How many process maps are adequate for a company for IATF 16949?

[rvanderbilt]

Hello,

Looking for an industry standard on how many process maps people have at there companies. Not talking procedures, but high level maps. It would seem that it might be dependent on the size of the company and maybe some other factors. However I have been searching for some type of criteria or baseline to judge this question and I am not finding anything. Interested to hear any comments.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Interested to hear any comments.

The reason why you can't find it is the fact it does not exist. Subjectivity abounds in what is a process, a sub-process, an activity, etc....Anyone who is competent to perform a Value Stream Mapping of a medium size manufacturing organization would end up with something like 30 to 70 business processes. However, for organizations certified under the automotive IATF and the aerospace IAQG schemes, they end up with a few (typically a handful) ultra high-level "processes" simply because, the fewer processes identified, the less reporting the auditor has to do. It is a typical case of the tail wagging the dog....

Good luck.

 

[rvanderbilt]

Thanks for the feedback. When you say 30 to 70 business processes and few high level process maps, I am interpreting that as 30 to 70 procedures with no KPI's attached to them for monitoring of performance and the few high level maps with effectiveness and efficiency measures linked to them that you have an auditor scrutinize for certification purposes. Would that be correct?

 

[optomist1]

Adding to Sydney's great post...if you parse or process map the smallest processes, you also commit to keeping all current and up to date, necessitating much extra effort...Sydney's post is spot on

 

[rvanderbilt]

Thanks for the feedback. I am trying to find that balance of too detailed and too general. As Sydney commented that there is a lot of subjectivity in the matter, I was hoping there might be some things to reflect on that might generate some criteria for what constitutes too detailed.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Thanks for the feedback. I am trying to find that balance of too detailed and too general. As Sydney commented that there is a lot of subjectivity in the matter, I was hoping there might be some things to reflect on that might generate some criteria for what constitutes too detailed.

The simple answer to the question is that you should have as many process maps as you need (which could be none). Don't worry about what everyone else might be doing. Do what's right for your company. If doing something in the way of documentation leads to some form of improvement or desirable utility, do it. If it doesn't, don't.

 

[John Broomfield]

Hello,

Looking for an industry standard on how many process maps people have at there companies. Not talking procedures, but high level maps. It would seem that it might be dependent on the size of the company and maybe some other factors. However I have been searching for some type of criteria or baseline to judge this question and I am not finding anything. Interested to hear any comments.

Focus on the cross-functional processes, starting with the core process from customer needs to cash in the bank.

From this you will be able to determine the cross-functional processes in the core.

Then determine the cross-functional processes necessary to serve the core such as recruiting and training for competence, purchasing, maintaining facilities and equipment, auditing and managing continual improvement.

My clients found that deployment flowcharting works best in describing who does want to fulfill each process objective.

 

[poh.s.lim]

Usually, I would start with only one top-level process map which I would try to incorporate all the products and/or services into that map. By products or services, I mean by category which is sufficiently distinct from each other. Then, from that top-level process map, depending on complexity, I may have cross-referenced process maps that are at the lower level (sub-processes) for those products or services which need to be expanded for clarity's sake. Through this method, I could iterate each step until I get to the level appropriate to the ground-level operations.

So, only one top-level process map is needed which is appropriate to the key objectives of the organization

 

[Funboi]

Hello,

Looking for an industry standard on how many process maps people have at there companies. Not talking procedures, but high level maps. It would seem that it might be dependent on the size of the company and maybe some other factors. However I have been searching for some type of criteria or baseline to judge this question and I am not finding anything. Interested to hear any comments.

One - in my experience. Those who suggest 30-70 must really like spaghetti…

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

I recommend using 1 or 2 high level process maps only for IATF16949- specifying sequence and interactions of processes (including remote locations/support and outsourced processes).