What about more forums so we can be more specific?



Hi Marc:
I am happy to say hello to you and the rest of the folks.Has been great to discover (could be by mistake)recently your site and having the opportunity to learn a lot and try to give some help (sometimes not expressing myself properly in English, due I am Mexican). Thanks Marc for giving us your experience in this "free"($$) way.And of course also to all the colleagues that have spent a lot of their time to give us help.
At the end, by participating in this kind of Forums all of us will be better prepared to build a better world (I am quite Don Quijote)

On the other hand I have only one question:

Have you planned to include into the Forums topics like Kaizen, 5 S's, Hoshin and other improvement tools ?

Take care


Note: This is a reply of submitted March 17, topic on Sugestions. It has been posted here because of its relationship with Continuous Improvement an due to lack of response in the other Forum. Thank you.
Elsmar Forum Sponsor


Fully vaccinated are you?
Sorry - I don't always catch every message.

I really have not thought much about specific forums for each quality tool. I can easily do that if you want to come up with a proposed list.

My biggest problem is keeping up with everything...

Kevin Mader

One of THE Original Covers!

I saw your post of the 17th, but was waiting for a response from Marc. Either way, any topic you want to discuss, you could fit it into a couple related forums, which would effectively attract a few of us.

So now that you have been discovered, what would you like to discuss first?



Andy Bassett

Hello Marc
What do you think about this;

Create a section for the new ISO 9000:2000 Standard.
For each individual section ie 8.5, 8.5.1 create a thread and let people ask their questions in each section.
You should end up with something like a very useful reference book with information/clarification for each section of the standard.


Andy B


Fully vaccinated are you?
Well, Andy, I understand your point but - then you end up with a number of threads on each section - which would be fine if the questions about each section were similar. But a lot ends up, to some degree, company specific. In addition you could end up with some very long threads.

I will leave the option to you folks - if you want to start a thread for each section, you are welcome to do so.

In so far as starting a number of new forums - well, suggest a short list and I'll add them. Adding forums is no problem.

In so far as a new forum dedicated to ISO9000:2000 - well, I guess I could. I have so far seen this as an evolution that didn't warrant a separate forum. Many if not most of the requirements are, for all intents and purposes, similar if not the same. I'll look at making some changes tonight.

Kevin Mader

One of THE Original Covers!

Andy's suggestion is a pretty good one. But to your point, many forums may make your maintenance activity a bit cumbersome. I think it is a good idea to get more opinions on this suggestion.

I think that most of the advantages of having a separate forum might be offered by performing a search. However, the search engine may be viewed as an additional, seldom used step.




Fully vaccinated are you?
I wouldn't even think of a forum for each section if the standard but I'll define an ISO9001:2000 forum.

As far as forums for each quality tool or specialty, I'm open to suggestions. If you want me to add a forum you have to agree to monitor that forum.

My experience has been, however, that many 'specialty' forums don't 'succeed'. An example is the AS9001 forum and the VDA forum. I have done this with a few of my 'pet' interests (such as TPM). What we wind up with if I make a forum for every tool, however, is tons of forums to monitor (it's hard enough to watch every forum as it is), increased maintenance for me (the software is pretty lame, actually, but not unexpected for a script based system. Each forum has to be individually maintained - you can't do much globally. I don't want to end up with 100 forums. I personally feel there are too many now.

I pretty much envision stuff like Kaizen and 5 S to be discussed, if you will, in the general quality topics forum.

Roger Eastin

Yeah, Marc, I think you could get rid of quite a few of the forums, like VDA6. In fact, you could probably get rid of at least a third of them, maybe even half! Hey, it's springtime, so it's time to prune!!


Kevin: Thanks for your post
Marc: Thanks for your response. I knew that only excess of work could brake your traditional quick response.

Hello everyone. When I posted the Kaizen-5"S" topic i wasn´t thinking of opening a "special" Forum but discuss those topics in some place.I agree with Marc to talk about it in the general topics. We cannot overcrowd the forums. I think that a good idea could be put all "starting" or new topics in the general, and in such a case that discussions are rich enough or even over concurred, in that time the forum coordinator will have sufficient evidence of the necessity of place that topic in a private or special Forum.

As always, is a pleasure to talk to you guys

P.S. Kevin: You asked me to start with questions or discussions on Kaizen,5S. If you dont mind let us move ( If that is a democratic decision) to general quality topics. OK Marc ?

