start by asking the users what they want to see in a procedure / documented process and then try to get the document (if you need one) to suit what the user wants.

My preference is for a visual description, because apparently the majority of us take in more from pictures than we do words. (Does anyone know where that came from, sounds psychological)

On the topic of scope purpose etc. I believe that works well when you want to explain WHY the procedure exists and WHERE it applies and to WHAT and WHOM.


Re: Apples and Pears - Stairs

Originally posted by Paul Simpson
On the topic of scope purpose etc. I believe that works well when you want to explain WHY the procedure exists and WHERE it applies and to WHAT and WHOM.
You beat me to it, Paul. I find Scope, Application, Responsibilities, in text procedures, help keep focus on what that particular procedure is all about and makes life easier for all. The users know exactly what is and what is not in the Scope or Application of the procedure. Of course, the new standard being process oriented makes it difficult to isolate any particular department and/or process. Personally, I feel it leaves a lot more open to interpretation and leads to heated discussions here as to who, what and where. Auditing is harder, to me, because you are guessing as to where you should stop or extend the audit. I like easy. Any Tier 3 documents that we issue here are in the Scope, ect.. format. It's your call and, as been said previously, not required. :ko: :smokin:

Thanks energy! I have about a 5 hour head start! I still put information about scope, responsibilities etc. in documentation of processes, particularly when there is a complicated interrelationship between someprocesses.

Maybe not necessary when you have a process "Capturing customer requirements" but if you have a number of processes in this area and different groups are responsible for the processes. I won't go on ....


I put Purpose, Scope, and Reference Documents sections on every Level 3 document. In addition to the good reasons others have cited, I find it helps me to clairify in my own mind (or the mind of whoever else is writing it) exactly what the procedure is supposed to cover (and what it's not supposed to cover). It helps organize one's thoughts and keep you focused on the task at hand. This is especially helpful when there are similar but different procedures used in other areas.

Top Bottom