Quality Policy Measureables
From: ISO 9000 Standards Discussion
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 15:32:44 -0600
Subject: Re: "Measurable" Quality Policy and Objectives /Darracott/Scalies
From: "Charley Scalies"
> From: JDARRACOTT
>
> a) Will an organisation which decides that the time,
> effort and costs associated with the insistance on
> "measurable" quality policy and objectives be unable to
> obtain third party certification?
Yes.
> b) Will such an organisation be able to specify
> ""measurable" quality policy and objectives"
> which are of a nominal nature to keep down time,
> effort and costs so that unproductive overhead costs
> are minimised?
If by "nominal" you mean insignificant and not related to and in support of the qualty policy, the answer is No.
Polishing all the mirrors and then adding smoke, won't work, nor should it. If a firm does not already have meaningful measurements to tell it whether or not it is meeting its objectives - both financial and quality - they are in far more trouble than any ISO standard could ever cure.
Charley Scalies
***********
From: ISO 9000 Standards Discussion
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 15:33:05 -0600
Subject: Re: "Measurable" Quality Policy and Objectives /Darracott/Van Putten
From: Dirk_Van_Putten
a) The quality policy does not have to be measurable. The quality policy must provide a framework for establishing and reviewing quality objectives. The quality objectives must be relevant to the function and level of the company to which it applies. The quality objectives must be measurable. Will the absence of measurable quality objectives mean the company is unable to obtain third party certification? It might but at a minimum it would mean a nonconformance issued by a registrar. A more interesting issue is how a company can decide that it requires too many resources (time, money, manpower) to have goals and to measure progress towards those goals. How does the company know how there are doing?
b) If goals of nominal nature are relevant to the function and level to which it applies, are measurable, and are consistent with the quality policy, then there is no conflict with FDIS ISO 9001:2000.
I don't think there is a problem with keeping things simple.
Dirk van Putten
**********
From: ISO 9000 Standards Discussion
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 15:33:17 -0600
Subject: Re: "Measurable" Quality Policy and Objectives /Darracott/Blair
From: GrantBlair
> b) Will such an organisation be able to specify
> ""measurable" quality policy and objectives"
> which are of a nominal nature to keep down time,
> effort and costs so that unproductive overhead costs
> are minimised?
Ask your management if THEY would work for a company with this quality policy. Is there anything about the policy that would attract the type of employees whom they would want? In today's market, passing the "Mirror fog test" is no longer sufficient to hire new employees. Not exactly sure what you are saying in part a)., but my impression is you are suggesting management is not willing to spend the time and effort to support the quality policy and measure quality objectives. If this is what you mean, then you will NOT be able to obtain 3rd Party registration.
Grant Blair
***********
From: ISO 9000 Standards Discussion
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 15:33:25 -0600
Subject: Re: "Measurable" Quality Policy and Objectives /Darracott/Paten
From: Mike Paten
I think the new standards are intended to focus on "data driven decision making" regarding process improvement. All of your monitoring and measuring processes - as well as the data analysis and improvement processes - should be driven by objectives stated in terms of "planned results". Without them your sunk. However, I would suggest the following approach:
First, create a minimum number of "macro" quality objectives for key QMS processes (identified as a requirement of clause 4.1) - merely state what you expect/plan to achieve from each .
Secondly, create a minimum number of "macro" quality objectives for key product realization processes (identified as a requirement of 7.1) --again, merely state what you expect/plan to achieve from each.
Then - using results of data analysis - compare actual results to planned results and decide if improvement in QMS processes and product realization processes are needed.
All process objectives should be focused on achieving the overall objective: enhancing customer satisfaction by meeting customer requirements.
P.S. I used the words "macro" and "key" in the above because I think you have got to start at the top - and work your way down as your system matures - don't try to do it all at once - just be able to show the breadth of monitoring, measurement and analysis required by the new standards - you have the rest of your corporate lives to work on the depth.
Mike Paten