Should a Quality Policy have Revision Control?

[Coury Ferguson]

Exactly why & the reasons the auditor gave us the n/c, for not being able to see the revision level.

I guess maybe because I think from the point of view, of the worse case scenarios.

I still would have questioned the validity of the Finding regarding unable to see the Revision. If removing them from the frame would have shown the Auditor that it was (assuming) the current revision level, then maybe a suggestion to increase the size of the frame would have been more appropriate, in your situation.

 

[Paul Simpson]

So I've made a real pretty quality policy with a nice diploma style frame and I've printed it off. Now obviously this is uncontrolled as it's printed off and it does not have a form number or a Rev. level on the document.

Why does that make it uncontrolled?

As an example:

• If you have a record of what the text of the policy is (e.g. the text editor original in electronic form) or the version in the manual (see your example below).
• You state in your document control procedure that printed copies are posted at location X and Y
• You can demonstrate that any revisions are managed and the latest policy is the only one available
• Hey presto! Controlled document

Now I just went out and bought a couple of frames to hang these in the conference room, lobby, my bosses office.....

Your locations X, Y (and Z)

should I have a rev and document number attached to them? It's already in the quality manual?

See above - no revision status required as the nature of your 'control' doesn't demand it.

should there be a reference attached to the bottom somewhere?

I'm thinking there should be?

Not if you write your document control procedure so that you don't.

Hope this helps.

 

[fletch]

Let me play the Devil's Advocate here.

If your Quality Policy changes (and it should be reviewed at the Management Review meetings) and it was determined (at the meeting) to not be the focus of the Organization. The Quality Policy changes. What would be your actions to eliminate the out of date Quality Policy with the ones that have been placed in frames. Or better yet, how would you make sure that the current Quality Policy is understood by the other employees within the Organization? Since, you are posting the Quality Policy, how would you know that the posted Quality Policy is the current revision (goals of the organization)?

Well of course I would then have to update the QM and take down the documents and hang new ones around. Better yet, I would have to train to the new change in the QM and express the change of the QP.

 

[Randy]

Ask a simple question about how to boil and egg and you get a flat quiche that's burnt.........

Just use the standard as your measuring stick with this problem.

What is the policy? Well unless I'm wrong (not hardly in this case) clause 4.2.1 states that the Policy is a system document.....Ya'll with me?

And what are we to do with system documents? Well unless I wrong here (Guess what? Not hardly again) .... clause 4.2.3 states that system documents must be controlled and explains what the controls must be. Ya'll still hanging in there?

Now, who determines how to meet the requirements of 4.2.1 and 4.2.3? Not some stinkweed auditor or some goofball-has-been-wannabe, YOU DO! IT's YOUR POLICY AND YOUR DOCUMENT CONTROL!

Just tell the whole wide world what you are going to do, make sure it meets 4.2.3, do it and tell eveyone who doesn't like it to hug a duck.

If your auditor says he doesn't like it that way file a complaint with the evidence of his not being able to meet basic requirements of objectivity, impartiality and meeting the definition of competent auditor and get a new one can and does. It don't matter what he does or does not like.

This as silly as saying that policies must be signed to be valid. QRAP!

 

[Helmut Jilling]

interesting...this post is using thousands of letters and characters to discuss whether you are required to put 8 characters (date) on a quality policy...

have the quality issues in our companies improved so much that this is now the most pressing issue of the day? Put a date on it and move on...?

 

[Paul Simpson]

interesting...this post is using thousands of letters and characters to discuss whether you are required to put 8 characters (date) on a quality policy...

have the quality issues in our companies improved so much that this is now the most pressing issue of the day? Put a date on it and move on...?

If you don't want to discuss document control join another thread.

As with all things on the cove we can be like Nike and Just Do It! Or we can discuss the requirements of, in this case, ISO 9001 and what it actually means - rather than what some auditor somewhere says it means. Hopefully the process means we all learn and the OP has developed their understanding of a range of ways of satisfying the standard and can then choose the most appropriate way that suits them.

I have posted this many times on the cove - many quality professionals do not understand document control and resort to putting issue dates, revision levels and signatures on quality documents and forms where they are not needed.

If we can shed a little light I might see fewer holiday application forms with document control - it doesn't matter!

 

[Helmut Jilling]

If you don't want to discuss document control join another thread.

As with all things on the cove we can be like Nike and Just Do It! Or we can discuss the requirements of, in this case, ISO 9001 and what it actually means - rather than what some auditor somewhere says it means. Hopefully the process means we all learn and the OP has developed their understanding of a range of ways of satisfying the standard and can then choose the most appropriate way that suits them.

I have posted this many times on the cove - many quality professionals do not understand document control and resort to putting issue dates, revision levels and signatures on quality documents and forms where they are not needed.

If we can shed a little light I might see fewer holiday application forms with document control - it doesn't matter!

I was trying to make a point in a blunt and direct manner. Apparently, I did not make my point...

There are many pressing issues and waste at many companies that need attention. People should spend their time on those issues.Why is it necessary and beneficial to endlessly debate something so simple?

The quality policy is part of the quality system. It has to be controlled. But, my point was doc control can be done so simply and seamlessly that it should not require debate.

Doc control does not require a form number, or any manner of complicated things that companies do. But it does require a method to ensure the correct revision is being used. That can be as simple as a date in a footer.

Instead of debating which docs must be controlled, perhaps it would be constructive and beneficial to discuss how to control docs in a manner which can be done easily and simply. I am continually showing clients that doc control is unnecessarily complicated.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Why does that make it uncontrolled?


As an example:

• If you have a record of what the text of the policy is (e.g. the text editor original in electronic form) or the version in the manual (see your example below).
• You state in your document control procedure that printed copies are posted at location X and Y
• You can demonstrate that any revisions are managed and the latest policy is the only one available
• Hey presto! Controlled document

Your locations X, Y (and Z)

See above - no revision status required as the nature of your 'control' doesn't demand it.

Not if you write your document control procedure so that you don't.

Hope this helps.

I agree that also works. Especially on the framed copies.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

An NC? Not just an observation?
That auditor needs an NC or at least an OFI.

No, that auditor needs a little more experience as a coauditor. I can't see Randy or I writing such a simplistic NC. Maybe back in the eraly days of my career, when I had no experience. This is why registrars should be slower to put new auditors in a solo lead Auditor role. It takes time to gain experience.

 

[Randy]

I just went through this exact scenario in a training course...revision "date" and signature. My challenge to students is to prove (only using the standard) that revision status means "date" and "approved" or "authorized" means signature.

The challenge always winds up being a fun exercise.