Document Revisions when a different company takes control

[Dan Johnson]

I am the QM on a Government contract, 16 years at the same location. My problem is that periodically (every 2 years as of now) the contract changes hands and I'm working for a new company. The last time this happenned, I discussed with the customer the fact that when this happens, we have to change our QMS entirely and it is extremely disruptive to our work force. We decided to create a stand-alone system and put a generic, customer-oriented logo on our procedures and all related documents. 6 months into the new contract, our corporate masters decide that the company logo has to be used. UGH!!!

So I changed the logo on everything, approximately 400 documents. What I did not do is change the revision number, date of the documents or the Master List of Documents, upon the advice of people with more experience then I. Guidance was also put out that existing records and documents in use (inventories, etc.) could continue to be used and submitted when required but any new forms had to have the company logo. This isn't a problem as our QMS is completely on a sharepoint server and everyone has access to it.

My question is: Do you guys think this will fly when I receive a Gap Analysis next month?

 

[Chance]

Re: Document revisions

My question is: Do you guys think this will fly when I receive a Gap Analysis next month?

Perhaps declare that in your quality manual stating that you added company logo to your procedures on (date) but did not change the revision numbers.

 

[JaneB]

We decided to create a stand-alone system and put a generic, customer-oriented logo on our procedures and all related documents. 6 months into the new contract, our corporate masters decide that the company logo has to be used. UGH!!!

Sounds like a sensible approach you took, but corporate masters of course have to be obeyed.

So I changed the logo on everything, approximately 400 documents. What I did not do is change the revision number, date of the documents or the Master List of Documents, upon the advice of people with more experience then I. Guidance was also put out that existing records and documents in use (inventories, etc.) could continue to be used and submitted when required but any new forms had to have the company logo. This isn't a problem as our QMS is completely on a sharepoint server and everyone has access to it.

My question is: Do you guys think this will fly when I receive a Gap Analysis next month?

Sounds eminently sensible, so why shouldn't it 'fly'?

All I'd take care to do is have some kind of reasonable record or records of what you did - that might be as easy as recording the decision in the action list/minutes from a meeting, or a memo, or even updating however many hundreds of documents to say 'nothing changed, just the logo'. I know you say 'guidance was put out' but sometimes that's in the form of an ephemeral email or 'news' on an intranet site, so make sure it can also be produced later.

I'd go for the most practical, most effective way that involves the least amount of wasted effort.

 

[sagai]

We also have similar tasks, when the customer project name changes, related documentation should also be.
One way is to use a template, if you are only subject to ISO9001, I would recommend to move your entire QMS under wiki and handle these mass changes in an electronic environment (we can not do so, due to part11, anyway.)
Regards

 

[Wes Bucey]

I am the QM on a Government contract, 16 years at the same location. My problem is that periodically (every 2 years as of now) the contract changes hands and I'm working for a new company. The last time this happenned, I discussed with the customer the fact that when this happens, we have to change our QMS entirely and it is extremely disruptive to our work force. We decided to create a stand-alone system and put a generic, customer-oriented logo on our procedures and all related documents. 6 months into the new contract, our corporate masters decide that the company logo has to be used. UGH!!!

So I changed the logo on everything, approximately 400 documents. What I did not do is change the revision number, date of the documents or the Master List of Documents, upon the advice of people with more experience then I. Guidance was also put out that existing records and documents in use (inventories, etc.) could continue to be used and submitted when required but any new forms had to have the company logo. This isn't a problem as our QMS is completely on a sharepoint server and everyone has access to it.

My question is: Do you guys think this will fly when I receive a Gap Analysis next month?

Sounds like a sensible approach you took, but corporate masters of course have to be obeyed.


Sounds eminently sensible, so why shouldn't it 'fly'?

All I'd take care to do is have some kind of reasonable record or records of what you did - that might be as easy as recording the decision in the action list/minutes from a meeting, or a memo, or even updating however many hundreds of documents to say 'nothing changed, just the logo'. I know you say 'guidance was put out' but sometimes that's in the form of an ephemeral email or 'news' on an intranet site, so make sure it can also be produced later.

I'd go for the most practical, most effective way that involves the least amount of wasted effort.

I pretty much agree with Jane's assessment and have an additional suggestion which should fly with each new set of "masters" as the contract changes corporate hands.

Confer with new masters and suggest:
Create a new cover page (with appropriate logo) for each document in the QMS using the same title, doc number, and revision level of the original with this little sentence added, signed by an appropriate officer of the new "master"
"This document adopted and affirmed in its entirety as part of the Quality Management System at [name and location of facility]
Organization name _________________
Authorized signature ___________________
date _____________________"


You will save entire forests and the new "masters" will probably be relieved at not having to create new competency records for employees showing they know and understand documents under new numbering systems or titles.

Obviously, you would probably agree the new folks have a perfect right to add some different documents which might supersede or conflict with your existing documents (things like chain of command, supplier preferences or approvals, etc.)

 

[Dan Johnson]

Thank you all for your assistance and great advice. As in everything ISO, documentation is key. I have a memo form that should do the job nicely. I'll have the Boss sign it and we should be in good shape.