Stuck in the middle of ISO 9001:2008 Implementation

[Dommy]

Couldn't agree more. Doing this will also help with your constant revisions to documents and also help document process which are now undocumented. Be sure to make a calendar and follow it. If you set dates, times and goals then you will be able to show top management where they can help and where you need to be.

As for updating revisions in your forms, the best answer I would have is to go electronic. Electronic is more suitable for any business that aims to constantly improve.

Just to reiterate what everyone else has said; It is hard enough to be the QMR for one system let alone many. I would focus all energy on one QMS with different divisions. I feel like you are adding more weight on your shoulders than you need to.

Good luck

 

[Dubai_capi]

Couldn't agree more. Doing this will also help with your constant revisions to documents and also help document process which are now undocumented. Be sure to make a calendar and follow it. If you set dates, times and goals then you will be able to show top management where they can help and where you need to be.

As for updating revisions in your forms, the best answer I would have is to go electronic. Electronic is more suitable for any business that aims to constantly improve.

Just to reiterate what everyone else has said; It is hard enough to be the QMR for one system let alone many. I would focus all energy on one QMS with different divisions. I feel like you are adding more weight on your shoulders than you need to.

Good luck

any 1 can help to provide a template for schedling the project more effectively..

thanks for the input

 

[SteelMaiden]

issue their business forms with the new revision numbers and issue dates

Why would you issue new revision numbers and issue dates? Your forms could all be considered "issued" the date you call your system implemented. There is no way I would change all my forms to include a revision number on them until the first time I actually revised them. A form with no revision number would be an original form as issued with the implementation of your system.

to finish their quality policy and quality objectives

Does your top management understand that this is a requirement for registration? If they do and they are not helping with this, it appears as though you have some commitment issues that need to be taken care of prior to bringing in your registrar. BTW, I see no problem with your divisions being autonomous. We operate that way, with over 30 divisions.

to finalise the date for first internal audit

Why are you waiting? Go out and audit something.

and the most important thing is to document many un-docmented processes..

Go to each area with a pen and notepad. Start asking questions, and writing down the answers. Why do you do this? How often? Who is responsible? Show me, step by step, what happens in this process. What do you do if you find nonconforming material? When you are done, you pretty much have a rough draft of your work instruction. Type it up, have the responsible (process owner) party approve it, then implement it.

so what do u advice to give it a kick.. am planning for the certification in june2011

I cannot remember how many divisions you said you are working with, but to tell you the truth, I wouldn't worry about getting them ready on the same date. I'd set up a schedule to stagger them somewhat, take what you learn from the first and apply it to the second and continue to trickle it down. Each division would be one step behind its higher priority sister. And, I'd really rethink that June date considering that you seem to have a problem with commitment issues.

 

[foiley]

any 1 can help to provide a template for schedling the project more effectively..

thanks for the input

http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=183451&postcount=2
Very simple implementation...

 

[Dubai_capi]

"Why would you issue new revision numbers and issue dates? Your forms could all be considered "issued" the date you call your system implemented. There is no way I would change all my forms to include a revision number on them until the first time I actually revised them. A form with no revision number would be an original form as issued with the implementation of your system."

thanks, i have a procedure for document control to mention a revision number and issue date on the forms. so how i can identify the forms being changed or not if i dont identify the change so the users can know that the form that they are using is the latest revision. am confused. i like your point of not puting any revision status once the system implemented but how you can identify the changes if it happen..

 

[JaneB]

I'd stop fiddling around with form revision numbers - given what you say, they should be very low down on the 'to do' list in importance.
And I don't think a lack of 'template' for managing it is really the biggest thing either - if you want one, there are plenty in the Post Attachments List.

But you haven't responded at all when people have queried the multiple systems, the multiple quality manuals and multiple objectives without any overall one in place.
What Steel Maiden said about the failure of divisions to address this IS important:

Does your top management understand that this is a requirement for registration? If they do and they are not helping with this, it appears as though you have some commitment issues that need to be taken care of prior to bringing in your registrar.

No commitment? No system - I'm sorry, that may not be what you want to hear, but you cannot do a system from the bottom up, no matter what plan you have or template you use. It just isn't possible.
If division management isn't 'making these things happen which need to happen, something has to change: them, the desire for certification, or the June date.

Her suggestion of staggering dates is a good one.

 

[JRKH]

"Why would you issue new revision numbers and issue dates? Your forms could all be considered "issued" the date you call your system implemented. There is no way I would change all my forms to include a revision number on them until the first time I actually revised them. A form with no revision number would be an original form as issued with the implementation of your system."

thanks, i have a procedure for document control to mention a revision number and issue date on the forms. so how i can identify the forms being changed or not if i dont identify the change so the users can know that the form that they are using is the latest revision. am confused. i like your point of not puting any revision status once the system implemented but how you can identify the changes if it happen..

While I agree with this in principle - one caveat. Make sure that you have a "secure copy" of all our documents at the time of implemetion of the system.
A document with no rev date is not proof that this is the same document used, unchanged, since the inception of the system. Having a "secure" copy allows you to show an auditor that the document on the floor matches the document in the "master folder" and is unchanged.

Peace
James

 

[Dubai_capi]

I'd stop fiddling around with form revision numbers - given what you say, they should be very low down on the 'to do' list in importance.
And I don't think a lack of 'template' for managing it is really the biggest thing either - if you want one, there are plenty in the Post Attachments List.

But you haven't responded at all when people have queried the multiple systems, the multiple quality manuals and multiple objectives without any overall one in place.
What Steel Maiden said about the failure of divisions to address this IS important:

No commitment? No system - I'm sorry, that may not be what you want to hear, but you cannot do a system from the bottom up, no matter what plan you have or template you use. It just isn't possible.
If division management isn't 'making these things happen which need to happen, something has to change: them, the desire for certification, or the June date.

Her suggestion of staggering dates is a good one.

well, the idea behind approaching iso per division separately is to make it easier for them and for me.. am going to do it for the timebeing separately but once i implement it for every division am going to make it one system.. the scope of the system is limited to few divisions which are the core to our organisation.. and your feedback is logical about the one system and not making it multiple systems.. the problem is that i already communicated to them about the multiple quality manuals and i dont know how to communicate again the concept of one quality manual..

also we have a division with external customers that are different from other divisions' customers entirely and the division provide them with entirely different services and if i include it in the same manual it will be confusing..

 

[Dubai_capi]

Yes, I would like to thank everyone who participated in this thread and appreciate your feedback..

 

[vk20000]

Hi,

I am also QMS,EMS MR for my organization.

I have not understood your problem. Please brief it again. I will definately help you in all respect.

Vijay