Implementing ISO 9001 - One Department at a Time - Internal Provision Only

[chris02 - 2011]

2 things,
1>A main facet of ISO9001 is "management responsibility". It seems that you have managers who would like this ISO thingy but when push comes to shove, they will choose the path of least resistance EVERY time. Department heads will constantly fob you off stating "lack of time" in a hissed tone. The only way department heads will introduce requirements to their specific process is if their manager is holding a gun to their head. The only way this will happen is if the manager is more interested in a strong process as opposed to a specific product/service getting produced within the time-line.
2>implementing 1 dept. at a time will cause huge headaches. Your process model and much of your documentation will change drastically every time a dept. comes into line. How also do you intend to have departments co-existing with processes? ISO9001 will quickly present itself as an unwieldy sword, scorned by the staff

In short,
rather you than me.

1 Agree if they can get away without doing anything they will.
2 Hopefully as we progress down the route to certification (hopefully not too far) I can get others interested in joining in on the process.

Thanks

C

 

[chris02 - 2011]

Yes, implementing a system with a restricted scope can be done. I've done it a few times, for a particular team within a large financial institution, for example, and for only part of a service providing business.

Butlooking at the list that you have, I'm not sure why you would just choose the 'internal facing' departments? In a way, those you've listed are some of the hardest ones to do (for many reasons). Plus, if they have little to do with your real service (providing charitable services?), then do you not risk having your ISO effort seen as irrelevant to 'what we are really about?'


A department by department model is very, very far from ideal - apart from anything else, it's contrary to the process approach. If you chose a process or two - say the provision of one or more of your services(which would of course involve different departments in it) would that not be a better way to go?

The warning flag here is that you say your company doesn't want to do it for the whole company. One director is on board... how many others are not? Because pushing the proverbial uphill against senior management resistance or apathy is not a wonderful way to go.

Hi Jane


Internal facing because they all fall under the one Director that is one board with this.

Good point as to how it will be perceived if we don't include departments that are actually providing service to clients. In an earlier post it was suggested that the other depts are listed as customers of the internal facing team, do you think this will work?

I am sure that we will need input from other areas of the business as they will have policies and procedures that involve our teams, hopefully they will pick up on the what we are trying to do.

I have 1 director out of 6 at the moment, with 1 expressing some interest if he can incorporate 17021 and 17024, as you say this is not going to be easy.

C

 

[JRKH]

Coming late to this discussion but find it somewhat interesting so thougth I'd comment.

Years ago there was an improvement initialtive called "internal customers" where everyone was to determine who was their immeidate customer within the company. On a more macro view there are large corportations where one location or unit will supply product to another loaction or unit within the oragnization. This led me to the thought, if each person/department has internal customers and suppliers, why couldn't we treat individual departments as "internal companies".
It sounds as though this is sort of what you are thinking.
While I understand what others are saying about the difficulties involved in such a venture, I don't think you should be dissuaded from it either.

Here is the thing - ISO can be the model that you work from but what you are really seeking to do is implement various improvement tools in the departments. If you have a manger or managers who are willing, there is no reason why you cannot work with them to do just that. Obviously there will be constraints and a "full" implementation of ISO may not be possible but certainly this is one way to "infiltrate" the benefits of ISO into the organization. I even considered wrtiing a paper on it but since I never had the opporotunity to actually try it....I was going to call the paper, "internal Customer? Internal Company.

I see it working like this. you have a manager who sees the logic of ISO and is supportive of you and sees where this can help his efficiency. So you work with him and his people to implement those sections OF ISO that they can directly control. (obviously some things like suppliers or budget or manpower they don't have much control over) But there are a lot of things they can do. As this takes hold and this department improves in both efficiency and morale, other managers might be inclined to take on similar initiatives.

If this does work out, and upper managment finally does decide to pursue ISO formally you already have a some to a lot in place, a core group of "leaders" to help implement audit and so forth.

Peace
James

 

[JaneB]

While I understand what others are saying about the difficulties involved in such a venture, I don't think you should be dissuaded from it either.

Here is the thing - ISO can be the model that you work from but what you are really seeking to do is implement various improvement tools in the departments. If you have a manger or managers who are willing, there is no reason why you cannot work with them to do just that. Obviously there will be constraints and a "full" implementation of ISO may not be possible but certainly this is one way to "infiltrate" the benefits of ISO into the organization.

Yes, I agree with you James on all fronts.

Chris, thanks for the extra info - now I understand better. Definitely don't let difficulties detract from the possibility. Work with what you have and what can be done, rather than hankering after what cannot - at least, right now. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!

