Exact Format of Clause 2 References

apestate

Quite Involved in Discussions
In the quality manual, if writing a reiterative document that follows the format of the ISO 9001:2000 standard, what is the exact format of the references I want to cite in my brief section 2?

on top of that, what references -do- I want to site? Our quality system is based solely ISO 9000.

I have seen ANSI/ISO/ASQC A9000:2000
and simply ISO 9000:2000.

I'm citing ISO 9000:2000, ISO 9001:2000, AIAG PPAP, AIAG SPC, AIAG APQP, AIAG MFMEA, AIAG MSA, and the procedures I have written to support our QMS.

Any suggestions on how to list these and any other references I may want to include?
 

SteelMaiden

Super Moderator
Trusted Information Resource
We have a list that includes the industry specs such as ASTM, ABS, AASHTO and a whole bunch of others. This section also serves as kind of a "master list" of the industry specs that we controll (update when new revs are released)
 
R

RosieA

Atetsade,

I would cite any standard you have used to set up your system, as long as you are prepared to be audited against that standard.

For example, you may choose to use a standard as a guideline vs conforming to the standard. I would NOT list standards that I use as guidelines, only those to which I claim conformance.

Per a previous registrar, If you have an RAB accreditation mark, you're supposed to cite the US accepted version of ISO 9000, which is ANSI/ISO/ASQ (not ASQC) Q90001-2000.
 
D

db

I have never, never, never done this. Why do it? It is not required. So what value does it add to your QMS?
 

apestate

Quite Involved in Discussions
well now I realize it doesn't add a **** thing to the system to add which documents I referenced in writing the manual.

then again, it does add something to the system... since this is the first registration audit at this company ever and since without the certification we will be closing the doors. and since the system is one of continual improvement, as long as we pass the first audit we'll be adding to the QMS anyway. and since the registrar auditor has said that the quality manual is usually a reiteration of the standard itself, I think for my first quality manual I'm going to reiterate the standard in form and content.

and since I'm here for the long haul and going after automotive tier 1's in the area, I have a feeling the QMS will come around quite nicely. when it does, this forum will have been the #1 cause of that, and I'll be here to see it too, just because I'm doing little things like citing the references used to write the QMS.

this is a compromise, but it will satisfy all of the requirements of ISO 9001. It isn't as pure as a hand rolled system using state-of-the-age techniques in documentation and process thinking, but it will document and identify our process approach.

the references aren't a big deal either, just a sideline, but knowing the exact format to make the auditor feel warm, fuzzy & welcome is exactly how I'm going to do it. ;)
 

apestate

Quite Involved in Discussions
the added -value- is that we're more likely to be recommended after the first audit. I realize this may not be the best way to view the system, but I must impress upon you that I'm not merely looking for a certificate. I am looking for excellence. I have no experience besides what I've gained here on this job, and the only way I know how to write a qm is this way, reiterative, narrative, and with references to supporting documentation.

this quality system is nothing without registration before the end of the year. with registration, well... it has the ability to really perform where it counts. continually, and for the future.
 
D

db

Okay, I can live with that. I just hate to see folks add complexity to the system without reason. It sounds like you have thought it out and made a decision. That is a major step that many don't do. They just hear someone say something somewhere and then they think what they heard is the law.

Good luck on your audit, and I'm sure we will be hearing from you with good results.
 

Cari Spears

Super Moderator
Leader
Super Moderator
atetsade said:
In the quality manual, if writing a reiterative document that follows the format of the ISO 9001:2000 standard, what is the exact format of the references I want to cite in my brief section 2?

on top of that, what references -do- I want to site? Our quality system is based solely ISO 9000.

I have seen ANSI/ISO/ASQC A9000:2000
and simply ISO 9000:2000.

I'm citing ISO 9000:2000, ISO 9001:2000, AIAG PPAP, AIAG SPC, AIAG APQP, AIAG MFMEA, AIAG MSA, and the procedures I have written to support our QMS.

Any suggestions on how to list these and any other references I may want to include?

Hi Atetsade -

4.2.2b requires that the manual contain documented procedures or reference to them. I only listed our own internal procedures. If you started listing documents of external origin (other than the standard(s) you are registered to) you would almost have to continue and list customer supplied Supplier Quality Requirements Manuals, ISO documents such as 10012-1 - QA Requirements for Measuring Equip and 19011:2002 - Guidelines for Quality and/or Environmental Management Systems Auditing, and on and on.

The AIAG documents you listed above are reference manuals, as are the ISO documents I just listed above. Your documented procedures - whether they are in flow diagram or text format - can make reference to any other internal or external documents that you may have written your procedures "in accordance with".

I have attached my QPM in the thread "Is your company registered to ISO9001:2000" page 10. I chose to reference some procedures in the Process Diagrams and others in a simple list format. See what you think! :)
 

SteelMaiden

Super Moderator
Trusted Information Resource
db said:
I have never, never, never done this. Why do it? It is not required. So what value does it add to your QMS?

For most it may add nothing....we like it because it is a ready reference for people across the plant who may need to see the standard/spec occasionally someplace to see if it is one that we are "selling" to, and have up to date copies of. We don't buy multiple copies.

I really do believe in the "show me the shall" principal and I do question my registrar about some things, but we do need to remember here that the quality system belongs to the company and we may need things that are not required by a "shall" in order to make things easier for our employees. JMHO...I don't mean to start anything just throwing out some food for thought.
 
C

ccochran

Example quality manual

Atetsade,

I've attached an example Quality Manual for a fictional company, showing one way that you could number the introductory sections. In the example QM, section 1 is "Introduction and process diagram," section 2 is "Scope and exclusions," section 3 is "Quality policy." Then section 4 picks up with the basic requirements of ISO 9001:2000 in user-friendly words (not necessarily the exact verbiage from the standard). As Dave B. pointed out, this is certainly not a requirement, though it could have some advantages.

Why include *your translation* of the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 in the quality manual? Here are a few reasons, some of which have already been mentioned;

1) Many registrars require in their contracts that the Quality Manual "include a commitment to all the requirements in ISO
9001:2000," or some such language. This can be accomplished by including your version of the verbiage from ISO 9001:2000.

2) Having the verbiage of the standard also allows the organization to
customize it in a way that makes sense to them. They can translate the
requirements into terms they're familiar with. The standard becomes
understandable throughout their organization.

3) Having the verbiage from the standard (or customized verbiage, preferably) facilitates an elaboration on exactly HOW the organization plans to meet some of the requirements. The standard in many places asks the organization to "define" or "determine" things that don't warrant stand-alone procedures, and the Quality Manual is a good place to put this kind of detail. Including the language from the standard puts these things in a context that's understandable. Without the verbiage from the standard, it's often hard to understand why the clarification is being provided.

4) Having a Quality Manual with the verbiage from the standard is a
good starting point in an audit. That way, you can put the standard
away and simply use their Quality Manual (with also will include
additional valuable detail).

Feel free to use or edit the example I've attached. It is by no means a 'best practice,' just one more example to throw into the pot and stir around. A significant weakness is that the example doesn't do a good job of translating the standard into use-friendly terms (...I got tired of working on it).

CC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Craig Cochran
Center for International Standards & Quality
Georgia Institute of Technology
[email protected]
 

Attachments

  • Rocio Floral Group Quality Manual.doc
    112.5 KB · Views: 698
Top Bottom