How many Quality Manuals does your company have?

[MichelleD]

There has been such a turnover here that no one person can give me a good reason why there is so much redundancy in the system. And belive me, I've been asking "why" alot. I feel like my six year old. I think because they had several departments excluded (and no one knows why for this one, either) from the certification they felt like they had to have separate systems set up. Right now, they don't even have one overall management review - they do it by department. I still don't understand they got certified. I have heard that you can "buy" a certificate from the company we used. I can see why the system is not value added to them.

We do not have an overall Quality Manual. And the Quality Manuals we have now are controlled by the Directors of each department. By the way, we also have more than one Management Representative. They are also the Directors or VP's of each area.

 

[MichelleD]

Good Point Did I say that? I'm fighting that terminology every day and turned around and used it myself.

 

[MichelleD]

My company was in a similar situation prior to my coming on board to rework the system.

There was a master quality manual with everything (a hodge podge of outline of the QMS, procedures, work instructions, appendices, drawings).
Then each deparmtent has it's own (controlled) quality manual with the main portion plus any other parts that affected that department.
On top of that each department had a "procedure manual" with stuff that was not in the quality manual.

It's now been reworked so that there is on Quality Manual that is a 13 page outline of the QMS.

Thanks....This is exactly the way I want to head and how I've set my other systems up in the past. I was just curious as to if anyone has had this work for them. I've only been here three weeks and still try to get a good handle on the "whys". I think I saw a quote on here the other day about "how do you eat an elephant" and the answer is one bite at a time. I have a feeling my biggest hurdle will be top management buy-in.

 

[Gaby]

Hi Michelle!

In the company I work for we only have one Quality Manual, it cover all the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and we're working on including ISO/TS ones also.

On my previous jobs also they had only one Quality Manual.

 

[MichelleD]

Hi Michelle!

In the company I work for we only have one Quality Manual, it cover all the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and we're working on including ISO/TS ones also.

On my previous jobs also they had only one Quality Manual.

Thank You...I needed to hear all these replies. In my opinion, a good Quality Manual should define the documentation structure. And after thinking this through, we don't have just one documentation system. I think this is where the multiple Quality Manuals are coming from. I could start several different discussions with some of the issues we are having here. Management Reviews, Management Reps, Internal Audits/Auditors, Corrective Actions

 

[Stijloor]

Thank You...I needed to hear all these replies. In my opinion, a good Quality Manual should define the documentation structure. And after thinking this through, we don't have just one documentation system. I think this is where the multiple Quality Manuals are coming from. I could start several different discussions with some of the issues we are having here. Management Reviews, Management Reps, Internal Audits/Auditors, Corrective Actions

Hi Michelle,

Please keep us Covers posted on developments. We're always interested how things work out. Keep in mind, everybody at The Cove is ready to lend a hand.

Let others know about this great resource.

Stijloor.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

I've worked at several companies but all have had just one Quality Manual that governed the ISO system.

Not only that... Most of us stick to just one manual, and many of us cram several systems into that one manual, for obvious reasons: The users tend to dislike having to look for things in several places. Your lot have gone in the opposite direction, then... Interesting.

I'm leaning toward only one but getting some resistance from the masses.

From the masses? Or maybe from some people benefiting from the current state of affairs (though I can't imagine anyone really benefiting from this setup)? What reasons are they giving you for staying at status quo?

They almost say exactly the same thing with minimal differences.

Which probably means that they also contradict each other at some point. Certainly a good opportunity to cut down on the bumf quotient anyway...

The company has been registered for about three years but had decided to drop their certification but wants to remain "compliant" so that at anytime a customer demands it we can pick back up our certification.

Ah. And would that customer be prepared to wait for the proceedings to run their course, I wonder...

And after thinking this through, we don't have just one documentation system. I think this is where the multiple Quality Manuals are coming from.

So I gather. A question: I would like to know what the users have to say about all this? I don't suppose they happen to view the system as a load of rubbish, by any chance?

I could start several different discussions with some of the issues we are having here.

Please do. We could all benefit from those discussions.

/Claes

 

[MichelleD]

From the masses? Or maybe from some people benefiting from the current state of affairs (though I can't imagine anyone really benefiting from this setup)? What reasons are they giving you for staying at status quo?

Which probably means that they also contradict each other at some point. Certainly a good opportunity to cut down on the bumf quotient anyway...

Ah. And would that customer be prepared to wait for the proceedings to run their course, I wonder...

/Claes

Ah, It's so nice to hear the same questions coming from someone else that I've been asking around here. And maybe "the masses" was the wrong phrase. I hear "grumble grumble" which is about what it amounts to. Not enough time, waste of time, etc. You name it - I've heard it. "We are not going to keep our certification, what does it matter?"

Luckily (or maybe unlucky) I've been given the authority to lead the effort to overhaul of the system. The major problem is that every department has their own mini system set up and managers/supervisors do not want anyone to mess with it. But if you talk to the operators of those same areas, they are drowning and are ready for someone to throw out a life preserver.

I am trying to get the point across to them that whether we are ISO certified or not we still must have a good business management system in place. The feeling here is to replace ISO with Six Sigma. They don't understand that these are two completely different systems that do different things for the business. And I know I'm rambling but talking this out is helping me make sense of it so I appreciate everyone listening.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Not enough time, waste of time, etc. You name it - I've heard it. "We are not going to keep our certification, what does it matter?"

Yes, and all those comments reflect a serious implication: They highlight the fact that the system in place has not been particularly useful... People will ask themselves "What's in it for me", and if they find nothing...

Luckily (or maybe unlucky) I've been given the authority to lead the effort to overhaul of the system.

So you have allies in high places then? Good on you.

The major problem is that every department has their own mini system set up and managers/supervisors do not want anyone to mess with it.

That is to be expected, I suppose... they do not want to lose control over their part of the system... which should work to your advantage later on: We want people to assume responsibility for what they do, right?

But if you talk to the operators of those same areas, they are drowning and are ready for someone to throw out a life preserver.

Great More allies! If you can aid them by making their every day tasks more agreeable, you can expect a lot of support from that end later.

I am trying to get the point across to them that whether we are ISO certified or not we still must have a good business management system in place.

Yes, that understanding is crucial, of course.

And I know I'm rambling but talking this out is helping me make sense of it so I appreciate everyone listening.

Yes, I know the feeling: Many Cove Dwellers have found themselves in similar situations, so we can both listen and understand.

/Claes

 

[osospat]

Only one documented Quality Management System should exist. Multiple manuals by department will fail to improve the business. Those that placed this task before should respect you when you tell them that only one documented QMS will work. If you receive continued resistance, a strong internal audit of the system that uncovers problems with compliance to the standard should help others see your point of view.

Pat Ryan