 

[chris02 - 2011]

Coming late to this discussion but find it somewhat interesting so thougth I'd comment.

Years ago there was an improvement initialtive called "internal customers" where everyone was to determine who was their immeidate customer within the company. On a more macro view there are large corportations where one location or unit will supply product to another loaction or unit within the oragnization. This led me to the thought, if each person/department has internal customers and suppliers, why couldn't we treat individual departments as "internal companies".
It sounds as though this is sort of what you are thinking.
While I understand what others are saying about the difficulties involved in such a venture, I don't think you should be dissuaded from it either.

Here is the thing - ISO can be the model that you work from but what you are really seeking to do is implement various improvement tools in the departments. If you have a manger or managers who are willing, there is no reason why you cannot work with them to do just that. Obviously there will be constraints and a "full" implementation of ISO may not be possible but certainly this is one way to "infiltrate" the benefits of ISO into the organization. I even considered wrtiing a paper on it but since I never had the opporotunity to actually try it....I was going to call the paper, "internal Customer? Internal Company.

I see it working like this. you have a manager who sees the logic of ISO and is supportive of you and sees where this can help his efficiency. So you work with him and his people to implement those sections OF ISO that they can directly control. (obviously some things like suppliers or budget or manpower they don't have much control over) But there are a lot of things they can do. As this takes hold and this department improves in both efficiency and morale, other managers might be inclined to take on similar initiatives.

If this does work out, and upper managment finally does decide to pursue ISO formally you already have a some to a lot in place, a core group of "leaders" to help implement audit and so forth.

Peace
James

Many thanks James really reassuring, agree try and go as far as I can within the support departments with the hope that others will jump in.

Chris

 

[JRKH]

Many thanks James really reassuring, agree try and go as far as I can within the support departments with the hope that others will jump in.

Chris

Chris,
I was just responding to another thread about internal "process" auditing and thought of this one...(Timing is everything )

As another aspect of this - internal company idea - when you audit the department, one of your measures would be the output to their internal customers so "customer satisfaction" becomes one of the metrics you can use to both measure effectiveness and drive improvements.
This assumes of course that "customer expectations" can reasonably be met...

Also bear in mind that it sometimes isn't even the manager who you will be your ally but others who see what you are trying to do and will help you. You look for and find those individuals who "understand" (hopefully managers) and grow from there.

Just keep encouraging and helping to change attitudes and outlooks. It takes time, patience and sometimes just plain bull-headedness

Peace
James

 

[Dubai_capi]

nice discussions. i liked the idea of internal customers.. for any quality initiative we need to treat internal divisions as internal customers and here lies the concept of customers buy-in the quality initiative like implementing iso:9001:2008 and explaining all the benefits to them.. for any quality initiative to successed you need to communicate and set channels for effective awareness sessions.. also you need to understand that quality initiative always implies change in many aspects so you need to enhance the communication and the buy-in activities to your plans..

 

[chris02 - 2011]

Thanks both,

Just completed internal survey on quality, process, planning, customer care etc etc and most of our own departments are not surveying or seeking input from our own internal customers. So yes one of the many recommendation will be to improve communication across the business, I will also be recommending that support managers take a greater role in planning the way forward for money making teams.

Point also taken that others may well want to get involved, I have a presentation in a couple of weeks to support managers but I may well ask if each could appoint a champion to support my initiative.

Thanks again to all.

 

[JaneB]

most of our own departments are not surveying or seeking input from our own internal customers.

9001 requires you to 'monitor perception of customer satisfaction'. It does not require this to be done via surveys - they are just one way of doing this. They work well in some contexts, and are useless in others.

But yes, seeking input, getting feedback etc is important. If it isn't done at all, how then does an internal area providing services internally know how well it's perceived to be doing that?? And what (if any?) data does it use to make decisions, eg, change what it's doing now, keep doing it, etc?

 

[chris02 - 2011]

9001 requires you to 'monitor perception of customer satisfaction'. It does not require this to be done via surveys - they are just one way of doing this. They work well in some contexts, and are useless in others.

But yes, seeking input, getting feedback etc is important. If it isn't done at all, how then does an internal area providing services internally know how well it's perceived to be doing that?? And what (if any?) data does it use to make decisions, eg, change what it's doing now, keep doing it, etc?

Hi Jane

Agree surveys are not the only way of getting feedback.

Some of our support depts do not know how they are perceived of if they are providing, what others would call, a good service.

My survey did reveal that support teams often get the blame when deadlines are missed, mind this is probably due to lack of planning and communication between departments.

C