Here's my stab at it:
Any organization is a system: it has inputs (some needs that need to be satisfied), has the 'black box' (where needs are being addressed) and outputs (satisfied needs). Within the 'black box' are a series of inter-related processes that transform the inputs into outputs in a systematic way. These processes require materials, equipment, manpower, methods, measurements, facilities, and an environment to exist. I think that these 'definitions' are most commonly taught in manufacturing and management curriculums in colleges and universities, although I did encounter the same in an Instructional Design curriculum. <snip>
OK - Let me throw this in. It's what sorta gets me when I hear 'process approach'. Years ago when I was in college my major was biology with chemistry and anthropology as minors. Everything is a system. I'm not a business person by education. It just sorta happened.
Take a person. You have inputs (from food to senses), you have quite a few outputs (from sweat to urine to muscle movement). This is your 'Black Box'. There are many internal and external interactions.
Now - How does this differ from a business? And in the sense of business, what does it mean? The way I see it every business is a set of processes. Like different forms of life there are different businesses, and even within a specific business arena (let's say metal stamping or injection molding) each company will have similar, but different internal processes. A company has no choice but to have processes as well as internal and external communications.
In short - What is new in all of this? Even in auditing to the standard - One may have a checklist of the requirements of the standards but one *has* to audit the processes. If an auditor is going to audit to any specific requirement of, say ISO 9001, the auditor by necessity has to audit the applicable processes. I've done a fair amount of auditing over the years and I can say by my definition every one has been a process audit and included the interaction of processes.
Again, a business is no different than a living organism. It is a series of processes (and I will point out here that in my writings I typically equate a process to a system) which interact with each other.
Back when I was heavily into implementations, one of the first things I did was go through each of the company's processes with them to ensure we could identify each system (aka 'process') and how each interacted with others.
Process Mapping (I did the original around 1995 as an FYI) We went through every document and mapped them:
Document Mapping
I guess I'm missing something but this all seems so basic to me that I have a hard time seeing why anyone would make such a big deal as if "The Process Approach" is anything new and/or different than it ever was.
That all said, I again ask - What is the process approach? In the other thread the original question was along the lines of "Should auditors promote the process approach?" What does that mean? What is it, specifically, that auditors should be "promoting'? To me it appears to be more of an issue of whether an auditor does more than look to see if a company has a procedure to address a requirement of a standard. If all an auditor does is look to see if a company has a procedure to address a requirement of a standard, them in my book it is nothing more than, if even, a desk audit.
Now - Let's say that "Should auditors promote the process approach?" is a valid question, exactly what would an auditor do to promote a "process approach"? What would the auditor tell them to do differently? In short, if I ask an auditor what is *not* a process approach, what will I be told?