Please help me come up with a Quality Policy

[potdar]

Sorry but I must be missing something here. Yes, the policy must be decided by the management but it must also satisfy the requirements of clause 5.3 if claiming compliance to ISO 9001.

b) I don't think it includes a commitment to comply with requirements and to continually improve.

c) I don't think it provides a framework for establishing and reviewing quality objectives.

I am all for keeping things simple but surely the policy has to comply without having to imply and 'read between the lines'.

Sorry Colin,

b) I somehow dont agree with the concept that a commitment to continual improvement can only be stated by including the stereotype words 'continual improvement' in the policy. If you include these magical words, you are committed. Else, you are not.

The standard requires that a commitment to the standard and to continual improvement is included in the policy, not the specific words.

The businesses, or even the management systems today dont run on magical words any more. They run on intent and demonstration of it.

And by the way, talking of magical words, why are we restricting ourselves to continual improvement? What happened to 'commitment to comply with the requirements of ISO 9001'?

I know there is a vocal community who does not agree. But there is also a not so vocal community that agrees.

c) ' Do it right the first time, every time' is a sufficient framework for establishing quality objectives.

 

[RoxaneB]

The standard requires that a commitment to the standard and to continual improvement is included in the policy, not the specific words.

There is no requirement to be committed to the standard. There is, however, a shall statement to comply with requirements. It does not state the standard's requirements. What about the Customers' requirements? In fact, consider section 5.3 doesn't mention Customers, why even mention them in the Quality Policy? Yet many suggestions in this thread are recommending putting the Customer in the QP.

And by the way, talking of magical words, why are we restricting ourselves to continual improvement? What happened to 'commitment to comply with the requirements of ISO 9001'?

I know there is a vocal community who does not agree. But there is also a not so vocal community that agrees.

I don't mean to sound nit-picky, but if they're not vocal how do you know that your last statement is valid? Where is the evidence?

Again, there is no statement that clearly says we must comply with ISO 9001 requirements...simply requirements. In this day-and-age of value-added activities, I'll pick my Stakeholders' requirements over limiting myself to simply those of ISO 9001. As organizations develop Business Management Systems - above and beyond the Quality Management System - again, why limit yourself to the requirements of ISO 9001? Why even mention ISO 9001? Surely your organization is more dynamic than what is prescribed in those shall statements.

I have nothing against ISO 9001. In fact, I think it is a wonderful tool to be used for organization's wishing to formalize their management systems. But to limit the scope of application of the Quality Policy to ISO 9001 activities doesn't assist in the development of a culture committed to continual improvement and Stakeholder satisfaction. It ends up creating an environment where phrases such as "We do this because of ISO" are uttered instead of "We do this because it's the right thing to do."

 

[Colin]

Potdar

I am not disagreeing with your sentiments on this, I quite agree with much of what you are saying. My contention is that clause 5.3 states certain things must be included in the quality policy and I cannot see them in the OP's policy.

Now, whether 5.3 should say what it does is another matter but as it stands, I don't think the clause is being met by the policy.

I don't think I suggested only complying with ISO 9001, far from it, the requirements can come from many sources.

 

[Alex Kobzar]

"A PROGRESSIVE COMPANY OF DEDICATED PEOPLE WHO BUILD IT RIGHT
THE FIRST TIME EVERY TIME"

In the Quality Policy it is stated that the Company is "PROGRESSIVE" and moreover consists of "DEDICATED PEOPLE"...
Does it mean that somebody is willing to demonstrate an objective evidence for that to an auditor?
Do you have the terms "PROGRESSIVE" and "DEDICATED" determined in the documented QMS?
Is meaning of these terms communicated and understood by ALL employees of the Company?: )

ISO 9001:2000(E)

5.3 Quality policy
Top management shall ensure that the quality policy
a) is appropriate to the purpose of the organization,
b) includes a commitment to comply with requirements and continually improve the effectiveness of the quality management system,
c) provides a framework for establishing and reviewing quality objectives,
...

To a satisfaction of the Standard requirements I'd recommend to establish a Quality Policy consisting of the two following statements ("a" and "b-c" statements are intended to support the ch. "a", "b" and "c" requirements above, accordingly):

a)
<type your Company name> <choose one: provides / supplies / supports / distributes / ...> <add a common description of the goods/services of the Company>.

b-c)
<your Company name> is committed to comply with the requirements (*) and continually improve the effectiveness of <choose between "our" (if the Policy is signed by top management or shareholders, otherwise type "it's"> quality management system.

(*) if smbdy asks: eventually the requirements are those of the QMS, that including the need to achieve the Quality Objectives.

Somebody may also be willing to consider re-phrasing of the proposed Quality Policy statement, as well as spraying a Quality Policy statement with a number of some more or less fancy slogans, for example:
- on-time,
- cost-effective,
- highest quality,
- competent,
- professional(s),
- ...to meet or exceed expectations of our valued Customers... (this one is my favorit!),
- ...will achieve these goals through teamwork and innovation...,
- ...using collective knowledge and leading edge technology...,
- ...as well as to maintain a safe work environment...!: //

I've just thought that some of the slogans, once placed in a Quality Policy, may also provide a "framework" for achievement of Quality Objectives (they are forming some kind of "vision", are linked to elements of QMS, also may be kindda real / representable)....WOW!!!!

