What method do you all use to provide paid for standards for multiple employees?

[SunGuy]

I'm asking this in the AS9100 forum since my company is in that industry.

We have standards that are individually purchased but in some cases shared with other employees. I wanted to get a subscription to maintain current standards and provide access to multiple employees so I reached out to one of the bigger providers and got a quote that we were happy with. When we were about ready to pull the trigger we got notified that the quote was incorrect and the price doubled (went from just over 20k to over 50k). I've done a search and found old threads here that said their companies were paying 10-15k a year, so I was wondering if there are more economical options out there.

I know the price varies depending on how many sites you have and what standards you want, but I was hoping to hear from you all how your organizations manage paid for standards to get some ideas on how we can have legitimate standards available for employees.

 

[Randy]

I was wondering if there are more economical options out there.

Seriously? You mean less expensive? I'm not even going down that trail, especially in a public forum, but I've experienced literally hundreds of organizations that have easily worked past that subject.

My question is why do so many people need a copy of something that most could care less about and even more might not even open?

 

[Kronos147]

My question is why do so many people need a copy of something that most could care less about and even more might not even open?

PRi is privatizing military specs in some 'creative' ways. Two sections of many of the specifications they publish are "acquisition requirements" and "inspection requirements".

Acquisition requirements state things like 'must reference current revision of specification' and may include a litany of specifics, such as;
Part number
Program number
Mother of the lead engineer's maiden name....

Then, if the purchase order doesn't include these things, it is nonconforming.

It shows to go then that having the specification is required to determine these requirements.

AMS specification inspection requirements may state something along the lines of "check that there is a pink ribbon on the box used for shipping from the supplier". If you don't have the spec to read that, then how would you implement that in the process?

Some astute auditor or customer may then ask to see the inspection instructions (work order or work instruction) where it shows you plan to meet the requirement for checking for the pink ribbon.

 

[Randy]

PRi is privatizing military specs in some 'creative' ways. Two sections of many of the specifications they publish are "acquisition requirements" and "inspection requirements".

Acquisition requirements state things like 'must reference current revision of specification' and may include a litany of specifics, such as;
Part number
Program number
Mother of the lead engineer's maiden name....

Then, if the purchase order doesn't include these things, it is nonconforming.

It shows to go then that having the specification is required to determine these requirements.

AMS specification inspection requirements may state something along the lines of "check that there is a pink ribbon on the box used for shipping from the supplier". If you don't have the spec to read that, then how would you implement that in the process?

Some astute auditor or customer may then ask to see the inspection instructions (work order or work instruction) where it shows you plan to meet the requirement for checking for the pink ribbon.

My statement holds, people only need that which is specific to them, the rest is meaningless. That's where a "guidance" document by the org itself can come in. If you're not involved in something like management review you don't need to know what and how.