How to Structure My Organization to Support the Quality Management System?

[akalbulus]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

Controlled copies: Are microsoft word (or even better .pdf) documents available in a folder that is read only to everyone but yourself. You IT person can help you with that, or perhaps someone else here can. There is no paper MASTER COPY. I would keep a copy of the email as the approval (use voting buttons "approve, not approve"). People can have copies, they are just uncontrolled and should know to access the system for the latest and greatest.

Uncontrolled copies are ANY that are printed. Include a footer on all templates that states: This is an uncontrolled document if printed. If a CONTROLLED copy needs to be printed and posted somewhere (on an enclosed bulletin board for example). Te document controller would do that, but to simplify the system I suggest to not allow that. Everyone has access to the folder copy.

aww..our company don't have an online documentation system so all of our documents kept in a filling cabinet.

this issue -if you believe- become our biggest issue regarding CONTROLLED documents and UNCONTROLLED documents. some of our staff said that our DOCUMENT CONTROLLER must have all of documents MASTER COPY so when the staff or management want a copy of it the document are well CONTROLLED.

some other staff said that the DOCUMENT CONTROLLER can't have the MASTER COPY because those are department's responsibility. So when the staff or management want a copy of a certain document they have to look for theirself and then request a stamp of document status from DOCUMENT CONTROLLER.

for the UNCONTROLLED document, i agree that it only contain an informations document not for work referrences.

so guys, i still need your guide how to solve this issue on my company..thanks

 

[Jgryn]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

aww..our company don't have an online documentation system so all of our documents kept in a filling cabinet.

this issue -if you believe- become our biggest issue regarding CONTROLLED documents and UNCONTROLLED documents. some of our staff said that our DOCUMENT CONTROLLER must have all of documents MASTER COPY so when the staff or management want a copy of it the document are well CONTROLLED.

some other staff said that the DOCUMENT CONTROLLER can't have the MASTER COPY because those are department's responsibility. So when the staff or management want a copy of a certain document they have to look for theirself and then request a stamp of document status from DOCUMENT CONTROLLER.

for the UNCONTROLLED document, i agree that it only contain an informations document not for work referrences.

so guys, i still need your guide how to solve this issue on my company..thanks

If you are using paper copies for distribution, (Are you creating the documents on a computer and then printing them?) then I would suggest that if you have a person called "Document Controller" they should have a set of MASTER COPIES (stamp them MASTER). Then this person would keep a list of departments and the CONTROLLED COPIES they have in one location/binder that is accessible to everyone in that department, they have (stamp them CONTROLLED). If someone needs a copy beyond that they should photocopy and keep a FOR REFERENCE ONLY stamp at the photocopier.

Does this help?

 

[JaneB]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

I need some help in determining how to stucture my organization to support the quality management system.

May I respectfully suggest that this sounds like putting things the wrong way around? The cart before the horse, as it were.

I would always structure the quality management system to support the organisation itself, rather than make the organisation fit around the system. (Or am I misinterpreting?)

 

[akalbulus]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

If you are using paper copies for distribution, (Are you creating the documents on a computer and then printing them?) then I would suggest that if you have a person called "Document Controller" they should have a set of MASTER COPIES (stamp them MASTER). Then this person would keep a list of departments and the CONTROLLED COPIES they have in one location/binder that is accessible to everyone in that department, they have (stamp them CONTROLLED). If someone needs a copy beyond that they should photocopy and keep a FOR REFERENCE ONLY stamp at the photocopier.

Does this help?

Is the UNCONTROLLED COPY Document, must be recorded its distribution in a certain form?

Thanks

 

[Jgryn]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

Is the UNCONTROLLED COPY Document, must be recorded its distribution in a certain form?

Thanks

The distribution of the UNCONTROLLED COPY does not need to be recorded, that is why it is UNCONTROLLED. If you are using it for something that it is important that it is up to date, then it needs to be properly distributed and CONTROLLED.

Or: A copy of the work instruction is included in a job folder. It is considered UNCONTROLLED for reference only, but becomes part of that Job Folder Record. It is indirectly controlled in this manner...

 

[scotdail]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

May I respectfully suggest that this sounds like putting things the wrong way around? The cart before the horse, as it were.

I would always structure the quality management system to support the organisation itself, rather than make the organisation fit around the system. (Or am I misinterpreting?)

Perhaps, or perhaps not, Jane. My meaning is what structure do I need to create to maintain the quality management system? Our documents have been created using an ISO 9000 format, using Microsoft windows folders with controlled read/write access, but these must be maintained and kept vital. We must have an audit schedule, trained auditors, manage that activity, and then drive continuous improvement.

Do any of you have a dedicated resource to maintain this, or do you drive it as the manager? I am having challenges with keeping track of all this, and am looking at how others have approached system maintenance. Is it done via a clerical function? Do you have a person in your department who is an ISO / QMS adminstrator? Other ideas for a small manufacturing firm?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: How to stucture my organization to support the Quality Management System?

May I respectfully suggest that this sounds like putting things the wrong way around? The cart before the horse, as it were.

I would always structure the quality management system to support the organisation itself, rather than make the organisation fit around the system. (Or am I misinterpreting?)

Perhaps, or perhaps not, Jane. My meaning is what structure do I need to create to maintain the quality management system? Our documents have been created using an ISO 9000 format, but must be maintained and kept vital. We must have an audit schedule, trained auditors, manage that activity, and then drive continuous improvement.

