G
Hi All,
Great thread Craig and excellent points expressed by all. I looked in a few books and came up with no solid answers. 9004 told me nothing so I looked in my old course material from my Registrar 'Understanding the ISO 9000:2000 standards'. My certification body is the largest in Australasia and it's parent is Standards Australia (the ultimate governing body)
In th notes, 7.4.3 spells out the actual standard and underneath that it says:
'You also need to determine the verification methods of any purchased product. This may vary depending on the type and impact of the product. If it is to be verified and released at the supplier's premises, this needs to be documented in the purchase information.'
So as you can see, this is as clear as mud. Personally, I agree with those that state this clause deals with incoming product only....but...you would be mad not to document the receipt of this product against a checklist of requirements (specification). This is exactly what we do because if later we tried to use it and it failed we would have a weaker case against the supplier. It also gives us peace of mind that the product going into our processes meets the same standards as those we take form our own mines.
8.2.4 again it goes thru the standard and then states 'On a day to day basis, the processes and products required to satisfy customer requirements must be monitored. Hopefully, through this monitoring, you identify potential supply problems before they become a problem. The product must be verified at each key step of the realisation, with records to demonstrate acceptance to be maintained, and should identify the person with authority to release acceptable product. If the product or service does not pass all checks, it can only proceed with customer's authority' Now this statement would tend to back up Craig's original post as it includes the initial supplied product as the start of the overall inputs and thus part of the realisation process. (This could get very confusing if we weren't rationale, level headed people
).
My company monitors both areas thru documentation, records and specifications. As Roxane and others state Good Business Practises dictate that we must ensure conformity of our product and the only way to do this is to 'check it'. The standard needs to be clearer and 7.4.3 should be amended to reference 8.2.4.
Great thread Craig and excellent points expressed by all. I looked in a few books and came up with no solid answers. 9004 told me nothing so I looked in my old course material from my Registrar 'Understanding the ISO 9000:2000 standards'. My certification body is the largest in Australasia and it's parent is Standards Australia (the ultimate governing body)
In th notes, 7.4.3 spells out the actual standard and underneath that it says:
'You also need to determine the verification methods of any purchased product. This may vary depending on the type and impact of the product. If it is to be verified and released at the supplier's premises, this needs to be documented in the purchase information.'
So as you can see, this is as clear as mud. Personally, I agree with those that state this clause deals with incoming product only....but...you would be mad not to document the receipt of this product against a checklist of requirements (specification). This is exactly what we do because if later we tried to use it and it failed we would have a weaker case against the supplier. It also gives us peace of mind that the product going into our processes meets the same standards as those we take form our own mines.
8.2.4 again it goes thru the standard and then states 'On a day to day basis, the processes and products required to satisfy customer requirements must be monitored. Hopefully, through this monitoring, you identify potential supply problems before they become a problem. The product must be verified at each key step of the realisation, with records to demonstrate acceptance to be maintained, and should identify the person with authority to release acceptable product. If the product or service does not pass all checks, it can only proceed with customer's authority' Now this statement would tend to back up Craig's original post as it includes the initial supplied product as the start of the overall inputs and thus part of the realisation process. (This could get very confusing if we weren't rationale, level headed people
). My company monitors both areas thru documentation, records and specifications. As Roxane and others state Good Business Practises dictate that we must ensure conformity of our product and the only way to do this is to 'check it'. The standard needs to be clearer and 7.4.3 should be amended to reference 8.2.4.


