ISO 9001 is too time consuming - A common complaint

[chaosweary]

I agree with triner, it doesn't sound like its integrated intoyour system, more like its being done separately for the cert instead of for the business. That being said, I don't think ISO9001 is really that hard to achieve, a lot of it is just pure common sense. I think the main issue is that all of these systems for quality, be it iso9001, lean, vanguard or whatever, they all make one fatal assumption...that the organization and its functional departments and people have the discpline to actually even follow their plans or processes. Heck most people, myself included, can't even follow a simple diet plan!

 

[Jen Kirley]

Based on all these remarks I feel it's safe to urge you take a step backward as an organization and ask, "Why are we doing this?"

ISO is not supposed to be an exersize, though like exersizing it can help an organization gain health and stamina. It can also bring fatigue and breakdowns when overused.

The things being done to conform to the standard shouldn't be so cumbersome they exceed their value. It's okay to question if the activities are too much, add value or supply important structure to the system and the assurance it's supposed to contribute.

In fact, the system is supposed to be thus scrutinized. Documents should be reviewed for effectiveness, not just conformance, and to affirm they represent activities and vice versa. Processes should be evaluated for effectiveness, not just conformance. Asking "Why do we do this/say this?" is part of my regular work as an internal auditor. But you certainly don't need the auditor to do this! You and your coworkers drive this thing.

So, maybe it's time to ask the unhappy people what they believe they can pare down or jettison and still maintain an effective system that customers would want to buy from. It's still all about the customer (both internal and external, remember), after all.

I hope this helps!

 

[tony wardle]

Maybe a good tact is to go to your complainers and tell them that it is GREAT that they have found the problem. Now, how can they assit to find the solution.

I had the same issue and the solutions are:-
1. The system does not have to looks good, it has to works good. Window dressing and fancy bits and bobs consume time.
2. Integrate - integrate - integrate -- If it becomes part of the job it is not an extra.
3. Let operator operate, let supervisors supervise, this by default gives managers time to manage. I dont know about you, but I often see managers supervising and operating.
4. Do what the Standard tells you - REVIEW - and make bold changes without fear. If the system is killing you, change it. It is YOUR system, for YOUR profitability and YOUR customer satisfaction. REVIEW should be done by everyone - especially the whiners.

Put this to your people - the object of the QMS is to make money from happy customers rather than waste money due to poor quality. If the company makes money, the employee makes money. Now, the employee is a customer. Would he or she spend it on goods from a company that is only half hearted in terms of quality ?

 

[pldey42]

Re: ISO 9001 is too time consuming

All good comments…

I wonder if we document too many of our processes and that is where the frustration is? We have close to 300 employees. This staff is broken down into 6 different groups all of which have there own ISO coordinator to monitor document updates. In addition we have shared documentation that each group uses that is monitored at a high level with representation from each group. Our master list of documents is in excess of 1000 documents. This does include forms, templates, and logs used to document project information. Everything is document controlled; including a log to sign in visitors.

Management also spends a lot of time reviewing continuous improvement suggestions. I do find we spend a lot of time on promoting staff to make suggestions, implementing ideas, and sharing implemented ideas with the other groups.

In my (painful) experience it's easy for political managers to discredit a quality team that are producing embarrassing data on product performance with general arm-waving comments such as "it ought to run itself by now." What does that mean? Nothing runs itself. Every QMS needs maintenance, and in a good one that's continual investment in continual, competitive performance improvement. (And some infrastructural things like doc control and audits.)

Yet the sentiment is correct. Good film directors put most of the money on the screen where the audience can see it, and good product managers do the same, metaphorically. Good quality departments are lean and mean.

So, I'd ask what, specifically, takes too much time?

If it's doc control, well, can it be automated? Are petty bureaucrats getting in the way? Or, are they just complaining because people always complain about doc control--in which case, remind them of the "cost of confusion" that will result if docs are not controlled. (I define the "cost of confusion" as the cost of 300 people wandering around not knowing what to do. Documenting processes should reduce it by, oh, about half!)

300 people with 1000 docs ... 1000 divided by 300 ... um ... that's about 3 or 4 each. Not many, but probably too simplistic a view. Do they all have to read all of them? Perhaps more importantly, is there a hint that the docs were written, not for them, but for (shh) registrars? If yes, there's probably a lot of mileage in rewriting them (over a reasonable period of time) for the real audience: in my experience that usually makes them shorter, and certainly their perceived value goes up.

"Management also spends a lot of time reviewing continuous improvement suggestions." Hmm -- do any actions come out of these reviews? Any improvements? Can you measure the return on investment (of time, resources)? Also, is there an effect on morale? (That might go either way. If they ignore millions of well-intentioned suggestions, morale will plummet. If they act, it only gets better.)

Hope this helps,
Patrick

 

[jaimezepeda]

Re: ISO 9001 is too time consuming

I wonder if we document too many of our processes and that is where the frustration is?... Our master list of documents is in excess of 1000 documents... Everything is document controlled; including a log to sign in visitors.

I am curious why your organization chose to make the visitors log a controlled document?

Jaime