SBS - The best value in QMS software

ISO 9001:2000 transition - Document and Process Discussion

J

JaneB

#61
Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#62
Re: ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000 conversion (transition)

Yes, a square is a type of rectangle.



Yes again. Or a process could be a part of a procedure. It doesn't make any difference. They are actions that follow the I-P-O cycle--Input-Process-Output. The input might be from another process (procedure), and the output might feed another one, or might be a final product.
I like to think of this as the procedure is the HOW of a process's WHAT.

So taking the example that has been used - although I have to say, once again,
  • I hate talking about sub optimal processes like document control and also,
  • as quality professionals we spend far too much time talking about document control full stop / period.
:bonk:
But that aside:
The process is document control (IMHO part of a bigger support process such as management of information) it has inputs such as:
  • need for documents
  • intellectual property
  • current documents
  • description of changes
it also uses resources such as:
  • document controller
  • IT equipment
  • time from those involved with the document
it has controls such as:
  • document control procedure
  • ISO 9001 (or other standard)
and it produces outputs:
  • controlled document
  • document distribution
  • updated document master list

The method of transforming the inputs into outputs (process) is described by a procedure (which may or may not be documented) which describes the steps taken and the controls exercised. For example:
  • It may describe document style and content
  • It says what the document controller does
  • It says who can approve documents
  • It describes how approved documents are distributed

Now if you want to have your system assessed and certified to ISO 9001 then you have to document this procedure - so you document the description of your process.
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration with a Mask on...
Staff member
Admin
#63
Re: ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000 conversion (transition)

Procedure - specified way to carry out an activity or a process (Note: Procedures can be documented or not)
Correct. This goes way back for me. One of the first concepts I taught implementation clients was that a procedure does not have to be documented if you can show there isn't a need for an actual document other than a specific "...documented procedure..." requirement such as exist in ISO 9001. An auditor would come in and ask to see a procedure for something (a process not requiring a documented procedure by ISO 9001 or whatever standard or customer requirement). I had to make sure the person representing the client company didn't reply "We don't have one" just because it wasn't documented. The mistaken impression that a procedure is only a procedure if it is documented has caused many companies to vastly over document and complicate their systems.
 

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#64
Re: ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000 conversion (transition)

whast is a "host's signature?"
Hmmm, there may be more work here than I was prepared for .... please have a look at the general intro to the Cove. While I am sure it is fun to jump in and stir things up there may be some benefit in looking at Marc's signature at the end of each of his posts. Take the latest one here.

Come on Paul, think about it:rolleyes: Do you think searching for hours through piles of old posts, then finding an answer would be anywhere near as stimulating as bantering back and forth, real time, with half a dozen or so pros on some mundane subject like is a document a procedure or a process? I think not. It's great all the old posts are still here and available but there is something about real time, in your face, discussion:argue:
I have found on occasions that a simple search on the Cove saves a lot of work. You may find that posts like Sidney's are available without having to ask your question / post your opinion.

Unless what you are saying is you can't be bothered to follow the quality guidance available here and just want to go ahead in you own sweet way ... ;)



Thanks Paul. I've had fun during my very brief membership, I am having a grand time right now, and I expect to continue to enjoy and learn from the cove, the covers - both new and old, and from re-hashing old subjects.
Good, I look forward to discussing some new areas over the coming months +.

What do you think - should I start a thread on why ISO did not include "...shall establish and maintain a documented procedure..." in the Management Review element of 9K94? Don't worry, I won't do it.:lmao:
You'll probably find it has already been covered in detail. Try a search.
This is one existing discussion thread: Management Review: Separate Procedure or Description in Quality Manual?

Good luck - thanks for the thought provoking jabs.:agree1:
It seems from some recent replies you have a few other people who look forward to rehashing old threads. There may be some benefit if the discussion moves on but will have to wait to be convinced.
 
G

Gary E MacLean

#66
Re: ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000 conversion (transition)

You'll probably find it has already been covered in detail. Try a search. This is one existing discussion thread: Management Review: Separate Procedure or Description in Quality Manual?
Come on Paul - you are far too serious. I wouldn't even bother looking up old posts on an archaic subject like QS - 9000 let alone should there be a procedure or not. Lighten up - try rolling on the floor while laughing.:lmao:

It seems from some recent replies you have a few other people who look forward to rehashing old threads. There may be some benefit if the discussion moves on but will have to wait to be convinced.
Tremendous benefit. Less benefit to those who have been a part of the initial discussion but significant benefit to the new Covers. And there will be new Covers Paul, every day someone new stops by. Some of them are going to stay.:mg: Then what?
 
J

JaneB

#67
Re: ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000 conversion (transition)

Come on Paul - you are far too serious.
Paul??? Far too serious? :lol::lol::lol:

If there was an icon for ROFL, I'd use it. Now I know that you haven't read many (any?) of Paul's other posts.

