Does anyone have an ISO 9001 Quality Records Matrix to share?

[energy]

Howdy Y'all,

Does anybody have a Records Matrix they would be willing to share. I would like some ideas as to what should be on it. I found one Dave Scott posted and it's pretty comprehensive. I believe it's because it's tailored for QS9000. Like, Collected By-Sorted By-Authorized Access. I'm not knocking the attachment, Dave. I just believe with the new standard not making the distinction between a Quality Record and a record, thanks Jim W. for pointing that out, I want to streamline our matrix to include all our records. Record Name, location, responsibility, retention time, only. What do you think? Any help? Huh? I know I'm going to get creamed here, but bring it on.

 

[Randy]

I'll use small words.

Go to microsoft word, go to table, make a table with what you want.

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, see if you can modify this simple matrix..

And yes, you will probably get hammered for asking about this

 

[energy]

Nerd? Okay!

Jim,

Excellent list. Know how I know? Marc has the same thing in the Premium Files which I have already downloaded. His list combines 8.3 to say "Nature of the product nonconformities and any subsequent actions taken, including concessions obtained." Other than that they are identical. You can do worse than having your work compared to that of the Cheech. Nice hand licking, you think?

 

[JodiB]

energy,

Did you lift the Records procedure from Ames Research? They did a 2 step sort of thing where they first identified the kinds of records that must be kept (similar to list that Jim posted) and then there was an "example" of some quality records on a separate kind of matrix.

I like that approach because the first table tells everyone what they need to keep records of, and the second one then compiles all of the actual records (by name) that are kept.

One change that I think I'll make is to add a column on the records matrix so that I can list the clause that the record satisfies.

 

[energy]

Re: Re: Nerd? Okay!

Jim Wade said:


Hand-licking, yes.

Nice? Er .. no! It's a trap, right?

rgds Jim

Jim,

No trap. A compliment, sort of. Don't get gun shy on me.

 

[HFowler]

energy,

Attached is my records matrix.

Best Regards,
Hank Fowler

 

[energy]

Good One

HFowler said:

energy,

Attached is my records matrix.

Best Regards,
Hank Fowler

Hank,

I like it. It's what I was looking for. Not all our records are structured with "numbers". We have Log Books, particular to certain areas. There are Service Agreements, Project Execution Logs, etc., that I want to refer to by name. What we call them. Yours appears to be what I want to do. I just wanted to see an example of others so that I don't feel alone with my intent to call the records what they are. Not some concocted numbering system that looks fancy but has no added value. I would expect to have the Quality Records a little more structured than regular records. Did I say "value added" again? Boy, it sure is catchy. Thanks much!

 

[energy]

All right!

My intent for sure.
By the way, nice picture. You had that picture available when you first joined the Cove. It took this long for others to see it? I had already put a face to the person with the mighty pen. You look pretty well preserved for 60. That's why you pi** me off. I'm soooo uuugggllly!
Later

 

[Ken K]

HOLD ON COWBOY....

Jim, your not going to knock people wearing paper bags, are you?


You'd look silly walking around with your shorts wrapped around your head....

 

[energy]

Annex B

Jim Wade said:

energy

In case this helps, here is a list of what I think are all records required by 9001:2000 (I haven't differentiated between 'quality' and 'other' records).

I have however grouped them according to whether they are related to key [operating] processes or support processes.

And I have flagged four records that are anomalies in that they have no x-ref to 4.2.4.

You think I'm a nerd, don't you? Don't answer that!!

rgds Jim

Required records (probably related to key processes)

7.2.2 results of review of product requirements
7.3.2 design and development inputs relating to product requirements
7.3.4 results of design and development review
7.3.5 results of design and development verification
7.3.6 results of design and development validation
7.3.7 design and development changes (no pointer to 4.2.4)
7.3.7 results of review of design and development changes
7.5.3 traceability identification
7.5.4 lost or damaged customer property
8.2.4 person(s) authorising product release.
8.2.4 evidence of conformity (no pointer to 4.2.4)
8.3 concessions obtained
8.3 nature of nonconformities and actions taken

Required records (probably related to support processes)

5.6.1 management review
6.2.2 e) records of education, training, skills and experience.
7.4.1 results of supplier evaluation
7.6a) basis for non-standard calibration (no pointer to 4.2.4)
7.6 validity of previous measuring results (no pointer to 4.2.4)
7.6 results of calibration and verification shall be maintained
8.2.2 internal audit records
8.5.2 e) results of corrective action
8.5.3 d) results of preventive action

Oh you wascally wabbit. Here I was giving you all the credit. I just found something very, very, very similar in ISO/TC 176/SC 2/N 525R ISO 9000 Introduction and Support Package: Guidance on the Documentation Reequirements of ISO 9001:2000.
Make that two wascally wabbits! I've been had.