Procedure binding even if not required by the standard - Where's the requirement?

[Sidney Vianna]

Where is common sense when you need it?

Actually NOTE 1, under 4.2.1 states:"Where the term 'documented procedure' is appears within the International Standard, this means that the procedure is established, documented, implemented and maintained."

Too bad the King of Common Sense, a.k.a Jim Wynne, is absent. Silly Girl, excellent point. Technically, the pundits, ISO "virtuosos", could say that Notes are not part of the requirements. The 1994 edition of ISO 9001, paragraph 4.2.2.b) had this explicit requirement. For some reason, the 2000 doesn't. But like you and others are saying, what would be the reason to document processes and activities via command media if there was no expectation of deployment and enforcement?

Where does it say that the employees have to be alive when clocking in? In absence of a dress code, where does it say that employees must wear clothes? Where does it say that you are expected to answer the phone when it rings or emails?

Do we need a standard that tells us to breathe? Where is common sense?

 

[silly girl]

Re: Where is common sense when you need it?

Technically, the pundits, ISO "virtuosos", could say that Notes are not part of the requirements.

I had not considered this. I usually use the notes to gain understanding of what the standard means - what the intention is behind particular elements. To me it does not make sense to 'ignore' the notes.

Silly Girl

 

[chaosweary]

Re: Where is common sense when you need it?

But like you and others are saying, what would be the reason to document processes and activities via command media if there was no expectation of deployment and enforcement?
?

Answer: To have a certificate required by the particular market you are selling to.

Do we need a standard that tells us to breathe? Where is common sense?

You do when an auditee asks you explicitly where it states this in the standard.

Sorry about the buzzkill, but that's life...integrity is not implicit.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Re: Where is common sense when you need it?

Answer: To have a certificate required by the particular market you are selling to.



You do when an auditee asks you explicitly where it states this in the standard.

Sorry about the buzzkill, but that's life...integrity is not implicit.

Chaos,

I think you may have missed the point here in this thread. Here is the OP post:

usually organizations have several procedures that exceed ól 9001's requirements with details related to their business, however, which clause do you think says that once a procedure is developed by the organizationit becomes binding even if not required by the standard, i think the closest is 4.1

Just review all of the threads that have been posted on the original post.

 

[chaosweary]

Hence the quotes...

 

[mirrorcrax]

Guys! Guys! could you please relax with the offensives, i'm not claiming i'm the guru of quality, i believe in exchanging ideas and points of view in regards of the interpretation and applications of this standard with which we're involved, i may know a thing or two, but hey! isn't the purpose of this whole forum to exchange ideas not attack other's person in a very subjective manner!

Now what van putten said very much describes what i was talking about

Hello All:

I disagree with Randy. 4.2.1d and 4.2.3 only describe requirements for having documents and controlling them. These requirements do not say you have to follow them.

I started a thread about this a long time ago. I asked, where in ISO 9001 is there a requirement that procedures have to be followed?

I never learned the answer. I did receive many replys from "tell the employee to follow it or be fired" to response that indicated the question was without merit.

I started the thread becasue I thought it was interesting that ISO 9001 does not have an overt clasue that states something like all documented processes must be followed.

I think mirrorcrax has raised a worthy question.

I agree with Mirrorcrax. I think the 4.1 f) is as close as we will get to such a requirement.

Regards,

Dirk

Without the need to patronize me guys, i am well aware of 4.2.1 d, yet i'm also aware that it's called documentation requirements! it doesn't mention anything about having to implement them word for word or even implement them at all, and don't think that it's all obvious because its not,

I'm with vanputten on 4.1, except that i feel the first two lines below 4.1 general requirements is what requires organizations to implement whatever procedures they develop, as it sayd "SHALL Document, implement, and maintain" ...."in accordance with the requirements of this international standard" which include 4.2.1d, so i don't think it's directly 4.2.1d, i think it's 4.1 primarily

different opinions and ideas always welcomed (with no subjective judgement)

 

[BadgerMan]

8.2.2 (b)

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Guys! Guys! could you please relax with the offensives, i'm not claiming i'm the guru of quality, i believe in exchanging ideas and points of view in regards of the interpretation and applications of this standard with which we're involved, i may know a thing or two, but hey! isn't the purpose of this whole forum to exchange ideas not attack other's person in a very subjective manner!

Now what van putten said very much describes what i was talking about




Without the need to patronize me guys, i am well aware of 4.2.1 d, yet i'm also aware that it's called documentation requirements! it doesn't mention anything about having to implement them word for word or even implement them at all, and don't think that it's all obvious because its not,

I'm with vanputten on 4.1, except that i feel the first two lines below 4.1 general requirements is what requires organizations to implement whatever procedures they develop, as it sayd "SHALL Document, implement, and maintain" ...."in accordance with the requirements of this international standard" which include 4.2.1d, so i don't think it's directly 4.2.1d, i think it's 4.1 primarily

different opinions and ideas always welcomed (with no subjective judgement)

I believe you need to review the entire standard (ISO9001:2000) to better support your stance.

As for the offensive remarks, I would still like to know your qualifications.

 

[ScottK]

I honestly think this is a moot question, mirrorcrax.
which is fine if you're just trying to spark debate.

But in all practicality I don't think ISO needs to specify such a thing.
ISO is a voluntary standard. It's not like you can get fined for non-conformances and it's not like you NEED ISO registration to sell a product as with some government regulations.

 

[BadgerMan]

8.2.2 Internal Audit: The organization shall conduct internal audits at planned intervals to determine whether the quality management system

a. conforms to the planned arrangements (see 7.1), to the requirements of this International Standard and to the quality management system requirements established by the organization, and

b. is effectively implemented and maintained.