Re-writing our Quality Manual - Need some input

[Gman2]

I am in the process of re-writing our quality manual (ours right now is 92 pages!!!).
I want to get this thing streamlined and simplified as much as possible.
But what I don't want to do is get written up for the manual.
So my objective is to make the manual as small as humanly possible and it still be passable.
I have read 4.2.2 a hundred times but that really makes no difference when you get an auditor who has their own "ideas" of what it should consist of.
Not saying that is going to happen, but it has already happened to me once s far as I'm concerned (with another issue).
I want this to be bullet proof but I really am turned off by the idea of just spewing out the standard and filling in our name.
But if that is going to make them happy then whatever.
I would just like some input from the people who have gone small and customized and what were the reactions and did their manuals pass.
If you feel like, it would be great if you could post up your manuals that did pass and maybe talk about the strong points and weak points. I think this would be a great chance for everyone to critique this method of writing smaller manuals.
I would post mine but I don't think the server could handle it!
But I will post the new one when finished.

And I know there was some discussion a while back about one page manuals, well looking at the standard I don't see how that is so far fetched.

The scope of the QMS
Reference to the Procedures
Process Interactions

That's it; I don't see how those three requirements could make everybody think that copying the entire standard is the best way to accomplish this.

If you can't post, you can e-mail it to me and I can post it.



G.

 

[Icy Mountain]

A search is a wonderful thing

Gman,
Try this thread:TS 16949 Quality Manual

It's rather large (up to 128 posts now) but it contains just about every possible opinion on quality manuals. In addition, there are a number of different style quality manuals available for download (it'll cost you US$25 but it's worth it for download access at the Cove).

Also, read the Quality Manual Structure thread. 168 posts of very good information.

IMO, between defining the scope, referencing the procedures and describing the interaction of processes, one page is pretty dadgum optimistic (unless you use really small fonts) but less than 10 pages is easily accomplished.

 

[Graeme]

Gman,
Try this thread:TS 16949 Quality Manual

It's rather large (up to 128 posts now) ...

In particlular, look at the ISO 9000:2000 manual attachment on this message in that thread:
(broken link removed)

 

[Icy Mountain]

Gee Graeme, thanks for the plug (grins broadly). Be warned, the interaction of processes is for MY company. If you start at post 103, be sure to read up through about 120 to see the discussion on that. Also, tattva posted a really good powerpoint interaction of processes that is far less complicated than mine.

 

[JRKH]

My Take

This is just some random thoughts - In no specific order

Why do you have a 92 page manual? How many tier 2 docs do you have now?
My opinion is if it can go in a lower level doc then put it there and get it out of the manual.

You want to make the maual "bullet proof" but don't want to regurge the standard. But consider this.
I chose to "regurge" the standard to:
a) Make the manual concise and bullet proof (its 13 pgs long).
b) To put the standard into language that others in the company can understand.

By doing this the manual becomes a readily usable reference for every manager in the company. I'm sure you'll agree that the standard can be somewhat difficult to decifer ,

James

 

[gpainter]

Keep it short,simple and a tier one document.

 

[Gman2]

Yeah but I just feel weak doing that.
I mean one is one and the other well....is the other.
Yet again, I don't want to get nailed either.

G.

 

[Cari Spears]

I had always regurgitated the standard too, until now. I can't remember where I posted mine - I'll try to find it and insert link.

We are much happier with this manual, it passed our ISO9k2k audit and we've received compliments from customers. Most of them say something like "It was nice to not see the standard regurgitated, you're manual actually tells us something about your company."

It includes background info about the company's history, the scope, policy and objectives, one overview interaction diagram and two lower level diagrams, an org chart, some text regarding issues that would pertain to our customer base, and a list of level II procedures. 14 pages including cover page and TOC.

 

[Gman2]

I had always regurgitated the standard too, until now. I can't remember where I posted mine - I'll try to find it and insert link.

We are much happier with this manual, it passed our ISO9k2k audit and we've received compliments from customers. Most of them say something like "It was nice to not see the standard regurgitated, you're manual actually tells us something about your company."

It includes background info about the company's history, the scope, policy and objectives, one overview interaction diagram and two lower level diagrams, an org chart, some text regarding issues that would pertain to our customer base, and a list of level II procedures. 14 pages including cover page and TOC.

Thats what I'M taking about.
Can't wait to see it.

G.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Hello G,

Some other links on the same subject:

What is acceptable quality manual content?
Help - Tips on updating Manual (1994 - 2000)
How BIG is Your Quality Manual?

/Claes