Draft ISO 9001:2008 (Feb 08 version) & Summary of Changes

[Peter Fraser]

Am I reading this section upside down - or am I really stupid? What does this mean (I have substituted the definition of a [product] from ISO9000 - which is, I believe, what ISO9000 exists for):

(1.1) "In this International Standard, the term “product” applies to the [result of a process] intended for, or required by, ... the product realization processes."

To me, this suggests that "product realization" could just as well be called "product transformation" (again using ISO9000 definitions) - since the "product" in this case is an input.

What about (for example) the induction and training process? It is needed to ensure that competent staff work in production. So your staff are a "product" on the production line?

There must be simpler words to describe the basic concepts. "Resources" might do, whether bought in or created, and that would help to get away from the confusion often caused when people try to find "inputs" to be "transformed" to fit the definition of a process, when the last thing you want is your resources to be transformed so that they can't be used again?

 

[joshua_sx1]

...I guess, you have to hold that “thoughts” until the final and official version is release…

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Am I reading this section upside down - or am I really stupid? What does this mean (I have substituted the definition of a [product] from ISO9000 - which is, I believe, what ISO9000 exists for):

(1.1) "In this International Standard, the term “product” applies to the [result of a process] intended for, or required by, ... the product realization processes."

Peter, I don't understand what your concern is. Please clarify. The paragraph you quoted just clarifies that the requirements of the ISO 9001 standard apply to the INTENDED product (which, by definition, includes components), but not to the byproducts of the product realization processes.

 

[Peter Fraser]

Peter, I don't understand what your concern is. Please clarify. The paragraph you quoted just clarifies that the requirements of the ISO 9001 standard apply to the INTENDED product (which, by definition, includes components), but not to the byproducts of the product realization processes.

Sidney

Sorry, but I don't understand your interpretation(!), and I don't think that it clarifies anything.

"The product intended for the product realization processes" sounds to me like something going in to another process, not coming out.

The intention may be as you say, but the result makes it less, rather than more, clear.

And if you forget about a production line, and try to relate it to a "transactional" process (such as the design of a training course?), it is worse.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Sidney

Sorry, but I don't understand your interpretation(!), and I don't think that it clarifies anything.

"The product intended for the product realization processes" sounds to me like something going in to another process, not coming out.

The intention may be as you say, but the result makes it less, rather than more, clear.

And if you forget about a production line, and try to relate it to a "transactional" process (such as the design of a training course?), it is worse.

Note 1 of the ISO 9001 DIS (I have not seen the FDIS document yet) states

NOTE 1 In this International Standard, the term “product” applies to the product intended for, or required by, a customer or the product realization processes. This applies to any intended output resulting from product realization processes, including purchasing.

The output of the purchasing process can be raw materials, components, etc. which will be used in the product realization process. The note, in my opinion, serves the purpose of clarifying that "product" also includes the constituent parts of the final product, i.e., raw material, sub-assemblies, etc. Many people still misinterpret the word product in ISO 9001 as only "final, finished products".

Note 3 of the product definition contained in ISO 9000:2005 states

Quality assurance is mainly focused on intended product

​

 

[Peter Fraser]

I find that the attempt in the standards to explain words used in the standards often makes things worse. "Product" is defined as "the result of a process", but this definition is then compromised by the manufactured concept of "product realization processes" - which implies that some (other) processes don't "realise" (ie create) products.

In ISO9001, most of the references to "product" do mean "what the customer gets", so it is not surprising that people interpret the word in that way. Right at the beginning of the 2008 Draft it says: "This International Standard can be used ... to assess the organization‘s ability to meet customer, statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the product...".

The way the word is defined and used needs to be rethought and redefined so that it is consistent, if as you (correctly) say "many people still misinterpret the word".

 

[Stijloor]

I find that the attempt in the standards to explain words used in the standards often makes things worse. "Product" is defined as "the result of a process", but this definition is then compromised by the manufactured concept of "product realization processes" - which implies that some (other) processes don't "realise" (ie create) products.

In ISO9001, most of the references to "product" do mean "what the customer gets", so it is not surprising that people interpret the word in that way. Right at the beginning of the 2008 Draft it says: "This International Standard can be used ... to assess the organization‘s ability to meet customer, statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the product...".

The way the word is defined and used needs to be rethought and redefined so that it is consistent, if as you (correctly) say "many people still misinterpret the word".

Peter,

What do you mean by:

<snip>"Product" is defined as "the result of a process", but this definition is then compromised by the manufactured concept of "product realization processes" - which implies that some (other) processes don't "realise" (ie create) products.

Emphasis mine..

Stijloor.

 

[CBAL08]

Thank you for sharing the draft ISO 9001:2008. Atleast we can get some idea , what and where we need to focus .

 

[jackvanderhout]

Peter,

What do you mean by:



Emphasis mine..

Stijloor.

Stijloor and Peter,

I think the confusion can be generated by the fact that there are production processes (lines) that have to be designed and built or modified in order to make new products to be shipped and sold. The production line can be seen as a product of an engineering process. More complicated are companies that design and make production lines for other production companies.

Kind regards,

Jack

 

[Stijloor]

Stijloor and Peter,

I think the confusion can be generated by the fact that there are production processes (lines) that have to be designed and built or modified in order to make new products to be shipped and sold. The production line can be seen as a product of an engineering process. More complicated are companies that design and make production lines for other production companies.

Kind regards,

Jack

Jack,

I personally do not have any problems with the term "process" and its interpretation. I was just curious to find out from Peter what he means by: manufactured concept of "product realization processes."

Stijloor.