S
Re: Quality Manual and a question
It's not the fault of the people either who fail to interpret it since the standards are written in 'foreign' language and are so much generic in nature.
"ISO 9001:2008 has been developed in order to introduce clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000"
The above statement is an admittance to the fact that many of the requirements of the earlier version of 9001 weren't easy to interpret (atleast ISO received such feedback), else why would they have come up with 'clarifications'.
It is not the fault of the standard that it is debated.
Off course based on industry feedback standard gets revised. It does not in any way imply the earlier version of the standard was complex and hard to understand.
The above statement is an admittance to the fact that many of the requirements of the earlier version of 9001 weren't easy to interpret (atleast ISO received such feedback), else why would they have come up with 'clarifications'.
It's not in my post; stated or implied.