Document Formats: Text Procedures vs. Flow Charts (Process Maps)

[Marc]

Re: Re: Flowcharts for Procedures

db said:

On the major, it probably would not be good for me to disclose the name of the company, or the registrar. The company was very upset with us (we suggested using flowcharts). I wanted to suggest a different registrar, but our upper management thought it might be viewed as us trying to pass the buck. Instead, we offered to convert to narrative procedures at no charge, but the company did not want us to do any thing more. After all, we had “done enough damage” already! I do not know if they still have the same registrar (this was a couple of years back).

That's a shame. I didn't want to know the company - that I understand that. But I get tired of hearing "A registrar did this..." while not naming the registrar as if this should all be a kept secret? What possible motive could one have for protecting a registrar by not revealing their practices?

I thought about my 'dare' after I posted it. I asked myself why I had to put it in as a dare. Unless it's Perry Johnson, everyone seems to keep things 'secret' when it comes to registrar transgressions. Heck - if that's the registrar's policy they should not have a gripe if it is revealed and discussed. I would like to know of policies like that if I was choosing a registrar. Is it always the auditor's call? I thought there was an appeals process. Is theirs to blankly say back "It's the auditor's call". I thought the idea was to have a system whereby one could challange an auditor's 'call'.

Darn - the truth hurts, doesn't it.

Is anyone here worried about being 'black listed' or something if they discuss a registrar by name?

 

[db]

Naming registrars

Marc,
I’m not certain that I would ever reveal the name of a registrar unless I had all the information at hand to back up my words. What I have is a two-year-old memory of an unpleasant situation. In the political world in which I operate, listing the name of the registrar could very well put my employment in jeopardy, not to mention potential civil liability.

Also, I did not speak directly to the registrar, or the auditor, nor did I actually see the NCR. As I think about the situation, I probably should not have stated the “facts” in the manner which I did. However, with the conversations that I was a part of, I do believe the incident unfolded as I described it.

This is the only case I’ve heard of where an auditor had an issue with flowcharts.

One last thing, Marc and I didn’t think about this until your response. It is funny how we trash PJ and “protect” others. Makes me wonder if ole Perry is as bad as his reputation?

 

[Marc]

That I understand. I would expect facts - not heresay and/or conjecture. I think we all know that's the rule here. Facts - not heresay.

It is a sad commentary, however, to have to say

In the political world in which I operate, listing the name of the registrar could very well put my employment in jeopardy, not to mention potential civil liability.

It doesn't speak well for the role of the registrar if they can destroy anyone who dares speak of them in other than glowing terms. Sad. Very sad. Unfortunately this sheds a cloud over the entire registration process.

 

[JodiB]

Could it be that the flowcharts did not adequately show responsibilities or history of change....or something else that is typically expected within a procedure?

 

[db]

Doc control

Unregistered, I mean Lucinda. As far as I know there should have been no problem there. We are careful to use fairly exact wording like: "the receiving lead tags the skids". If another document, or record is involved, we also reference it. Change history is handled through other means. However, the auditor did cite 4.5.

 

[gpainter]

I would venture to say that if the registrar would look at Noboxwine's flow chart (block diagram) that they would have NO problem with it. The ones that I have seen usually have limited info. One suggestion for Noboxwine, once registered it is your Quality Management System based on ISO, try to avoid mentioning ISO. This will help make it your System rather than ISO's. We reference ISO only a few times and have had real problems making everyone understand that it is our system based on ISO. I really like the MESSAGE FROM THE PLANT MANAGER part!!

 

[Mike S.]

Quote by db: In the political world in which I operate, listing the name of the registrar could very well put my employment in jeopardy, not to mention potential civil liability.
________________________
I completely understand db's position on fear of losing his job or being sued for speaking the truth with details/names. Been there. Everyone should fear this to some degree, at least realizing that it is possible. In today's litigous society anyone can pretty much sue anyone for almost any reason (remember millions of $ originally awarded the lady who sued McDonalds because their coffee was hot, not to mention the scores of similar crazy lawsuit stories we have heard?). Who cares if the facts are weak or wrong, it can still get to court. Imagine the stress, financial and mental, of losing your job or having to defend yourself in court against a corporate entity in such a case? Tis much easier to just not do it -- at least in writing. There are many of us who have true tales that should be told, but we are afraid to take the risk (to ourselves and our families) that comes with doing it. Like in many other situations, one must carefully review the risks vs. benefits of speaking out. I d%$n sure don't like it, but that is reality IMHO.

