Merging of Quality Management of 3 Business Units

somashekar

Leader
Admin
Thank you for this insight.
You are right, the 3 companies have different legal entities.
We will be transfering some manufacturing processes to X, Y or Z so as to have better synergy among the companies.
Handling organisational change will be a major challenge.
Each company has their own policy, Would it be advisable to have a common policy for the 3 companies.
Acting as the Coordinator sounds very practical.
I will definety come back for more feedback/advise.
The cove rocks!
I am sure the Top management for all the three is same. That is the reason why you are talking about merging QMS of 3 units. QMS is a top driven system and surely you will have a central process that you apply over all the 3 units and still you let the three business units run and manage their cost centers effectively on their own QMS terms and strength. In this instant the Quality Policy is a central process and must be one policy applied to all the 3 units.
 
M

Mauri

This thread has somewhat answered a question that I was going to raise. Thank you to everyone that posted. I am Quality Manager of three separate sites. We have a QMS over-all and then fine tuned to fit each site's specific needs. I don't deal with ISO so the certifications are different and I don't have a choice as to who audits the site. It is dependent on the location.
One site has 4 different certifications, another one 1 certifications and the 3rd site we are trying to get 3 certifications.
We are building a brand new site which will have 4 certifications as well.
 
N

nidhir

In that case, I would have prefered a non-merged system if I were you. Because, implementing a system has lots of hard paths to walk, and in this case, there are 3 different companies, different manufacturing processes, different managers, different quality cultures and approaches, a separate managing level... The worst thing I always encounter is the human factor; you must achieve the leadership of the top management and the involvement of the people at the same time. When you achieve that, anything comes easy.

In fact, that was the only thing in my mind when I replied in previous post.

Most of the time, people react reverse(?) when you try to implement something new. There are several causes for that but the main causes are:

1. A new system means change: change in the positions, change in the work done, change in the responsibilities... "People fed by the existing system doesnot let the system change." I always take this into account.

2. Human is a rebellious creature. You must let people to feel that the system belongs to them. In other case, you must convince or achieve people that you are doing the right thing and the only thing to be obeyed is what you do or say.

3. On the other hand, people are really easy going. If you convict others that you are the only one to be listened or obeyed to, then they willnot even move their finger without you saying them to do.

So... It is a very thin line to implement and sustain a "working" quality system. That's why I say to implement separate systems within each site and HQ with 4 QMRs and a QMS coordinator. Yes, there are identical documents, processes, but different people will apply those!

If you want to discuss more, send me a message with your questions/problems, I will be returning a reply soon.
Thank you everybody for your valuable comments.
Just for info, The 3 companies being merge forms part of a group with 6 other companies. The group has its values, mission vision and so on. The 3 companies being merged have recently been acquired by the group ( 2 yrs) . They have their own values, culture and so on. WE are receiving some request to align with HQ values. But as Harry puts it, you cannot force a marriage!
If I go in there to transform everything, I am sure I will be met with barriers.[/QUOTE]
 

ASDriven

Starting to get Involved
As it happens, I have similar issues at hand. Our comparatively small site is part of a large group where all the sites have built their own systems. We are now set to integrate them (which is part of the reason for my current abysmally low post count :notme: ). Anyway, as somashekar says this should not be too tricky (though it does create a lot of work). In our case the top documents will be owned by corporate management.

This is also an opportunity for improvement: Comparing different systems is bound to reveal good and not so good points in all of them. It is quite possible that you have solved similar issues differently, and now would be a good time to look for and spread best practice.

/Claes

I'm new to quality management altogether. Where would you start? I feel like my head is spinning with where to settle on first as I'm now responsible for both QMSs. I just feel lost when I see the mess that the previous company left as they were using a consultant company to manage most of their QMS.

Currently, I'm just organizing their files to make it easier with the next step being a QMS audit of the acquired company. I'm just unsure if this is the correct approach.
 

John Broomfield

Leader
Super Moderator
I'm new to quality management altogether. Where would you start? I feel like my head is spinning with where to settle on first as I'm now responsible for both QMSs. I just feel lost when I see the mess that the previous company left as they were using a consultant company to manage most of their QMS.

Currently, I'm just organizing their files to make it easier with the next step being a QMS audit of the acquired company. I'm just unsure if this is the correct approach.

Leave the files for now and work with top management to determine the mission of the merged organizations and its core process (which runs from understanding customer needs to cash in the bank - to invest in improvement).

Within this core process the key processes should quickly become apparent. Ask top management to nominate the owner of each process so you can work with them later in capturing the way each process actually works (and which of those docs is actually required).

Serving the core process with the necessary resources, monitoring and improvement are the other key processes in the system; you’ll need to know (and work with) the owner of each of these processes too.

Deployment flowcharts are a great way of capturing the way these processes actually work including their interactions. Ask the process owners to engage their process teams in rigorously reviewing the flowcharts for accuracy.

Then archive the docs shown to be unnecessary.

Then be surprised to the extent the natural (as is) system conforms to the standard. Where it doesn’t, add the necessary controls to existing processes and design, if necessary, any new processes required. You may find that you need no new processes for the system to be effective.

Keep it real and avoid creating a work of fiction in your office.
 

Jim Wynne

Leader
Admin
I'm new to quality management altogether. Where would you start? I feel like my head is spinning with where to settle on first as I'm now responsible for both QMSs. I just feel lost when I see the mess that the previous company left as they were using a consultant company to manage most of their QMS.

Currently, I'm just organizing their files to make it easier with the next step being a QMS audit of the acquired company. I'm just unsure if this is the correct approach.
Please note that you've replied to a post from 2010, and you've raised this general topic in at least two other threads. Please bump one of the others if you still have questions.
 
Top Bottom