Do any of you have a dedicated resource to maintain this, or do you drive it as the manager? I am having challenges with keeping track of all this, and am looking at how others approached the maintenance. Is it done via a clerical function? Do you have a person in your department who is an ISO / QMS adminstrator? Other ideas for a small manufacturing firm?

We can't always assume that organizations are culturally prepared for having a structured quality system. It seems to me that the greatest impetus is satisfying extrinsic requirements for ISO compliance/registration, rather than some deep perception of a need for improvement. In such an instance scotdail's question about how to structure the organization makes sense, and is probably mostly overlooked when implementations are planned.
Whenever any new business system is introduced, the planning has to include what will be needed in the form of new resources and training in order to make it work. This is especially true in automotive companies, because the burden of documentation is substantially larger and more complex. Once a system has been implemented and it's discovered that someone (usually the quality manager) is being spread too thin, it might be too late. The best way to overcome it and relieve some of the burden is to have other managers play a more active role in doing such things as writing and maintaining documentation for their own areas of responsibility, and helping with the internal audit process. A full-time administrator is nice to have, but might be considered too much of a luxury in many companies.

 

[CliffK]

Re: How to Stucture My Organization to Support the Quality Management System?

The following applies primarily to procedures, work instructions and other documents of that ilk. For stuff like production formulas and drawings, your control methods need to be completely above reproach.

If you don't already have Lotus Notes or Microsoft Sharepoint, don't get either one. They're a waste of money--I say this as a Certified Lotus Professional developer.

Electronic document distribution systems may make it easier to administer and control your documents, but they can be a royal pain for the guys out on the plant floor. Do the front-line employees exist to support the quality system, or does the quality system exist to support them? Investigate how they will get access to and use the documents before you settle on a delivery method.

If you're having trouble controlling a paper-based system, maybe there are too many documents. How many of the tasks really need a documented work instruction? Do you have any data proving that the work instructions have improved things? If not, prune them relentlessly.

Excessive detail can also contribute to control problems. Detail creates opportunities for the practice to diverge from the document, necessitating frequent change.

Would the time spent writing documents not be better spent in error proofing and elimination of waste motion? (fewer steps=fewer opportunities to screw up=better quality, no?)

Procedures don't create the product, people create the product. Spend your time making the job easier for the people and you'll get a better return on your invested time.

Getting line management involved in documentation is a good idea. It tends to reduce the over-documentation problem.

Paper-based systems are simple. A sixth grader can understand one. Granted there may be more labor involved in administering one, but it can be cheap labor. Get an intern, hire a high schooler.

If you must automate, OpenOffice or one of the proprietary spreadsheet/word processor products will provide all the functionality you need. Personally I like OpenOffice because it includes a free pdf maker. Also you can't beat the price: free.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: How to Stucture My Organization to Support the Quality Management System?

The following applies primarily to procedures, work instructions and other documents of that ilk. For stuff like production formulas and drawings, your control methods need to be completely above reproach.

If you don't already have Lotus Notes or Microsoft Sharepoint, don't get either one. They're a waste of money--I say this as a Certified Lotus Professional developer.

Electronic document distribution systems may make it easier to administer and control your documents, but they can be a royal pain for the guys out on the plant floor. Do the front-line employees exist to support the quality system, or does the quality system exist to support them? Investigate how they will get access to and use the documents before you settle on a delivery method.

If you're having trouble controlling a paper-based system, maybe there are too many documents. How many of the tasks really need a documented work instruction? Do you have any data proving that the work instructions have improved things? If not, prune them relentlessly.

Excessive detail can also contribute to control problems. Detail creates opportunities for the practice to diverge from the document, necessitating frequent change.

Would the time spent writing documents not be better spent in error proofing and elimination of waste motion? (fewer steps=fewer opportunities to screw up=better quality, no?)

Procedures don't create the product, people create the product. Spend your time making the job easier for the people and you'll get a better return on your invested time.

Getting line management involved in documentation is a good idea. It tends to reduce the over-documentation problem.

Paper-based systems are simple. A sixth grader can understand one. Granted there may be more labor involved in administering one, but it can be cheap labor. Get an intern, hire a high schooler.

If you must automate, OpenOffice or one of the proprietary spreadsheet/word processor products will provide all the functionality you need. Personally I like OpenOffice because it includes a free pdf maker. Also you can't beat the price: free.

Some very good advice, imo, but I hasten to add that process documentation doesn't exist solely for people to peruse in order to do their jobs on a daily basis. We should be developing optimized processes, and the details need to be documented. There should be a standardized method for operating each process, a method that's been proven to work as intended. No one can do do things by the book if there is no book, or if everyone's "book" is different.

 

[scotdail]

Re: How to Stucture My Organization to Support the Quality Management System?

Some very good advice, imo, but I hasten to add that process documentation doesn't exist solely for people to peruse in order to do their jobs on a daily basis. We should be developing optimized processes, and the details need to be documented. There should be a standardized method for operating each process, a method that's been proven to work as intended. No one can do do things by the book if there is no book, or if everyone's "book" is different.

I agree with what you are saying here, Jim.

One thing I would point out is the procedures are for training of the resources to follow methods consistently, not to assure that people follow a consistent process.

Without an effective training program, supported by management, all the procedures and standardization in the world are worthless. Likewise, without an effective document management system to assure that the procedures are up to date, the training program cannot possibly be effective.

I agree with the concept that the individual managers must maintain their processes. Just like we do with issues such as physical inventory and productive maintenance (TPM), there needs to be a regimented process of regularly reviewing and updating the procedures in each area of discipline, and auditing to assure they are consistent with best practice.