Understanding ?to ensure the changes are identified?? Revision Status of documents

[Valeri]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

The "reason for change" table is used however so that the users of a revised document can quickly ascertain what has been modified.

I admit to not being a fan of strike trhough's or font size/colour change. I find it lessens the "readability" of a document. But if works for a company, I won't knock it.

Actually, this has worked for 3 companies in the past 15 years.

It is somewhat a pain to change font size/color. However, the readers love it as they can quickly scan what is changed without the hassle of going to the bottom of the document then scrolling back through it to review the changes (you know how QSI works or in some cases doesn't )

 

[ddunn]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

I agree - the changes do not have to be with the document. However, it is much easier to control one document than many in various places/databases.

I use a database to allow a better search capability of the changes. In root cause analysis I may not know the specific document that changed just date range or subject of the change. In a database I can search by date, subject, key word,.....

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of document

Our procedures only show the latest changes. For example, if the current revision of a procedure is R03, the R03 procedure only shows what was changed when the R02 procedure was updated to R03, doesn’t show what was changed when the R01 procedure was updated to R02.

---

How did you do it?

Exactly as you describe it: Only the latest changes in the current document. If anyone wants info about previous revisions, those documents are kept by yours truly. Such questions are few and far between, but I do get them.

/Claes

 

[Al Rosen]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of document

Exactly as you describe it: Only the latest changes in the current document. If anyone wants info about previous revisions, those documents are kept by yours truly. Such questions are few and far between, but I do get them.

/Claes

That's good, but I understood the OP to not have maintained a complete history somewhere.

 

[db]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

This is a "pet peeve" with me. No where is a "change history" required. I make a change in my 3-day Internal Auditor class. The presentation has over 380 pages. I change 7 different pages. The way the changes are identified to the other trainers is I send out an email outlining the changes. If it also impacts the admin staff, I change the "Instructions to Admin" and send them an email outlining the changes. That is it! If we feel there is some reason to keep the old version, we will archive it. We do this in instances where there is a major change, but for minor adjustments, the email is the only way identify what changed.

 

[ddunn]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

This is a "pet peeve" with me. No where is a "change history" required. I make a change in my 3-day Internal Auditor class. The presentation has over 380 pages. I change 7 different pages. The way the changes are identified to the other trainers is I send out an email outlining the changes. If it also impacts the admin staff, I change the "Instructions to Admin" and send them an email outlining the changes. That is it! If we feel there is some reason to keep the old version, we will archive it. We do this in instances where there is a major change, but for minor adjustments, the email is the only way identify what changed.

Please define minor and major changes. Can you guarantee that no minor change will ever cause major problems? Why would not want to keep a record of every change? You don’t have to keep old documents only a record of what change, when and why. To he** with ISO this just makes good business sense.

Pardon me if I get a bit hot about this. I’ve seen too many companies get burned real bad because change records are not always kept.

 

[db]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

Please define minor and major changes. Can you guarantee that no minor change will ever cause major problems?

For the purposes of this discussion, I don't think that is relevant. The same question applies regardless of whether you keep a “change history” or not. When you make a change, the question comes into play. But I can’t see why it is important in whether you keep an old version of a document. We keep the old copies in case there is a question down the road, as to the content of the class.

Why would not want to keep a record of every change? You don’t have to keep old documents only a record of what change, when and why. To he** with ISO this just makes good business sense.

Why burden yourselves with extra paperwork? In some cases (customer drawing, etc.) I agree, it does make great sense. But most of the changes I see are minor things. We changed the wording to make it less ambiguous.
Pardon me if I get a bit hot about this. I’ve seen too many companies get burned real bad because change records are not always kept. [/QUOTE]
Likewise, I’ve seen companies make the change system so complex, folks end up making informal changes, or the change process takes so long and complicated that once a “Document Change Request” gets initiated, it takes weeks or months to get a change in place.
Don’t get me wrong. There are times when previous versions, or even some documentation as to what was changed is necessary. However, in my experience, I see this as one place where companies build monsters they can’t feed.
BTW, I also think that in some circumstances, identifying the changes through training would be sufficient.

 

[silly girl]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

Why should the complete history of revisions be preserved? Would preserving the latest two revisions do?
<snip>
My question is:
When the current procedure revision is R03, who would need to know what the change was when R00 was updated to R01?

This may depend on your product, but if product is returned you may want to be able to look at a document with the same revision. If there are any court cases, you would want to demonstrate the documents that controlled the process at that point in time. When improving processes, it might be worthwhile to look at the history of the process in terms of controlling documents, quality data, etc.

Just a few ideas.

Silly Girl

 

[Wes Bucey]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

Yes! You get it, Silly Girl! Thanks for such a succinct reason.

 

[vanputten]

Re: Understanding “to ensure the changes are identified”? Revision Status of documents

Hello Darkafar:

I think your auditor's write up is a great example of why many see little value in conformtiy assessment to ISO 9001.

I suppose some one could make the case that they way 4.2.3 c) is written, that you have to identify all changes to the document since its inception. 4.2.3 c) states changes (plural). But that could also mean all of the changes that happened in the last revision.

I would want to know the business benefit of identifying ALL changes of that document since its inception.

Unless the auditor can make a good business case that it is important, I say it is a waste of time and resources to debate whether all changes or only the most recent changes need to be identified.

How many documents do we receive (in our public lives) that include all of the changes to the document? When we buy a service or tangible product, do we get documents that identify all of the changes since inception? As of right now, I can think of a single example.

Regards,

Dirk