Internal Communication Procedure - ISO 9001 5.5.3

[florin pirvulescu]

Last year we were audited by our registrar body for certification against 9001:2000.
I noticed there are auditors entering a company bearing templates in mind. Templates of procedures, templates of quality forms, templates of non-conformities s.o. We are a micro enterprise (3 employees) doing everything. Reaching the clause 5.5.3 Internal communication, I was asked if we have a procedure for internal communication process. It doesn't matter our discution on the subject. The most important thing for me is that a procedure for communication between 3-4 people working in the same room is completely useless. My thread is refering to the term used in standard which I find it unappropriate, confusig and therefore leading to misunderstandig and abuse of some auditors. In a earlier version of ISO 9004 it was used another term (I forgot it) suggesting "means of communications".

What do you think, quality folks?
Florin P.

 

[M Greenaway]

Hello Florin

An auditor cannot request to see a documented procedure on internal communication because the standard does not mandate this.

Clause 5.5.3 states that top management should establish appropriate communication processes, including communication on the effectiveness of the QMS.

The word 'establish' in this clause does not mean 'document', and the term 'appropriate' allows organisations to determine for themselves what communication processes are necessary. Like you say in a company of only 3 employees lines of communication will be very good, hence any semblence of a formal communication process is perhaps totally unecessary.

What the auditor should do to address this clause is ask the other two people, for example, if they know the effectiveness of the QMS.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Martin's right..

Hullo Florin,

Martin's absolutley right. Three employees working in the same room would mean that a procedure is quite unnecessary.

It's also a good thing to always keep 4.2.1 / Note 2 in mind:

The extent of the quality management documentation can differ from one organisation to another due to

a) the size of organisation and type of activities,
b) the complexity of processes and their interactions, and
c) the competence of personell.

Btw: Did you manage to persuade the auditor?

/Claes

 

[florin pirvulescu]

Yes I did, but I think just because we use to be fiends before the audit. After we freeze the relationship.
By the way I remember the term used in ISO 9004 second edition at 5.5.3: "communication channels" instead of "communication processes" in 9001.
Thank you all
Florin

 

[florin pirvulescu]

again 5.5.3

Again 5.5.3. The second part of the sentence tells us: „…and that communication takes place regarding the effectiveness of the quality management system.”
What should we understand?

 

[Carlos Echeverry]

What the auditor should do to address this clause is ask the other two people, for example, if they know the effectiveness of the QMS.

What you mean with this? How any company ensure people know the effectiveness of the QMS? Through Top Managments Reviews Outcome?

 

[RoxaneB]

What you mean with this? How any company ensure people know the effectiveness of the QMS? Through Top Managments Reviews Outcome?

Welcome to the Cove, Carlos!

5.5.3 does not state how an Organization should communicate the effectiveness of the QMS to the Employees...simply that the processes need to be established.

Using the outputs of Management Review could, I suppose, be one method of communication - if, say, the minutes of the meeting were posted or something along those lines.

But think of all the meetings your company has. I know my company has a lot! These meetings are ways to communicate...Internal Audit results being posted is another...company newsletter articles is another...emails/interoffice memos...the means of communicating the effectiveness of the QMS are endless!