rogerpenna
Quite Involved in Discussions
So... I am quite in doubt of WHEN we should plan and document changes to the extent of ISO 9001:2015.
It seems like a whole lot of extra bureaucracy, if used for everything.
Should I fill a whole Change Form, identifying risks, responsabilities, etc, etc, just to change the flow of a process?
Proposed Change: Employees must first pour the coffee and then the sugar.
Problem Identified: When sugar is poured first in the cup, and then the coffee, the sugar melts and forms a crust on the bottom of the glass, which the cleaning lady needs more time to scrub it clean
Risks: Employees may not be able to sugar their coffee to their liking, leading to widespread revolt and strikes
Opportunity: Reduction of sugar levels on company employees (some might give up on coffee and drink tap water, reducing coffee costs to company)
Measurement Criteria: Cleaning Lady will measure number of cups she scrubs and average time, for 1 month. After enforcing the new rule, we will try to reduce total time spent scrubing cups by 75%
--------------------------------------------------------
Jokes aside, I've seen people talking about all this change planning for stuff like hiring a new employee...
So, when should I apply it? And how? In a new form that will be filled when someone decides to change the position of their desk?
Or should it be integrated into everything else? As it somewhat already is?
Because it seems to me, everytime a Non Conformity is identified, it's analysis and action plan with 5W2H, it already covers all of that.
We work with Infrastructure Civil Engineering. Our main process is in the worksite itself, and it is not highly standardized. Each project is a different project. Of course, you can´t first pour the asphalt, then compact it, then lay the gravel base, and then excavate the earthworks. But it mostly is totally the opposite of a production line.
That said, there are project changes. Again, those are mostly covered in other documents, like the Worksite Quality Plan (which is an old requirement of another standard).
We then have action plans created based on the Risk Identification and Treatment procedures. Again, those action plans I guess cover most of the "requirement changes".
Some other changes may appear based on Critical Management Review. I supposed creating a new Action Plan (without starting FROM a risk accessment or Non Conformity) would also cover that when it comes to change, right?
What is left out? Not many things I guess.
Maybe a procedure describing how and when we deal with changes, basically refering to Audits and Non Conformities and resulting Action Plans, to our Risk Accessment and Treatment procedure, to changes coming from the Management Critical Review, etc... a master Change Planning document refering to other documents who already have procedures in place regarding changes?
It seems like a whole lot of extra bureaucracy, if used for everything.
Should I fill a whole Change Form, identifying risks, responsabilities, etc, etc, just to change the flow of a process?
Proposed Change: Employees must first pour the coffee and then the sugar.
Problem Identified: When sugar is poured first in the cup, and then the coffee, the sugar melts and forms a crust on the bottom of the glass, which the cleaning lady needs more time to scrub it clean
Risks: Employees may not be able to sugar their coffee to their liking, leading to widespread revolt and strikes
Opportunity: Reduction of sugar levels on company employees (some might give up on coffee and drink tap water, reducing coffee costs to company)
Measurement Criteria: Cleaning Lady will measure number of cups she scrubs and average time, for 1 month. After enforcing the new rule, we will try to reduce total time spent scrubing cups by 75%
--------------------------------------------------------
Jokes aside, I've seen people talking about all this change planning for stuff like hiring a new employee...
So, when should I apply it? And how? In a new form that will be filled when someone decides to change the position of their desk?
Or should it be integrated into everything else? As it somewhat already is?
Because it seems to me, everytime a Non Conformity is identified, it's analysis and action plan with 5W2H, it already covers all of that.
We work with Infrastructure Civil Engineering. Our main process is in the worksite itself, and it is not highly standardized. Each project is a different project. Of course, you can´t first pour the asphalt, then compact it, then lay the gravel base, and then excavate the earthworks. But it mostly is totally the opposite of a production line.
That said, there are project changes. Again, those are mostly covered in other documents, like the Worksite Quality Plan (which is an old requirement of another standard).
We then have action plans created based on the Risk Identification and Treatment procedures. Again, those action plans I guess cover most of the "requirement changes".
Some other changes may appear based on Critical Management Review. I supposed creating a new Action Plan (without starting FROM a risk accessment or Non Conformity) would also cover that when it comes to change, right?
What is left out? Not many things I guess.
Maybe a procedure describing how and when we deal with changes, basically refering to Audits and Non Conformities and resulting Action Plans, to our Risk Accessment and Treatment procedure, to changes coming from the Management Critical Review, etc... a master Change Planning document refering to other documents who already have procedures in place regarding changes?