Tips on updating our Quality Systems Manual from ISO 9001:1994 to ISO 9001:2000

[Bob_M]

Can anyone provide tips on helping me get our manual updated?
----------------
Our current manual (not written by me) is basically a rewording of the 1994 standard with a small amount of company specific info. It includes, Procedure Appendix, Definitions (?), Organization Chart, Policy, Objectives, Scope, etc.

To be honest NOBODY reads this document, including me the current Quality Manager.

I need to get our manual done quickly, but I want it to be a usable document if possible.
------------------
Our Pre-Assessment to update is July 16 and I have alot of work to do (or at least I think I do). {The stress and worry is building quickly}

We recently reviewed and updated most of our documentation including the 6 Required procedures. Unfortunately we were not able to create many flowcharts this time around.
----------------
I have a few quality manual samples and I know only WE know our system best, but general tips are welcome.

I've seen basic rewording of standard with reference to Company specific procedures.
I've seen another one with all the procedures included in the manual.
----------------
Any general or specific tips and examples are welcomed.
----------------
OH some company details:
Currently less than 30 employees,
6 office people including President/Owner and myself.
Metal Stamping (Truck industry) and Spot Welding (AC Kits mainly).
One quality person (me) whose resposible for quality system and ISO upgrade. I get to do most of the work, but input is provided as needed.
---------------
I'll probably post requesting specific help later, but I'm desperate for general guidance for now.

Thanks in advance
Bob_M

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Hi Bob,

Absolutley... My no.1 hint concerning updating a 1994 std manual is: Don't. Write a new one from scratch instead, and make it mercifully brief. Look at what 4.2.2 requires... It's not a lot, so this shouldn't be a problem.

Our manual contains:

• A brief description of the company
• A brief description of our products (with pointers to our product programme)
• Quality, environmental and safety policys
• A brief description of the organisation and ownership
• A brief description of our management system (with pointers to the written procedures)
• An overall process interaction graph
• A list of certifications and approvals (which will soon be changed to a pointer to the internet

We used nine pages (with plenty of space left) to do this.

/Claes

 

[Bob_M]

Claes,
Perhaps UPDATING was not the best term to use.
You are correct, I in fact more or less need to start from scratch.
(Major requirement changes and problems with the original electronic file).

Your manual sounds simple and straight to the point.
---------------
We (mainly I) have a lot of work to ensure that our system is complete and interacts sufficiently for our needs. (I had expected to have a few extra weeks to do that, but things happen).

I probably will email/contact our auditor and ask what requirement/guidelines our registrar requires/recommends. Its a good start I think.

I also need to find time to talk with the boss (President) and discuss his expectation and requirments for the rest of our updating process.

Oh well, I guess this is what I get the little dollars for.

 

[Jimmy Olson]

I know a lot of people on here are against having a manual that follows the same format as the standard, but personally I don't see a problem with that. As you said, nobody really reads it anyway

If you are going to start from scratch the best thing to do might be to sit down with the standard and explain how you meet each section in the manual. It's pretty simplistic and might not be the best reading material, but it will be effective.

If you want to make something that will be more readable (and maybe even enjoyable) you could try writing it as a story and go through the entire process flow. Just depends on how creative you feel like getting.

Just remember to relax and try not to worry too much. I'm sure anyone here who has gone through it will tell you that they worried about everything and thought things were way worse than they actually were.

 

[Bob_M]

Originally posted by Richard Olson
I know a lot of people on here are against having a manual that follows the same format as the standard, but personally I don't see a problem with that. As you said, nobody really reads it anyway

If you are going to start from scratch the best thing to do might be to sit down with the standard and explain how you meet each section in the manual. It's pretty simplistic and might not be the best reading material, but it will be effective.

If you want to make something that will be more readable (and maybe even enjoyable) you could try writing it as a story and go through the entire process flow. Just depends on how creative you feel like getting.

Just remember to relax and try not to worry too much. I'm sure anyone here who has gone through it will tell you that they worried about everything and thought things were way worse than they actually were.

Some how I just knew Richard would reply.
I've seen your manual which follows the standard, and it follows the standard pretty well with plenty of reference to internal procedures.

I may also go that route just to make sure we cover all areas of the standard. We don't necessarily have a procedure or mention of every item, but that doesn't me we don't do it. So in some cases, the manual may be the only place something we do will be documented...

I always worry too much, especially when I can see the deadline is very close.

Hopefully it will work out just like our last two assessment audits were not as bad as expected.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Originally posted by Bob_M
---X---I may also go that route just to make sure we cover all areas of the standard. We don't necessarily have a procedure or mention of every item, but that doesn't me we don't do it. So in some cases, the manual may be the only place something we do will be documented...

I always worry too much, especially when I can see the deadline is very close. ---X---

Yep,we can go in two directions here (or pick something in between for that matter):

One extreme would be to place the entire system in the manual.

The other one would be to do what we did: We wrote the manual last, when the entire system was already in place, and it felt quite natural to put the bare minimum content in it and just refer to the the relevant parts of the QMS.

As for the worrying... I suppose we all do a bit of that, but I have a personal guideline: I do what I can do as well as possible, but things I cannot do anything about... I do my very best to disregard. It sounds easy and it is. It has helped me through a lot.

So: Good luck and don't worry... Be happy..

/Claes

 

[Trolle]

Hi all,
I’m busy doing with the very same task as Bob_M and my guess is that right now there are quite a few of us all over the world doing just the same. Last date for ISO transition; 94 à 2000 closing fast!

Is there anyone out there among you ”old salts” who has any ideas or opinions concerning the value of ”procedure portal statements” such as statements of purpose, general introduction/info and such similar stuff? Are they needed? Can there be too much or is there any middle road?

Cheers

 

[howste]

Is there anyone out there among you ”old salts” who has any ideas or opinions concerning the value of ”procedure portal statements” such as statements of purpose, general introduction/info and such similar stuff? Are they needed? Can there be too much or is there any middle road?

I pretty much look at who is going to be reading the document. For a quality manual, there will be auditors (internal & external), customers, and management (maybe? ). I think about what information those users will need, and don't put anything more than that.

 

[Raptorwild]

Hello Bob,

For future reference, get ISO 10013 Guidlines for developing quality manuals. BIG HELP!

Good luck
Paula