How do you decide what is a Process, a Procedure or Work Instruction?

[JaneB]

Sure... but I don't think one can argue (convincingly at least) that these definitions are all that's needed. Have you seen the many lively debates in the Cove on how good/useful/effective those definitions really are, including the one on the definition of a process?
I've yet to meet anyone for example who, having read/been advised of the process definition from ISO 9000 responded that all was now clear and they quite understood what a process was and how to identify one.
And so forth.

 

[Jim Wynne]

OT: Clarification

Sure... but I don't think one can argue (convincingly at least) that these definitions are all that's needed. Have you seen the many lively debates in the Cove on how good/useful/effective those definitions really are, including the one on the definition of a process?
I've yet to meet anyone for example who, having read/been advised of the process definition from ISO 9000 responded that all was now clear and they quite understood what a process was and how to identify one.
And so forth.

Point of clarification

I don't think that in the current discussions you refer to that the definition of "process" is in question; it's the process approach that's ill-defined.

 

[ISO 9001 Guy]

Sure... but I don't think one can argue (convincingly at least) that these definitions are all that's needed. Have you seen the many lively debates in the Cove on how good/useful/effective those definitions really are, including the one on the definition of a process?
I've yet to meet anyone for example who, having read/been advised of the process definition from ISO 9000 responded that all was now clear and they quite understood what a process was and how to identify one.
And so forth.

Sure, I'll take the bait. If you look at the thread called "Should auditors promote the process approach?", you will find two articles posted. One of them, the one called "Letter vs Intent," contains a section dedicated to "Identifying Processes." In light of the apparent question here, the following might also be useful.

Where does a process begin and where does it end? The best answer I've heard to this question was offered by my British friend, who said (something like): "To be honest, the correct answer here seems to be: it doesn't matter so long as it's well defined." Well-defined? That means the whole system of processes as defined holds water--no holes.

 

[Bill Goss]

As a member of the ISO 19770-2 and ISO 19770-3 Working Groups, we went through a long debate over these as well and we worked it out quite well. In fact, the Organization for International Standardization has the definitions documented, and we are in agreement with the definitions as published.

 

[Bill Ray]

I am new to this gruop and I was wondering if anybody has a template for writing a new process, any help will be good.

 

[Stijloor]

I am new to this gruop and I was wondering if anybody has a template for writing a new process, any help will be good.

What process?

Stijloor.

 

[harry]

I am new to this gruop and I was wondering if anybody has a template for writing a new process, any help will be good.

Welcome, Bill.

It can be in descriptive or flowchart/map form. You can get some ideas by referring the relevant files in the 'post attachments list (thin green bar at the top left hand corner of every page).

Here's one using 'map' as keyword for the search.

 

[Jim Wynne]

I'm not entirely certain that all the requirements of the standard are a process, either. I've never been a fan of some of the requirements which are procedures being a process! For the life of me I can't see why document control is a process, internal audits nor records control! To me, that leads to questions being asked about measurement and monitoring and you know where that rapidly leads! Are we really saying that document, audit and records procedures should be monitored and measured? I sincerely hope not...

Who says that all processes must be measured?

 

[ISO 9001 Guy]

Who says that all processes must be measured?

Jim, I agree with you here. (And I love you, always fishing for that counter-example. I know somebody like that, too.)
It may well not be appropriate to measure all processes, but it is appropriate to at least monitor all processes. Some may be adequately monitored via internal audits. Others might warrant dedicated measurement.

 

[JaneB]

Re: OT: Clarification

Point of clarification

I don't think that in the current discussions you refer to that the definition of "process" is in question; it's the process approach that's ill-defined.

I beg to differ.
And thought we were talking about the topic of the the thread - how to decide if it's a process, procedure or WI.