C
Craig H.
FWIW, my ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 goes up to xii, with page iv blank, and pages vi and viii having nothing but "This page is intentionally left blank" written on them. Maybe the other versions omit these two pages???
The Process Approach: Is a process more than a procedure with a flowchart?
- Thread starter Paul Simpson
- Start date
J
Jimmy Olson
I have the ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 version also, but its introduction only goeas to page vii and doesn't have any blank pages. This is too confusing. I need to go back to the bar 
C
Craig H.
OK, how about this - Mine came from ASQ. Maybe that is the difference. Is your Contents on page v?
Now we're arguing page numbers, and its only Monday. By Friday, this forum should get REALLY interesting!!
Now we're arguing page numbers, and its only Monday. By Friday, this forum should get REALLY interesting!!
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Jimmy Olson
My copy from ASQ has the table of contents on page iii,
I guess even though you get it from the same place there's still variations. I thought this was supposed to be a standard.
I can't even think of where this will be by Friday.
I guess even though you get it from the same place there's still variations. I thought this was supposed to be a standard.
I can't even think of where this will be by Friday.
Processes
Also see:
Process Approach - What Is It?
Interaction Between Processes
Process Mapping
Process Interaction Chart
Process Approach - Take 2
Difficulties with the Process Approach
Feel free to 'rejuvinate' any of these past threads by posting replies with respect to them in them.
Also see:
Process Approach - What Is It?
Interaction Between Processes
Process Mapping
Process Interaction Chart
Process Approach - Take 2
Difficulties with the Process Approach
Feel free to 'rejuvinate' any of these past threads by posting replies with respect to them in them.
D
DaveK
Process Mapping
During pre-assessment, our registrar specified that we must include the "management processes," i.e., human resources, infrastructure, quality policy, planning, internal audits, data analysis, etc. within the process map, indicating how those management processes interact with our primary processes. Also, the registrar stated that we must provide a description of how we control those management processes, i.e, monitor, measure, analyze. This could be included on a separate, linked process map. Is this interpretation consistent with other registrars and certified companies?
During pre-assessment, our registrar specified that we must include the "management processes," i.e., human resources, infrastructure, quality policy, planning, internal audits, data analysis, etc. within the process map, indicating how those management processes interact with our primary processes. Also, the registrar stated that we must provide a description of how we control those management processes, i.e, monitor, measure, analyze. This could be included on a separate, linked process map. Is this interpretation consistent with other registrars and certified companies?
Paul Simpson
Trusted Information Resource
I've been away working and holidaying over the Christmas break and have just come back to the Cove to see how the thread is going.
The thread (so far) sums up the whole problem for me. We as Cove members cannot agree on what a process is. How can we expect the poor old clients / bosses / assessors to do so?
I started with the proviso that a process begins and ends with a customer (I know they all don't but unless you have a starting point you can't make a start).
We have had a lot of (useful) discussion about what the standard says and what registrars say .... but do we know?
Similarly are process measures, quality objectives easily identified, are they the same as KPIs and business objectives?
What are people doing out there?
Here, in no particular order is my list of the top 4 things to do.
If an operation doesn't begin and end with a customer it is not a process, it may be part of a bigger process or it should be got rid of.
I'm telling clients to get rid of documents unless there is a justified demand for them (and not from the auditors).
Objectives start with the MD and get cascaded down until the objectives / measures become pointless.
Software systems replace procedures but require data controls to be in place.
Let me know if you disagree with any (or all) of the above.
The thread (so far) sums up the whole problem for me. We as Cove members cannot agree on what a process is. How can we expect the poor old clients / bosses / assessors to do so?
I started with the proviso that a process begins and ends with a customer (I know they all don't but unless you have a starting point you can't make a start).
We have had a lot of (useful) discussion about what the standard says and what registrars say .... but do we know?
Similarly are process measures, quality objectives easily identified, are they the same as KPIs and business objectives?
What are people doing out there?
Here, in no particular order is my list of the top 4 things to do.
If an operation doesn't begin and end with a customer it is not a process, it may be part of a bigger process or it should be got rid of.
I'm telling clients to get rid of documents unless there is a justified demand for them (and not from the auditors).
Objectives start with the MD and get cascaded down until the objectives / measures become pointless.
Software systems replace procedures but require data controls to be in place.
Let me know if you disagree with any (or all) of the above.
N
NYHawkeye - 2005
Hi Paul -
Based on my experiences so far with 9001-2000 your list looks pretty good to me.
I don't, however, quite understand your thinking on processes needing to begin and end with a customer??
I would take a close look at paragraph 0.2 in 9001-2000. In particular the 3rd paragraph reads -
"The application of a system of processes within an organization, together with the identification and interactions of these processes, and their management, can be referred to as the 'process approach'."
I wish that instead of calling it the 'process approach' they would use the term the 'system approach'. I believe that defining the system and the objectives of the overall system should be the #1 priority. In general, I would say that the system should begin and end with the customer - not necessarily true for each process though.
Once the system is defined and the objectives of the system are established, understanding how to identify the processes is easier. The key thing I try to look at is the impact of the individual process on the overall system objectives. If the process has little or no impact on the system then it can either be ignored in the QMS or simply rolled into a higher level process. Improving a key process should result in a clear improvement in the overall system.
The hardest thing to remember (and convince other people of!) is that processes rarely, if ever, correspond directly to functions or departments (which are both political divisions).
I like your list - I think if more time is spent thinking about the total system versus the individual processes then some other issues might become more clear.