If I were in your situation, I would most definitely take the minimalist approach to documenting the system. If the auditor feels "uncomfortable" about auditing a scarcely documented system, too bad for him/her. You mentioned being aware of the ISO APG papers. There used to be one there for auditing with minimum documentation. That APG paper has been withdrawn but I attach it here.
It‘s impossible to tell. However, one way is to forget traditional thinking about documents, procedures etc. Why not develop a bunch of checklists which start with the review of inputs and step through the process (typically about 9 steps or so) to an output. You might find that actually useful, like a list when you visit the hardware store…
I could list quite a few things that are in ISO9001 that our people know, but not in any relation to ISO - just our internal processes.
It is the other way around. People were controlling nonconforming products way before ISO 9001, BS5750, Mil-I’s and Mil-Q’s, etc. ISO 9001 is nothing more than the collection and packaging of semi-universal industry practices. The only “novel concepts” brought about (and to an extent still misapplied) were internal audits and management reviews.
Exactly so, Sidney. Nothing written in standards is new! All that happens is the standards writers pick up with users' practice. MIL standards were developed based on lessons learned from the Second World War in managing supply chains.
