Have to jump in
Gary L. Phillips said:
Gone are the good O days (? 1994 series) where an organization could publish a "Quality Policy" that is so generic that it could be applied to thousands of companies in almost any given industry sector. The standard wants us to really give a lot of thought about our organization, what it does, how it works, etc. when we begin to formulate the 'broad stroke ' of what we are all about.
A lot of folks do not like the new requirements of the standard probably because it is going to require that we make our QMS so personal, after all, isn't that what it should be like don't you think so???
Gary, I think they are very similar. The new standard tells you what to put in your policy. So does the older version. The new version has a) thru e). The older version has it all in one paragraph. It was more subceptible to interpretation issues. If you make your policy just like the new standard wants, there is no problem. There are differences in the content. Continually improve, blah blah vs. objectives and commitment to "Quality", etc.. Of course it is auditable, but if one can't meet their policy with the required content, they shouldn't be considering registering to ISO9001:2000.
I posted this before and here it is once more:
XXX is committed to maintaining a customer focused Quality Management System that:
— Produces products and services that meet customer/regulatory requirements
— Is communicated from Top Management to all levels of the organization
— Continually monitors to improve all aspects of our Quality Management System”
This policy is implemented by a set of procedures and work instructions that describe how activities at XXX are performed.
Straight from the standard and I would bet most companies will have something similar (not very personalized as you have said) because it's clear cut. I will, however, say that if you can't meet the requirements, make up something else and good luck. JMHO