On another point, why don't some of the registrars and certified auditors who are Cove members/visitors go on record and give a thumbs up or down to noboxwine's flowchart?

Mike S.

 

[Bruce Epstein]

just a nit

Mike S. said:

remember millions of $ originally awarded the lady who sued McDonalds because their coffee was hot
Mike S.

Although the "hot coffee" lawsuit is commonly believed to have been frivolous, it was not. In this case this particular McDonalds had already received several complaints that the coffee was *50* degrees F too hot as compared to the chain's normal standards. This 81 year-old woman suffered severe burns when her cup of coffee overturned.

See the American Trial Lawyers' page on the case http://www.atlanet.org /cjfacts/other/mcdonald.ht

Not that there aren't other examples of inappropriate court cases, this one may have been justified.

(Sorry, my brother is a lawyer.)

Bruce

 

[Marc]

Mike S. said:

I completely understand db's position on fear of losing his job or being sued for speaking the truth with details/names. Been there. Everyone should fear this to some degree, at least realizing that it is possible. In today's litigous society anyone can pretty much sue anyone for almost any reason (remember millions of $ originally awarded the lady who sued McDonalds because their coffee was hot, not to mention the scores of similar crazy lawsuit stories we have heard?). Who cares if the facts are weak or wrong, it can still get to court. Imagine the stress, financial and mental, of losing your job or having to defend yourself in court against a corporate entity in such a case? Tis much easier to just not do it -- at least in writing. There are many of us who have true tales that should be told, but we are afraid to take the risk (to ourselves and our families) that comes with doing it. Like in many other situations, one must carefully review the risks vs. benefits of speaking out. I d%$n sure don't like it, but that is reality IMHO.

I suggest you not go out of the house then because that applies to about everything one does - everyone is open to suit for many things. I have had multiple threats of suit here with respect to this site. I haven't shut the site down over the threats I get. Sometimes one must follow their beliefs. I have a drawer full of threats here. Last fall it was terrible - I was getting several threats a month. Like to see one of the many? See http://Elsmar.com/lawsuit/

If you don't have the balls to challange the threat, you're admitting they own you. Personally I don't like to be owned. That's the main reason I still do not take advertising here.

So - we come back to the same thing. One can't know anything about a registrar because no one will say anything because they're afraid they'll loose their job and who knows what else.

I repeat what I said before: Sad, sad, sad.

On another point, why don't some of the registrars and certified auditors who are Cove members/visitors go on record and give a thumbs up or down to noboxwine's flowchart?

We can say that this is impossible taken out of context - you can't know if it is sufficient if you're not there to see the situation as a whole. This example is simple as it addresses housekeeping. How about something more complex?

I'm not 'downing' the WI posted. I like it. But you really can't evaluate its sufficiency from afar.

Bruce Epstein said:

Although the "hot coffee" lawsuit is commonly believed to have been frivolous, it was not.

Despite what the judge said, the suit was - in my opinion - frivolous. Stupid is a better word. Anyone who buys hot coffee should know it is hot (what's the link to the 'Common Sense' thread?). If they are also so stupid as to put it between their legs and drive away they deserve what they get.

By the way, this came up in England and the court ruled that the person who was burned by the spilled coffee was an adult and should have known better. The suit was dismissed.

 

[CarolX]

getting off the sugject

Off the current subject, but as a coffee lover, and one who thinks we have gotten WAY outta hand in our legal system.....I must....

Bruce Epstein said:

Although the "hot coffee" lawsuit is commonly believed to have been frivolous, it was not. In this case this particular McDonalds had already received several complaints that the coffee was *50* degrees F too hot as compared to the chain's normal standards. This 81 year-old woman suffered severe burns when her cup of coffee overturned.

The lawsuit was frivoluous-

lifted from the web site

McDonald's also said during discovery that, based on a consultant's advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Coffee served at retail establishments is ALWAYS between 180 and 190. This does provide the best flavor. Ask your local coffee shop if this is true!

Home brewers only run between 135/140 to prevent "frivolous lawsuits" and home accidents.

Why do you think cofee tastes better away from home (well, except that stuff at gas stations - LOL)

How do I know this - I spent 3 years managing a fast food reasturant.

Sorry Bruce - It was frivolous.

Coffee lover,
CarolX