If you write it, they will read it...
Okay, so it's a play on whatever baseball film that Costner was in (he's been in so many, it's hard to keep track
). The ISO 14001 forum has a discussion on merging the manuals for multiple standards, so I'll mention a bit about what I said there.
Our Chilean sister facility has developed an Operations System that combines ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and OHSAS 18001. Not all of the Elements are the same and yet somehow they managed to develop a 28 page Operations Manual that covers all three Standards and addresses all of the applicable "shall's"
Their manual is not written in the form of an ISO Standard. It's written for them...for their Customers....for all of their Stakeholders. The language is simple and appropriate for the industry and location. And, truth be told, it's actually rather interesting to read. They've managed to successfully blend three systems into one truly functional and dynamic system, while keeping it true to who they are.
It's not easy to write a manual that isn't just a revamp of the Standard, where you read "organization" to mean "insert your company's name here"
. Obviously, though, it can be done.
Richard, my concern is that your Managers seem to want you to revise something that is, technically speaking, done. Why spend the time revising it now? It meets the shall's...sure, it's nothing spectacular....save that for the continual improvement. Tell your External's later that you revised the manual's format so that it would appeal to your Stakeholders (including Customers). For now, imho, it's done...go focus on other parts of the sytem that need work (if necessary).
Okay, so it's a play on whatever baseball film that Costner was in (he's been in so many, it's hard to keep track
Our Chilean sister facility has developed an Operations System that combines ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and OHSAS 18001. Not all of the Elements are the same and yet somehow they managed to develop a 28 page Operations Manual that covers all three Standards and addresses all of the applicable "shall's"
Their manual is not written in the form of an ISO Standard. It's written for them...for their Customers....for all of their Stakeholders. The language is simple and appropriate for the industry and location. And, truth be told, it's actually rather interesting to read. They've managed to successfully blend three systems into one truly functional and dynamic system, while keeping it true to who they are.
It's not easy to write a manual that isn't just a revamp of the Standard, where you read "organization" to mean "insert your company's name here"
Richard, my concern is that your Managers seem to want you to revise something that is, technically speaking, done. Why spend the time revising it now? It meets the shall's...sure, it's nothing spectacular....save that for the continual improvement. Tell your External's later that you revised the manual's format so that it would appeal to your Stakeholders (including Customers). For now, imho, it's done...go focus on other parts of the sytem that need work (if necessary).
