One QMS & Two Plants - Can there be 2 Management Representatives, 1 for each plant?

[John Broomfield]

Re: One QMS & Two Plants - Can there be 2 Management Representatives, 1 for each plan

Let me give just two examples....

Apparently it didn't look good on paper to have internal auditors going back and forth between plants. The same goes for gages to be shuttled to plant #1 for repair/calibration where our gage tech and his lab are located. Or the gage tech going to plant #2 for other reasons.

A new auditor/gage tech was quickly trained for plant #2. Auditors and gage tech's cannot possibly be trained that fast but this person is on the books.

If the new management rep at plant #2 thinks this is good enough he says the QMS at Plant #2 is functioning fine. No problems get reported to top management or discussed with the MR at plant #1. I cannot go to plant #2 as an auditor to uncover problems that may be overlooked. This is nothing whatsoever against the new auditor. He just doesn't have the experience yet.

This is what I'm talking about when I say the two plants are to be separate entities as much as possible and, I should add, as quickly as possible. Also, this is just 2 parts of the entire QMS.

I would much prefer having only one MR overlooking both plants. But if it's an acceptable strategy by top management and allowed by ISO/TS 16949 then there's little I can do.

Rick

Rick,

I see what you are grappling with now.

The top manager for the management system shared by two plants is the person to whom both of the plant managers report.

The MR must have a reporting relationship to that top manager and authority delegated from that top manager.

From the evidence you have now provided assigning an MR to each plant manager is not enabling the management system to function effectively due to lack of resources.

By appointing two MRs the top manager may have insulated him/herself from having anything to do with the management system.

You may have more evidence you cannot report here to make the case for the top manager choosing which of the two MRs reports to him/her. That would leave the other MR as the deputy.

Once the MR has the top manager's authority that person can sort the resource problems with the audit process and with the process for controlling measuring equipment for both plant managers.

You now need to find a way of convincing both plant managers of the need for one of the MRs to report to the top manager (who has control of the resources - see 5.1e).

OR

Separate the one management system for two plants into two management systems - one for each plant with self-sufficiency of resources for all processes for both management systems (that way the plant manager = the top manager).

IMO, the problem is not two MRs but the fact that neither MR is reporting to the top manager.

John

 

[somashekar]

Re: One QMS & Two Plants - Can there be 2 Management Representatives, 1 for each plan

I would much prefer having only one MR overlooking both plants. But if it's an acceptable strategy by top management and allowed by ISO/TS 16949 then there's little I can do.

Hi Rick.
MR's are not to overlook the plants. They are a part of some core process and also perform the QMS pilot task.
You can very well manage two QMS under one certification, or opt for two certification. The key is in defining roles and responsibilities and establishing proper internal communication.

 

[rickmcq]

Re: One QMS & Two Plants - Can there be 2 Management Representatives, 1 for each plan

Thank you all for your interpretations and opinions. There is far more latitude in the operation of 2+ facilities under one QMS than I had realized.

...along with potential problems.

Rick