Gary - it's a fine line. I know - I haven't been around the forum for years & years either. But just jumping right in and declining to bother to do any searching or checking out what's going on at all is a little bit akin to barging straight into an existing conversation at a social gathering without so much as waiting & listening first, and making a little effort to understand the conversation first.

In the time I've been around, I have noticed some of the same topics recur. And yes, I absolutely agree that new people, new topics, changes etc. are the lifeblood of a healthy forum. But I think it's also reasonable that there's some expectation that newcomers will just do a little research themselves, for the sake of politeness and consideration. Not read "every post", no of course not - but just a tad of prior searching & checking out what already exists isn't a lot to ask.
 
G

Gary E MacLean

#68
Point well taken Jane:)

However, I didn't really mean 'too serious' in general; I meant too serious in that one response to a statement. I made a slanted remark towards researching QS - 9000, which we all know is obsolete - right? But Paul came back with a very serious "yes - you can go to this specific thread and do just that." My comment was certainly in jest but Paul's didn't seems to carry any levity at all. That's why I referenced the "too serious" thing. I have read quite a few of Paul's lighter posts and in general, yes he is a light hearted lexicon. Seriously, I was only referring to that one response about researching QS - 9000. Don't mis-understand me Paul - I really don't think you are serious at all, most of the time.

Also, I typically read every post, from beginning to end, in any thread I care to comment on, before I decide to post. Many times I don't even post because things seem to have been covered very well but then there are those times where a thread seems to have left something dangling. Then I just have to throw my own two cents in. My comment may be to drag something up from the past, or to introduce something that does not appear to have been discussed before or maybe even to challenge a controversial post that has so far went totally un-challenged.

What I usually don't do is reference across thread to thread before I make my own comments. I read them, individually, but I don't quite have the where-with-all to adequately organize and cross-reference them yet. I'm working on it. I also try to stay in the immediate last two years. I will sometimes read something older than two years old but my findings will generally not restrict my comments. I figure in two years the membership of Elsmar has changed so dramatically that anyone could benefit from new discussion on old topics.

The stats are amazing. Why this month alone there have been almost 4000 posts already and over 380 new threads started. I will be the first to admit that NO, I certainly do not have the time to read every one of them. In addition to that there are almost 200,000 posts stored in ELSMAR. Please don't ask a curious new visitor to first go read those 200,000 posts then come talk to us.

Visitors appear to be a strong part of Elsmar. there are 37,000+ visitors registered with over 6500 of them active in the Cove. I really don't know who Mr ELSMAR is or who is responsible for the initiation of this Kewl site but I am certain, by looking at the sides of the pages, that some revenue comes from advertising. I know from experience that the larger your distribution is the more the potential for lucrative advertising dollars. That's why I think Mr Elsmar would prefer us not to chase off the inquisitive new visitor with the ominous task of having to read almost 200,000 posts before you have the right to post anything.

I will probably continue to read, digest, comment and rebut in the same manner I have been doing. I feel with my two year window I am getting anything of any value anyway. If not then the roughly 24,000 new visitors that have discovered the Cove in those two years will be starting almst where I am starting and they will surely have something to say where they have not had the opportunity to say it before.

Thank you for your pointed remarks and very helpful suggestions - I look forward to an exciting future at Elsmar.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#69
I wasn't going to respond but it seems, Gary, your second approach seems to try to justify your original dig while ignoring my best efforts to inform. I do try and help occasionally, you know.

However, I didn't really mean 'too serious' in general; I meant too serious in that one response to a statement. I made a slanted remark towards researching QS - 9000, which we all know is obsolete - right? But Paul came back with a very serious "yes - you can go to this specific thread and do just that." My comment was certainly in jest but Paul's didn't seems to carry any levity at all. That's why I referenced the "too serious" thing. I have read quite a few of Paul's lighter posts and in general, yes he is a light hearted lexicon. Seriously, I was only referring to that one response about researching QS - 9000. Don't mis-understand me Paul - I really don't think you are serious at all, most of the time.
So we have established we don't know each other that well! When you post in the context of a thread on documentation of processes / procedures that:
What do you think - should I start a thread on why ISO did not include "...shall establish and maintain a documented procedure..." in the Management Review element of 9K94 (sic)? Don't worry, I won't do it.:lmao:
it could be read as being in context - a useful opportunity to show you the value of a search. ;)


Without the "tongue in cheek" emoticon we won't be able to understand each other any better.

I really don't know who Mr ELSMAR is or who is responsible for the initiation of this Kewl site but I am certain, by looking at the sides of the pages, that some revenue comes from advertising. I know from experience that the larger your distribution is the more the potential for lucrative advertising dollars. That's why I think Mr Elsmar would prefer us not to chase off the inquisitive new visitor with the ominous task of having to read almost 200,000 posts before you have the right to post anything.


