Simple Quality Systems Manual - Do we really need bloated Quality Manuals

P

pgtips

#1
Do we really need to produce bloated Quality Manuals that regurgitate the clauses of the standard from the first person? This seems such a waste of time and resources! :mad:

Surely unless the is an exclusion a reference to the relevant clause will suffice! Thus effectively reducing the manual to a link document between the standard and the company specific detailed documents. See attached for my proposed minimalist manual.

Let me know what you think.
 

Attachments

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
Re: Do we really need bloated Quality Manuals

IMO your quality manual should be as long or as short as you need it to be.

The one I wrote is 15 pages of substance (not including index, cover page, rev page) and it works for my company.
I've seen others that are book size, but contain all the procedures in the system. Only work instructions and forms are separate documents.

...the whole of the law shall be Do as Thou Wilt
 
#3
pgtips said:
Do we really need to produce bloated Quality Manuals that regurgitate the clauses of the standard from the first person? This seems such a waste of time and resources! :mad:

Surely unless the is an exclusion a reference to the relevant clause will suffice! Thus effectively reducing the manual to a link document between the standard and the company specific detailed documents. See attached for my proposed minimalist manual.

Let me know what you think.
Where are you coming from with this line of thought? You aren't considering it as original are you?

As for your manual....where does it have something not offered up before in numerous other discussions?
 

Wes Bucey

Consultant/Advisor
Moderator
#4
Let me hasten to step in here as a "gris eminence."

First, Welcome to the Cove! I congratulate you on your preferment!:bigwave:

Second, a word of caution for newbies when jumping into an established Forum:
A good Discussion Forum (the Cove ranks among the best) has a Search function for prospective posters to use to make sure they are NOT going over old ground which may have been discussed to death. Certainly, there may be occasions when it is time to revisit a topic, but the person initiating such a thread owes it to the rest of the Discussion group to acknowledge awareness of the previous discussions together with an explanation WHY the topic should be revisited.

In lieu of such an effort on the part of ANY poster beginning a new thread, there should be no hurt feelings if frustrated Discussion Group members proceed to FLAME or lambast such a post.

Thus said, perhaps the original poster would like to do some homework and try to mend some fences.

Still don't understand the thrust of this post? PM me and I will give you a less politically correct version!
 

Cari Spears

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
Hi, pgtips - and welcome to the cove if I haven't already!:bigwave:

See this thread for a similar discussion:
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=3734

I've already posted our Quality Policy Manual around here somewhere - we are currently ISO9001:2000 registered. Here is my rough draft manual for AS9100 - it has not been audited by our registrar yet - but the only additional requirement in 4.2.2 for quality manual contents is to show the relationship between AS9100 requirements and the documented procedures referenced. I went ahead and added FAR Part 145 relationships too because that's next for us.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
P

pgtips

#8
I take all your comments on board and apologies for my lack of clarity. :bonk:

Our company has been accredited to BABT340 a British telecoms standard for modems for many years. Unfortunately though the years they insisted we produce a Quality Plan mirroring their clauses from the first person perspective. Being a pet annoyance of mine I was surprised to see many postings recommending the same for a Quality Manual. I now had a question and a proposed solution I wanted to put forward to the forum for comments. I was not trying to be original or clever but simply had a question.

As an improvement suggestion, I would ask those who have become a little frustrated with new members fumbling in the dark, looking for answers, to have patience and provide a link to a thread on ‘asking questions’ best practice. So we do not repeat the offence or simply stop posting.

Many thanks to Al Rosen for this excellent thread which I missed http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=4866&highlight=boss it answers all my questions. :D
 
W

wooddy

#10
Do we really need to produce bloated Quality Manuals that regurgitate the clauses of the standard from the first person? This seems such a waste of time and resources! :mad:

Surely unless the is an exclusion a reference to the relevant clause will suffice! Thus effectively reducing the manual to a link document between the standard and the company specific detailed documents.

:thanx: PG, You are right on target. I am charged with writing our quality manual (QM). We already have an extensive collection of policies, standard operating procedures, work practices, forms and templates. I certainly don't see any sense in copying them into the QM. I intend to "point" to any relevant existing documentation from the QM, provide the text and diagrams to tie it all together. Why create a maintenance nightmare in trying to keep the QM up to date with changing information published elsewhere?

Wooddy

Now, on to read the Boss Wants a 4 Page Manual thread!
 

Top Bottom