How many sentences does your Quality Policy statement contain?

[AndyN]

...well, if you can include the following requirements into one paragraph, then 1 paragraph would be enough:
- appropriate to the organization’s purpose,
- includes commitment to comply with the requirements & continually improve the effectiveness of your QMS,
- it provides a framework for establishing & reviewing quality objectives,
- it is communicated & understood within the organization, and
- it is being reviewed for continuing suitability.

This is not supposed to be in the policy - it's the requirements for the policy. No-one should be writing a policy that incorporates the statements above! The requirements are that the organization has a policy and it is supposed to meet those statements.......so a simple one-liner "to be the best" or something equally banal, isn't going to do!

 

[potdar]

so a simple one-liner "to be the best" or something equally banal, isn't going to do!

Just because you talk of the banality of a one line policy - a simple curious thought. Is the Quality Policy a part of the Manual, or is it the other way round?

If the Policy exists first and does not say that I will follow the ISO 9001 QMS, thats suposedly wrong. Still, I do get certified for TS 16949 and ISO 9001 even if my policy never mentions ISO. How come?

If it is a part of the manual, it is followed because the manual is. It need not blabber again and again the same stereotype statements like "We shall follow the ISO 9001:2000 QMS and ensure that its effectiveness is continually improved." Of course the manual talks of all these things being done. The empoyees know it. The customers know it by seeing the certification logo. The auditors know it. Whom are we trying to remind? The management? If at all, they would be the most likely stakeholders who need to read these statements.

A single hard hitting statement that drives the motto of the organisation is always more effective. The rest can be detailed in the objectives.

How about "We work systematically to be the Best"? Banal? On what grounds?

 

[Paul Simpson]

Just because you talk of the banality of a one line policy - a simple curious thought. Is the Quality Policy a part of the Manual, or is it the other way round?

I'm not sure what your point is.

The Quality policy and the manual are not connected in ISO 9001 requirements - so it is up to the organisation to decide how they relate.

If the Policy exists first and does not say that I will follow the ISO 9001 QMS, thats suposedly wrong. Still, I do get certified for TS 16949 and ISO 9001 even if my policy never mentions ISO. How come?

There is no requirement that the organisation commits to comply with ISO 9001 (or TS) there is a general requirement to commit to requirements that some overzealous auditors have interpreted as 9001.

If it is a part of the manual, it is followed because the manual is. It need not blabber again and again the same stereotype statements like "We shall follow the ISO 9001:2000 QMS and ensure that its effectiveness is continually improved." Of course the manual talks of all these things being done. The empoyees know it. The customers know it by seeing the certification logo. The auditors know it. Whom are we trying to remind? The management? If at all, they would be the most likely stakeholders who need to read these statements.

Agree. Few organisations have a good understanding of the role of policy in communicating to employees.

Something you also see on the cove!

A single hard hitting statement that drives the motto of the organisation is always more effective. The rest can be detailed in the objectives.

How about "We work systematically to be the Best"? Banal? On what grounds?

That statement wouldn't satisfy 5.3 clauses a, b and c. Never mind the banality. The policy statement should be a way of capturing the organisation's strategy for quality - a strap line doesn't do it for me.

 

[joshua_sx1]

This is not supposed to be in the policy - it's the requirements for the policy. No-one should be writing a policy that incorporates the statements above! The requirements are that the organization has a policy and it is supposed to meet those statements.......so a simple one-liner "to be the best" or something equally banal, isn't going to do!

That’s why I mentioned “if you can include the ff. requirements into one paragraph”… I didn’t said those exact lines should be there… but the compliance to the requirements for establishing quality policy should be met…

…anyway, since the question is “How many sentences does your Quality Policy statement contain?”… I guess, whatever ever on it, doesn’t matter…

 

[JaneB]

A single hard hitting statement that drives the motto of the organisation is always more effective. The rest can be detailed in the objectives.

Totally agree with you, Potdar. Anything longer than a single statement is rarely effective - people can't remember it, and thus the 'quality policy' usually just becomes a collection of vaguely recalled words to the people who actually work there. And which they almost certainly don't use to refer to, guide and drive their actions and decision-making. Which is what an effective quality policy should do IMO.

No, I don't claim that all the requirements (eg, as quoted by Paul) are also covered by the single statement. But there are ways of covering those off, (eg, below the single policy statement) while not detracting from or obscuring the message of the 'single hard-hitting statement'.

Banal? Shouldn't be.

If it is, then that's not down to being brief, it's almost always because the organisation hasn't actually put the effort into coming up with something that really captures what their policy is.

It's actually much harder work to come up with something that's good and short than it is to produce something that is essentially a lot of regurgitated stuff from the Standard and/or the usual bland wordy blah-type stuff.

 

[Jasonvand28]

AS9100 we currenty have 3 sentences.

 

[Raffy]

For TS16949 Certified company, We have 4 sentences...

 

[safi99]

who cares...if the system is consistent with the quality policy.

 

[Falco]

We have a one liner as follows:

"Quality is the perception our clients have of our ability to turn client requirements into products and services, efficiently, accurately, and profitably in a safe and professional manner while continually improving."

Although this may be too "quality jargonish" for rank and file, our quality objectives are appropriate at various levels. Most rank and file quality objectives are built into processes and procedures while manger/director/VP level quality objectives are woven into corporate strategies for services and operational improvements.

 

[Obi-wan Kenobi]

who cares...if the system is consistent with the quality policy.

That's true. Who cares what was written. It can be a motherhood statement which most auditors will just look at the three key sentences which are:
1. Meeting customer satisfaction
2. Consistent processes which focusing on reduce variations and waste reduction (sounds same with ISO/TS 16949:2002, as for ISO 13485:2003 safe and effective product)
3. Continually improve processes and product

However, what is really matter is the focus on EFFECTIVENESS and EFFICIENCY which bring to the bottom line of any businesses, i.e. PROFIT and GROWTH.

Does the quality policy statements provide the commitment(s) of the top management?
Only Top Management has the answer.