J
Re: Measurables for Document Control and Internal Audits
Interesting question, and discussion, with some very good points made both on the 'for' measuring and 'against' sides.
I'd be unhappy about not doing any measurement or assessment at all, and most particularly of internal audit. Though I don't take the view that one has to measure 'everything'. But then, I'm not an engineer, either. Which also means that I am quite willing to accept subjective measures where they are appropriate - I'd argue that subjective assessment in certain areas is very appropriate, eg. 'satisfaction' or 'perceived value'. I don't share a desire to drive intelligent, subjective analysis/feedback from people out of everything.
If no one is doing any assessing of whether the customers of IA are satisfied with it (for example), I think there's strong risk of having a process that isn't perceived to be of much value, and consequencies include low (if any) drive to improve.
For document control, depends a lot on how important it is. Sounds like the OP is in a situation where it is - but time to change perhaps not, or not easily assessable. What instead? Um - 'perceived timeliness'? Accuracy? 'Documents I need are available when & where I need them'?
I think Duke's given excellent advice - I've taken the liberty of reformatting it a bit:
We all tend to think of our own customers/clients/situations when responding - do you know what yours want and if they're getting it?
PS: Oops - I just realised (sorry) I strayed into the automotive forum without noticing, so apologies. My comments were intended for 9001 environments.
Interesting question, and discussion, with some very good points made both on the 'for' measuring and 'against' sides.
I'd be unhappy about not doing any measurement or assessment at all, and most particularly of internal audit. Though I don't take the view that one has to measure 'everything'. But then, I'm not an engineer, either. Which also means that I am quite willing to accept subjective measures where they are appropriate - I'd argue that subjective assessment in certain areas is very appropriate, eg. 'satisfaction' or 'perceived value'. I don't share a desire to drive intelligent, subjective analysis/feedback from people out of everything.
If no one is doing any assessing of whether the customers of IA are satisfied with it (for example), I think there's strong risk of having a process that isn't perceived to be of much value, and consequencies include low (if any) drive to improve.
For document control, depends a lot on how important it is. Sounds like the OP is in a situation where it is - but time to change perhaps not, or not easily assessable. What instead? Um - 'perceived timeliness'? Accuracy? 'Documents I need are available when & where I need them'?
I think Duke's given excellent advice - I've taken the liberty of reformatting it a bit:
Ask yourself (the organization) who the customers are of those two processes. Then go talk to the customers and ask them
1. what is important about the outcomes of those processes to them
2. which measurable outcomes are most important, and
3. what improvements they perceive would be most useful.
Then establish metrics around the ones that make more sense to measure and set targets for improvement.
1. what is important about the outcomes of those processes to them
2. which measurable outcomes are most important, and
3. what improvements they perceive would be most useful.
Then establish metrics around the ones that make more sense to measure and set targets for improvement.
PS: Oops - I just realised (sorry) I strayed into the automotive forum without noticing, so apologies. My comments were intended for 9001 environments.
Last edited by a moderator: