Re: Work Instructions vs. Process Control Plans - No Substitutions? TS16949 - 7.5.1
I would think this would depend upon the complexity of the specific task or job as to whether writtten instructions are necessary or not, but in any case a Control Plan is not meant to be an instruction on how to do a specific task or job.
Maybe one of the TS 16949 savvy folks can comment on this.
I would think this would depend upon the complexity of the specific task or job as to whether writtten instructions are necessary or not, but in any case a Control Plan is not meant to be an instruction on how to do a specific task or job.
Maybe one of the TS 16949 savvy folks can comment on this.
These instructions shall be derived from sources such as the quality plan, the control plan and the product realization process.
The language in 7.5.1.2 is clear concerning the existence of documented work instructions, but has a caveat of only for those process that impact the conformity to product requirements... This almost screams control plan to me... Therefore it would depend upon ones registrar and customer as if they are willing to accept the operator using the control plan as their instruction. Personally I would not have a problem with any operator who could show me they understood the control plan and how it applied specifically to their job tasks. Personally I think operators with this level of understanding, would indicate the organization has meet the other requirements of clause 7 related to Knowledge, Competence, Awareness and Communication.
Work instructions to me personally are nothing more than silly bits of paper strung about, flapping in the breeze. Operators of repetitive processes never read or refer to them. In lean terms they are non-value add in most cases. I would rather observe objective evidence that an organizations training program is robust, than flit about chasing valueless paper around the shop floor, or as Mr Lennon put it "as a restless wind inside a letter box"