.... Also, I typically read every post, from beginning to end, in any thread I care to comment on, before I decide to post.....
Really, Gary. So when in response to your question:
whast is a "host's signature?"
I posted:
Hmmm, there may be more work here than I was prepared for .... please have a look at the general intro to the Cove. While I am sure it is fun to jump in and stir things up there may be some benefit in looking at Marc's signature at the end of each of his posts. Take the latest one here.
You obviously missed my link to Marc's post. With the signature on it of "A Search is a terrible thing to waste!" under his heading "Marc - Your Elsmar Cove Host" :lol:

Looks like I was too subtle. Not something I am often accused of here!:lmao:
 
Last edited:
G

Gary E MacLean

#70
Yeah, the signature thing really threw me. I am used to a signature being well, a signature - you know. In fact it took me a month to reaslize that I could change my signature without ever really having to change my signature???:frust:

Now that I am past my own blockade I understand what you meant that first time around. A signature here on Elsmar consists of, really, the words you choose to display at the bottom of every one of your posts. Silly me - and I thought it meant signature:bonk:

No, we don't know each other Paul but my guess is we soon will...........

Thanks for your comments
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
R Key Process Indicators (KPIs) for ISO 9001:2000-certified Service Organization ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
P Internal Audit for ISO 9001:2000 vs. Internal Audit for OHSAS 18001:2007 Internal Auditing 4
H ISO 9001:2000 Certificate - Original approval date 18 July 1995 and valid until 2012 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 27
E ISO 9001:2000 transition to ISO 9001:2008 - Do I have to rewrite the QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 22
M Advantage between ISO 9001:2000 vs ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
A Quitting ISO 9001:2000 - Necessary Changes to product literature, logos, etc. ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
M Updating a Quality Manual from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 57
B Updating from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
B Advice needed for ISO 9001:2000 update to 2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
K How to update from Procedure to Process - ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
F How much longer can a company declare registration to ISO 9001:2000? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 21
N ISO 9001: 2000 to ISO 9001: 2008 - How to change the documents & procedures? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
S Transition from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 and TS 16949:2002 to TS 16949:2009 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
V ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 - Identification in meeting notes. ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
E Validity of ISO 9001:2000 Certificates - How to handle supplier ISO 9001 certificates ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
K Interpretation of the differences between ISO 9001: 2000 & 2008? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q How long is ISO 9001:2000 good for (valid) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
N ISO 9001:2000 version to ISO 9001:2008 - Necessary Document Revisions ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
Q ISO 9001:1994 Upgrading to ISO 9001:2000 or ISO 9001:2008? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
D Time frame for validity of ISO 9001:2000 Certifications IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
H Effectiveness of ISO 9001:2000 Implementation in small industrial organizations? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 29
J Is Version Change needed for ammending ISO 9001:2000 to 2008 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
L ISO 9001:2000 vs. ISO 9001:2008 differences and concerns ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
R ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 Transition - Changing documentation ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 22
C Recertification for ISO 9001:2000 - framework ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
D Relationship between ISO 9001:2000 and EFQM ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
D Acquisition (Merger) of an ISO certified to ISO 9001:2000 company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
A Is ISO 9001 Transition (from 2000 to 2008 version) Training Required? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 24
P Calibration - Clause 7.6 of ISO 9001:2000 - Is all this necessary? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 42
D To change or not to change? Our documents reference ISO 9001:2000 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 31
A Registration to ISO 9001:2000 in 2009? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
S What are the consequences of having an expired ISO 9001:2000 Certificate ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
A A macro-process structure approach to auditing for ISO 9001:2000(8) General Auditing Discussions 19
B CNC Controls under ISO 9001:2000 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
Marc Summary of ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 Changes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 166
A Brief discussion about ISO 9001:2000 clauses ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
K Advice on exclusion of 7.5.2 of the ISO 9001:2000 Standard ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
L ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI v1.2 Integration and Org Deployment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
GStough REACH and ISO 9001:2000/13485:2003 - Never the Twain Shall Meet? RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 4
S GAP Analysis for ISO 9001:2000 vs. ISO 13485:2003 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
D ISO 9001:2000 - Implementation in an Environmental Consulting Firm ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
K Getting started with ISO 9001:2000 Templates Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 18
Z Synchronizing two quality management systems: ISO 9001:2000 Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 5
J ISO 9001:2000 4.2.3- Quality Records, Production Travelers Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 9
C ISO 9001:2000 Certificate - How to have a 3 year validity instead of 1? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
N When will ISO 9001:2000 Certificates turn into ISO 9001:2008? General Auditing Discussions 11
J Should product brochures be controlled per ISO 9001:2000? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
I ISO 9001:2000 Recertification controls ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
J ISO 9001:2000 7.3.5 "Verification" and 7.3.6 "Validation"- Clarification ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 29
J Must you use an ISO 17025 lab in order to receive ISO 9001:2000 Certification ISO 17025 related Discussions 16

Similar threads

Top Bottom