John C

Andy, Marc,
I agree an ISO 9000:2000 would be of great interest and could grow to be of considerable value. I need to do some work on it and I suppose we all do - what better way than together? Agreeing with Marc: I don't think it should be called ISO 9000:2000 though. It's the issues that forces our approach to change that really concern us. Queries relevant to '94 and '00 versions should not be part of it.
I don't see that we should change the Cove system. It's the individual, 'live' issue that grabs the attention and makes us devote a lot of effort to issues. So, rather than making a framework and then trying to patch it in, let's start with someone's current big concern. I think it is a new heading within ISO Topics. There's already some - different - 2000 topics there. (Note; I saw a forum where they did work through the standard section by section and it turned out to be very boring and did nothing for me) If the first contribution goes well then it will expand. It needs to be able to grab the attention so we should try to ensure that the first topics are current and critical.
rgds, John C
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Marc Forums - "Watching" One or More Forums for New Threads and New Posts Elsmar Xenforo Forum Software Instructions and Help 1
Pancho Forums, blogs and wikis may forge a more inclusive Government Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
Sidney Vianna IATF 16949 News IATF News - Top 10 IATF 16949 nonconformities and more..... IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
E The FDA regulations (21 CFR 312.3): Is it allowable that IND sponsor involves more than one individual or organization? Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 0
J Outsourced Purchasing for Contract Manufacturing vs more typical/simple Supplier Management ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
N More than one UK RP? UK Medical Device Regulations 3
O How to give a score/yield more correctly to my suppliers Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 12
Marc GM says no more tailpipe emissions by 2035, carbon neutrality by 2040 World News 47
O Is hiring more difficult right now? Career and Occupation Discussions 13
K FDA - Can we have more than 1 Initial Importer Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
K Gage R&R with more than 3 appraisers Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
K More than one importer for the same device EU Medical Device Regulations 3
S Two or more predicates suitable? 510K submission US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
E Received a Major finding during IATF Surveillance audit for loss of BIQS Level 3 (more than 6 SPPS in 6 months)...how should we address SYSTEMIC CA? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
L Which one is more important for FMEA CC or SC, FMEA and Control Plans 6
M UDI-PI on a package that contains more devices EU Medical Device Regulations 3
M Informational Update – MDR and IVDR implementing measures rolling plan – 2 more NBs designated under the new regulations Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
B More than one Risk Report per Medical Device ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
Ed Panek Can a single supplier fit two or more categories for risk? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
Sidney Vianna More allegations of unethical behavior in the Aerospace Sector AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
N Technical File Reviewer has requested more testing to ISO 10993 Other Medical Device Related Standards 10
M Informational FDA Panel: Too early to pull textured breast implants over cancer risk, need more data Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M BSI – Want to know more about the Notified Body? Registrars and Notified Bodies 0
Marc Renewables, led by wind, provided more power than coal in Germany in 2018 Sustainability, Green Initiatives and Ecology 8
A MSA When an Instrument Measures More than One Parameter Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
M Vernier Calibrations & more General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
bobdoering Contingency Plans Likely to be Scrutinized More Now IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
Q How can you justify using a more accurate Pin Gage class? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 16
JoshuaFroud Addressing wet ink signatures when more than one site is involved 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 8
G More on IATF - Temporary Change of Process Controls IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
Sidney Vianna IAF Ruling - No more ISO 9001:2008 nor ISO 14001:2004 audits after 2018-03-15 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
P Tool for Measuring - Do I have to do more than one Gage R&R for the PPAP? Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
T ISO 14001:2015 cover more than 1 company or business unit? ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 13
L How to get more Auditing Experience Career and Occupation Discussions 11
C Squeeze in one more - Rate of failure Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 6
M Is it possible to have more than one authorized representative in Saudi Arabia? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 6
somashekar People are more than just ?resources? Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2
N More Central Limit Theorem Questions Six Sigma 4
M More than canned audit check-sheets? Auditing the Engineering Department Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 5
Marc Explore - Movies, audios and more! An Online Library Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 2
B Share ideas to make Management Review more interesting Management Review Meetings and related Processes 4
Wes Bucey More Phishing Emails! Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 7
O Rebuilding Quality Manual to be more relevant to our business Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 7
Stijloor Toyota recalls more than 6 million vehicles. World News 5
cscalise Separate Forms or Procedure Attachments - What's more common? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
T Promotion with Less Pay and more hours Career and Occupation Discussions 37
S FDA CDRH Premarket Review Submission Cover Sheet - adding more products 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
T More than One Original Test Report - Original Print General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
Hershal More about Teddy bears Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
B Calculating Combined DPMO and Sigma Level for Two or More Different Work Areas Six Sigma 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom