posted 01 August 1998 09:50 AM               

You might want to check out A Nonconformance Database Example

For company audits, one of the databases I use is: An Audit Findings Report

posted 01 August 1998 01:35 PM               

"...butthen I suppose if it works why fix it...".

posted 05 August 1998 07:02 AM               

And barb - what were (are) you going to send?

By the way - I have asked my ISP to supply me with backup files from last Friday which should have the earlier posts. I'll put them up when (hopefully not IF) my ISP sends me the files.

posted 11 August 1998 09:14 AM               

Barb's form is in the pdf_files directory in pdf and the format barb sent it in - RTF (rich text format).

Barb's Internal Audit Form - The pdf Version

The file name is QF317-2.pdf (the rtf is QF317-2.rtf).

posted 12 March 2000 10:35 AM               

When i look at the documents on offer i can appreciate that they are ISO compliant to 'n'th degree, but i would be scared of using them with my customers. I can just imagine their eyes glazing over and sinking back in their chairs with boredom. I go so far as never to mention the word audit, i call them 'improvement reviews' and usue the standard 3 column meeting sheet that most companies have, that lists;
A. What has to be done (Areas for Improvement).
B. Who has to do it
C. When it should be done.

I think it is not unreasonable to ask a busy engineering group to sit down, review how they are going about their job, hopefully against their procedure, and look for improvements. This smacks of 'positive' continuous improvement.

The alternative is to have an AUDIT (This word already conjures up negative images), and inform them that they have a DEVIATION against ELEMENT 4.5, DOCUMENTATION CONTROL which will need a CORRECTIVE ACTION FORM to be filled out which will be entered into the CORRECTIVE ACTION DATABASE etc etc

Filling out a form that looks like something a Tax office rejected because it was too complicated is not going to help you at all.

Regards

posted 12 March 2000 06:15 PM               

Forms can provide a service, they can be memory joggers to the busy individual, who wants to remain compliant, and not take days of writing to get there...ergo...fill in the blank. Forms are typically created out of the need to write something down (repetitive?),,,and are typically meant to serve the creator...not the rest of the world. Any form posted in the forum isn't meant to be for someone else to use as is..its an idea that someone had, that may or may not be adaptable for use by someone else...but works well for the creator's system. Anyone who thinks they can grab someone's thoughts on a scenario and make them autofit into another has some painful surprises coming. These are examples to be drawn from. Forms typically are used by analytical minds, they are a tool to an end. Other types of minds find them boring and useless...these people need to have their own tools that work for them....there are many out there.

Which forms do you find so offensive, and why? lets see if we can create some new tools for the tool box? (or is it outside of the tool box?)We all can benefit from that

posted 13 March 2000 08:42 AM               

Yes, i guess you are right, i was a little negative. I do use various things from this forum, including forms information and advise, it's just sometimes i am amazed that ISO ever gets accepted and implemented when it is approached in such a dry bureacratic manner.

I guess the approach should always suit the culture and nature of the company. (Otherwise someone would start selling standard manuals and putting consultants out of work).

I stand by my original comments that Audits should be presented in a different light, and concentrated on process or interdepartmental improvements, as opposed to simply relating everything to the standard, this is the best way i can think of, of guaranteeing input and involvement from the employees.

If you think in this light then it makes sense to keep any associated documentation (Deviation Reports etc)as simple as possible to avoid over-bureacratising and devaluing the whole process.

I guess in future i will use my own approach if i feel that the company is looking for genuine process improvement,(or has an ISO acceptance problem) but if for any reason my client wants a visibly watertight ISO system, (To obtain new business from a customer for example Ill eat some humble pie and come and beg for a look at your documentation

Regards

posted 13 March 2000 12:37 PM               

WHEN IN FACT IT DAMN WELL SHOULD BE IF YOU DO IT RIGHT !!!!!