Re: Meeting ISO 9001:2015 Clause 7.1.6 Organizational Knowledge Requirements
Agree, Sidney. In other words, knowledge must ultimately be captured into the management system in order to be useful. Corrective action is one way of capturing such knowledge.
Dumping papers into a server, or having a lessons-learned meeting, or even training, by themselves, are not acquiring permanent knowledge for the organization. Those activities may indeed be steps in the acquisition of knowledge. But the knowledge gels only when it is part of a process description. It does not need to be written down. It can be "tacit" knowledge. Such mode of knowledge is fragile at best. Knowledge really becomes useful only when transformed into explicit knowledge in the form of management system documents.
As the paper that Brad shared earlier in this thread lays out, there is a knowledge creation loop that is, IMO, the PDCA cycle but viewed from a different angle.
There is no simplistic, one-size-fits-all answer to this. The knowledge acquired from a business blunder might get hard coded in a Verification & Validation protocol; for example, if I am a global organization which just spent billions of dollars in a product recall of products having their batteries exploding and being banned from all commercial flights, worldwide, I will make sure that, as I am validating new products which also contain batteries, the lessons learned (organizational knowledge) from the previous fiasco never get repeated, by instituting a much more thorough V&V process, defined in a NPI (New Product Introduction) Manual.
If I am an organization that got stiffed by a customer for lack of payment, which almost took me out of business, I will institute a process in my customer acquisition process that requires a credit check of that potential customer, before I engage in any project that requires significant expenditures. That "knowledge" is captured in a process and associated accompanying procedure titled "Customer acquisition and engagement"
Organizational knowledge, just like corrective action, is designed to make organizations, more effective, efficient and, as importantly, avoid repeat mistakes. Failure to learn from mistakes is just another trait of dysfunctional organizations.
If I am an organization that got stiffed by a customer for lack of payment, which almost took me out of business, I will institute a process in my customer acquisition process that requires a credit check of that potential customer, before I engage in any project that requires significant expenditures. That "knowledge" is captured in a process and associated accompanying procedure titled "Customer acquisition and engagement"
Organizational knowledge, just like corrective action, is designed to make organizations, more effective, efficient and, as importantly, avoid repeat mistakes. Failure to learn from mistakes is just another trait of dysfunctional organizations.
Dumping papers into a server, or having a lessons-learned meeting, or even training, by themselves, are not acquiring permanent knowledge for the organization. Those activities may indeed be steps in the acquisition of knowledge. But the knowledge gels only when it is part of a process description. It does not need to be written down. It can be "tacit" knowledge. Such mode of knowledge is fragile at best. Knowledge really becomes useful only when transformed into explicit knowledge in the form of management system documents.
As the paper that Brad shared earlier in this thread lays out, there is a knowledge creation loop that is, IMO, the PDCA cycle but viewed from a different angle.
