Patricia,
I am lost! Where did you see a “cross-reference of the how the Standard interfaces with the Business Operating System” on our Process Interaction Matrix? The table at
http://********/article-process-interaction.htm shows ONLY processes that a company uses. While you stated that “… it does not answer the question of how the processes in the system interact with each other” symbols “<” and “>” show these interactions per the legend on the bottom of the chart. While you also noted that it “… certainly sheds no light on their [processes] sequence”, the arrow next to the product realization processes defines exactly that sequence. Take another look at it – it is a cool tool and hundreds of companies are using it.
Regards,
Mark Kaganov
Hello Mark,
I owe you a partial apology. The PDF version posted is not very clear, even if enlarged, and I mistakedly assumed that the processes listed down the left-hand column represented the elements and sub-element of the standard (hence, my comment regarding the "interface of the standard with your system processes). I see now, that the same processes are listed both down and across the matrix.
So let me restate my commnets...the matrix referenced still falls short of the requirement to identify/define the "Management System Processes" (not every sub-process in the organization), and to demonstrate their sequence (not just Product Realization) and interaction.
As an example...if I go to your 'Purchasing Process" in the left column, it appears to have no interface with the "Corrective Action Process" or the "Management Review Process"....I could go on with several similar "lacking interfaces"...I think you get my point.
I believe the point of this exercise is to capture the dynamics of the "Business/Management/Quality Operating System", thereby demonstrating an organization's understanding and vision of the "System"...and not necessarily to try to capture and interrelate all the nuances of every process and sub-process.
As you mentioned, most companies have failed to identify a practical approach to this, because they are trying to capture too much information in one model, and end up with a document that fails to really provide any value to anyone.
The model provided still does not address the requirement, as I understand it.

Patricia