Documentation Update to ISO 9001:2008 (My first post)

catemu

Registered
I've been a member of this forum for over a year and this is probably my first post. However, I've always lurked around the Cove when I needed help, which I always find. This time I’ve read a lot of posts trying to find an answer to the questions I’m about to ask, maybe I should have looked deeper, however, I’m going to be brave and admit that I am having trouble finding the exact answer, as I am fairly new to the world of Quality and also the new Quality Assurance Manager of my company. Any comments of your part will be welcomed. Without further delay, here is the deal:

I work for a rapidly expanding company. We are currently ISO 9001:2000 registered, we have well over a dozen plants under the same registration (and more plants are being added). Now, our last external audit was done in October 2009; this means that this upcoming October we are going to be audited as per the updated 9001:2008 standard. The way we manage our documentation (Including the QA Manual) is as follows: a digital copy of every controlled document is kept in a server which is accessible from all the plants. The plants may or may not print a copy which, once printed, has a "reference only" watermark. The questions that I have are:

1) Can I update all documentation right now, changing from 9001:2000 to 9001:2008 and make it available to the plants through the server?

2) I intend to remove all ISO 9001:2000 from the server well before we get audited and registered to the new standard; do you think I may run into trouble with my external auditor (or any other body) by doing so?

Thanks for all the inputs and comments.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

You can update your documentation any time you want and you're behind the power curve with the 2008 thing.

Why not just remove all references to the revision of ISO 9001 completely? It's not necessary to have it and you're just playing a form of Russian Roulette with a single shot pistol if you keep it in.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Agreed! If I were the auditor, I wouldn't be too worried about documentation references between the standards. What I'd be focused on is your Management Review...Here was a change that could affect the qms and what was done? It has taken this long to do what? I'm thinking there's more to this than simple documentation changes...but, of course I'd be objective, while following my "auditor's nose"...
 
J

JaneB

Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

If I were the auditor, I wouldn't be too worried about documentation references between the standards. What I'd be focused on is your Management Review...Here was a change that could affect the qms and what was done? It has taken this long to do what? I'm thinking there's more to this than simple documentation changes...but, of course I'd be objective, while following my "auditor's nose"...
Me too. :yes:
Doco plan is fine (I'd remove the specific references to year also - why have 'em?)

But as both Andy and Randy (hmm, those rhyme) point out, it's very late to be doing this, ie, right up to the very last minute. As auditor, I would also be asking myself: why is this company so very late in doing this? What kind of review is their management doing - is it timely and effective? etc. That's where I would be looking too.
 

catemu

Registered
Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Thank you all for your replies. The reason on why we are behind with the auditing to the new standard was that the previous management rep. signed the contract a long while ago without paying attention to the standard that was being mentioned in it. So last year I was surprised (and disappointed) to find this out. Randy, I had given it some thought to the removal of the revision year to the ISO 9001 documentation , I does make sense, I'll propose its convenience in the next Senior Management meeting. As this company is marketing driven, having "ISO 9001:2008 Registered" as opposed to "ISO 9001 Registered" printed in their business card makes a different to them; I know it sounds dumb, but hey, go figure.

I really appreciate all of your inputs and comments.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Thank you all for your replies. The reason on why we are behind with the auditing to the new standard was that the previous management rep. signed the contract a long while ago without paying attention to the standard that was being mentioned in it. So last year I was surprised (and disappointed) to find this out. Randy, I had given it some thought to the removal of the revision year to the ISO 9001 documentation , I does make sense, I'll propose its convenience in the next Senior Management meeting. As this company is marketing driven, having "ISO 9001:2008 Registered" as opposed to "ISO 9001 Registered" printed in their business card makes a different to them; I know it sounds dumb, but hey, go figure.

I really appreciate all of your inputs and comments.

And your CB didn't help you out with better service than that? They didn't help you with some kind of time line to get your certificate changed over? I wonder why the auditor didn't make mention of it a while ago...
 
J

JaneB

Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Catemu,
I hear what you say about 'without paying attention' but it still brings up the question of how good and effective management review is. (That's one of the reasons why it's in the Standard). At the very least it raises questions (to any auditor's mind) about your - meaning the company's - control of external documents - because the issue of a new version of ISO 9001 is something that should have been captured in your system. If it wasn't, needs to be.

I second Andy's questions. Surely your CB would have provided information on the release of a new Standard (without new requirements), the need to review one's system against its updates, etc etc? Any half-way decent CB would have done this, not to mention offered good guidance.

But hey - happy we've been able to help. ;)
 

catemu

Registered
Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Just to clarify, even though we have quite a few plants, there was only one person dedicating less than a third of his time to the Quality System, the person with this responsibilities also managed a health and safety and environmental system; then, two years ago I was trained as an internal auditor and lead auditor to help with internal audits (I saw the opportunity for advancement and I took the initiative of enrolling and taking the courses). The person in charge of the QS left the company the week before the external audit and I was left on my own (with little experience I may add) to deal with the traveling and auditing with the external auditor. As a recommendation from the auditor the company decided to have one full time person dedicated to the Quality Assurance System for the whole company during the Senior Management Review, a Quality Assurance Manager, they pointed the finger at me and said "You're it!"; and I became the Quality Assurance Manager. I've had no contact with the certifying body, except a couple of weeks ago to set up a date for the external audits.

Our senior management review is usually after the external audit. I have to say that the minutes from previous meetings were less that a page long with about 3 to 4 action items (never met the standard). Whereas now, they are over three pages long with a few dozens action items; most of which have been addressed. The more I look and think about our system I start seeing potential weaknesses and opportunities for improvement . I notice that there's a change in the mindset of the senior management, before the wanted to be ISO and meet the minimum requirements; however, now they want to take full advantage of a Quality System, there is more buy-in, and they put me in charge of it.
 
J

JaneB

Re: Documentation Update to 9001:2008 (My first post)

Our senior management review is usually after the external audit. I have to say that the minutes from previous meetings were less that a page long with about 3 to 4 action items (never met the standard). Whereas now, they are over three pages long with a few dozens action items; most of which have been addressed.
Yup - that's one indication of ineffective review. Not happening on a regular basis, few actions and they waited until after the external audit to have it. :nope:

But it sounds like there's changes afoot now, and you're in a great position to help them improve the management systems.
The more I look and think about our system I start seeing potential weaknesses and opportunities for improvement . I notice that there's a change in the mindset of the senior management, before the wanted to be ISO and meet the minimum requirements; however, now they want to take full advantage of a Quality System, there is more buy-in, and they put me in charge of it.
Good to hear! Congratulations for your forethought.
 
Top Bottom