Should The Management Representative be a Manager?

[vanputten]

The whole concept of Mngmt Rep is destined to fail. Organizations give a person the title because a standard requries it. I have never seen a person with the title Mgmt Rep. actually have full authority to maintain every part of a QMS (all departments, proceses, etc.)

Anybody aware of any 3rd party audits where the organiztion was written up because the Mngmt Rep. did not have adequate authority? I guess any audit finding could be associted with the failure of the Mngmt rep. to maintain the QMS. Let's see, a manufacturing department is not doing an inprocess inspection as defined by a process engineer during the advanced product planning. Write up the Managment Rep!

I don't think pay grades/level has anything to do with this. In my opinion, we are discussing an issue that has been around for a long, long time... assigning responsibility without authroity to meet the responsibility.

I am sure there are plenty of companies where a VP of Engineering would have no authority over a quality coordinator.

My point is that I believe the standard is requiring that whomever gets the title, whether they previously had the authority or not, now must have the authority to be successful in maintaining a QMS that crosses many boundaries (departments, products families, sites, etc.)

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Re: The Management Representative should be Manager?

"Top management shall appoint a member of the organization's management who, irrespective of other
responsibilities, shall have responsibility and authority that includes
a) ensuring that processes needed for the quality management system are established, implemented and maintained,
b) reporting to top management on the performance of the quality management system and any need for improvement, and
c) ensuring the promotion of awareness of customer requirements throughout the organization.
NOTE The responsibility of a management representative can include liaison with external parties on matters relating to the quality management system."

In my current role im just a Systems Coordinator (i deal with ISO 9001 and HACCP with the backing of the General Manager and we are OK). If i cant make them run I let the GM do so

The 2008 version has clarified this. As I interpret it to say is that they need to be a Manager or Higher, in my opinion.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: The Management Representative should be Manager?

The 2008 version has clarified this. As I interpret it to say is that they need to be a Manager or Higher, in my opinion.

The only change was the addition of the phrase shown in bold below, which further muddies the waters, imo.

Top management shall appoint a member of the organization's management who, irrespective of other responsibilities, shall have responsibility and authority that includes...

What was the rationale for the change?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

The whole concept of Mngmt Rep is destined to fail.

Since you are a member of the US TAG to the ISO TC 176, I am hopeful that you expressed that opinion to the group.

 

[Big Jim]

I too would like to know the rationale of this change in wording. I view it as an attempt to reign in companies that hire a consultant to be the MR and the consultants only involvement is to be present during CB audits.

 

[howste]

...appointed by top management, who works for the company in a managerial capacity...

I think these are the key words in the TC176 interpretation. For this requirement titles and employment status mean nothing. If they've been appointed by top management, and they're working in a managerial capacity in the organization, they're the management representative.

Now, even if they've been appointed, I've never seen a management representative with real authority that didn't earn it somehow anyway. Without competence and trust, they usually get nowhere. In my world, the best management reps lead the implementation and maintenance of an effective system by first understanding the intent of the requirements and how they can benefit the organization. Then with patience and persuasion, they work with management (or better yet, leadership) and process owners to do the right things for the right reasons. Seek to understand, then diagnose (Stephen Covey).

 

[Big Jim]

I think these are the key words in the TC176 interpretation. For this requirement titles and employment status mean nothing. If they've been appointed by top management, and they're working in a managerial capacity in the organization, they're the management representative.

Now, even if they've been appointed, I've never seen a management representative with real authority that didn't earn it somehow anyway. Without competence and trust, they usually get nowhere. In my world, the best management reps lead the implementation and maintenance of an effective system by first understanding the intent of the requirements and how they can benefit the organization. Then with patience and persuasion, they work with management (or better yet, leadership) and process owners to do the right things for the right reasons. Seek to understand, then diagnose (Stephen Covey).

You raise an excellent point. The source of power. There is the power that comes from title or appointment, and then there is power that comes from a person's ability to get things done through people. Which one do you think is more effective?

 

[Jim Wynne]

You raise an excellent point. The source of power. There is the power that comes from title or appointment, and then there is power that comes from a person's ability to get things done through people. Which one do you think is more effective?

Ability isn't enough; you need permission. The biggest shortcoming in QMS management that I continually see is delegation of responsibility without delegation of the authority needed to be effective. I think the intent of the standard is that the position of MR should be filled by someone with the responsibility and authority to act independently.

 

[Stijloor]

Ability isn't enough; you need permission. The biggest shortcoming in QMS management that I continually see is delegation of responsibility without delegation of the authority needed to be effective. I think the intent of the standard is that the position of MR should be filled by someone with the responsibility and authority to act independently.

Excellent point!

Similar to delegating dumping responsibilities upon a person whose hands are tied. I used to call them "ISO Victims." :mg:

Stijloor.

 

[Big Jim]

Ability isn't enough; you need permission. The biggest shortcoming in QMS management that I continually see is delegation of responsibility without delegation of the authority needed to be effective. I think the intent of the standard is that the position of MR should be filled by someone with the responsibility and authority to act independently.

I did mean to include that part. By getting things done through people I mean the ability to effectively get things done through people, and that would need to include his ability to motivate people to get things done.

Its been several years since business school when the terminology was fresher on my mind. At least the concepts are still there.