 

[potdar]

There is no requirement to be committed to the standard. There is, however, a shall statement to comply with requirements. It does not state the standard's requirements. What about the Customers' requirements? In fact, consider section 5.3 doesn't mention Customers, why even mention them in the Quality Policy? Yet many suggestions in this thread are recommending putting the Customer in the QP.

OK. Sorry. I shall rephrase my statement. Why are we not discussing the mising commitment to 'comply with the requirements' of ISO 9001? (Yes, ISO 9001. Not QMS. Just hold your horses.)

Regarding the customers, everyone is welcome to include their requirements in the policy if they like. But these are not a mandatory part of the policy. The auditor has no business to comment if someone doesnt include them.

I don't mean to sound nit-picky, but if they're not vocal how do you know that your last statement is valid? Where is the evidence?

Oh! they may not be contributing in this thread. But many have expressed their opinions in similar threads earlier. Just check the average number of posts in this thread to know what I mean by vocal.

Also, interactions do take place among consultants, auditors and practicinors of ISO 9001 outside the cove as well. I may tell you here that management who really take the pains to sit and draft their quality policy (instead of delegating the job to a consultant) normally rubbish the suggestion that the policy include the magic phrases like commitment to QMS or continual improvement. They are a minority and they definitely are not vocal. So are many other consultants who draft the policies where you find the words missing either ignorant or they positively abhor the idea. They also, for sure are not vocal.

Again, there is no statement that clearly says we must comply with ISO 9001 requirements...simply requirements. In this day-and-age of value-added activities, I'll pick my Stakeholders' requirements over limiting myself to simply those of ISO 9001. As organizations develop Business Management Systems - above and beyond the Quality Management System - again, why limit yourself to the requirements of ISO 9001? Why even mention ISO 9001? Surely your organization is more dynamic than what is prescribed in those shall statements.

The title of the document I have in my hand says "ISO 9001:2000 Quality Managemnt Systems - Requirements"

Clause 5.3 of this document (QMS?) : Top management shall ensure that the quality policy

b) includes a commitment to comply with requirements and continually improve the efectiveness of the quality management system.

I thought the QMS they are talking about (and we are discussing about) must be the same QMS ISO 9001. Please correct me if I am wrong.

If it is the same QMS, I think the 'shall' is very clear. And here, initially we are discussing only the 'shall'. Beyond the 'shall' can follow after we have decided whether the 'shall' requirements are met.

I have nothing against ISO 9001. In fact, I think it is a wonderful tool to be used for organization's wishing to formalize their management systems. But to limit the scope of application of the Quality Policy to ISO 9001 activities doesn't assist in the development of a culture committed to continual improvement and Stakeholder satisfaction. It ends up creating an environment where phrases such as "We do this because of ISO" are uttered instead of "We do this because it's the right thing to do."

I couldnt agree less. But we happen to be in this discussion because some auditor has told our OP to do something 'because ISO says so'. My initial suggestion is to do something 'because it is the right thing to do' and it also satisfies the ISO requirements sufficiently - in my opinion. Ways to keep the auditor happy (these are required) are also suggested. It also comes with a big IF - if he agrees with it!

 

[Denis9001 - 2007]

The requirement for a Quality Policy causes me problems but it depends on what the purpose of the policy is. Many people try to make it a quality slogan but it would be hard to have a good slogan which contained all the 9001 requirements. Others see it as marketing/publicity instrument and try to make it flowery like a brochure page. Nothing wrong with that for some people but for me I don't like the requirement for the policy to include a commitment to meet legal requirements. I fear customer could think it funny that the company finds the need to state what shouldn't need to be stated. Since the policy is for most companies written when they first start down the road to certification I prefer to see it as a notification to company staff informing them of the management/company commitment. I think of it almost like a ISO9001 compliance statement. So you simply write the requirements ie "This company is commited to..1) 2) 3)" and that's it. The purpose of the policy is to commit in writing the company and top management. If ever a staff member said "the comapny doesn't care about a QMS" the policy can be brought out with the top managers signature on it.

 

[Alex Kobzar]

Our current quality policy is:
"A PROGRESSIVE COMPANY OF DEDICATED PEOPLE WHO BUILD IT RIGHT
THE FIRST TIME EVERY TIME"

In the Quality Policy it is stated that the Company is "PROGRESSIVE" and moreover consists of "DEDICATED PEOPLE"...
Does it mean that somebody is willing to demonstrate an objective evidence for that to an auditor?
Do you have the terms "PROGRESSIVE" and "DEDICATED" determined in the documented QMS?
Is meaning of these terms communicated and understood by ALL employees of the Company?: )

And the last one: is there an objective evidence available at the Company to demonstrate that the "DEDICATED PEOPLE" are really "BUILD IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME EVERY TIME"? :