|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums 
|
|
|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums
|
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
|
 The New Elsmar Cove Forums
 ISO 9001/4:2000
 ISO9000:2000
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: ISO9000:2000 |
|
Daniel P. Kain unregistered |
posted 03 November 2000 07:15 PM
 
I am currently a Quality Engineer for a company that is seeking ISO9000 registration. The Quality Manual was in the development stage when I began in this position in August. I am now picking up the pieces and re-motivating the company to commit to ISO registration, the dilemma is that with ISO9000:2000 being issued soon, should I format the QM and all documents to the 1994 or the 2000 standard before I get too far along into the process? IP: Logged |
|
Al Dyer Forum Wizard Posts: 622 |
posted 05 November 2000 03:13 PM
 
The proverbial rock and a hardplace! The majority of the people I talk to have gone the way of using the DISISO-9000-2000 version for their format. The thought process being that documents will need to be generated for either system and in the worst case it should be a long session of re-numbering, cutting and pasting to have the most current system in place. Ideally the content will not drastically change, only the visual format. Looking forward to additional input. ASD... ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
Dave Davis Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 7 |
posted 06 November 2000 11:53 AM
I would recommend that you consider the time frame in which you wish to have your registration audit. If you plan to be audited prior to the actual approval and introduction of the ISO9000:2000 then go with the 1994 series. If plans are to seek approval after the introduction then perhaps the 2000 series would be better. Myself, I would go with the 1994 series. I feel that the registration body that will be auditing your company will have to undergo training and may be more focused on an audit of the ISO9000:2000. Remember, you will have three years to implement the ISO9000:2000 once it's been approved. Just my opinion. IP: Logged |
|
isodog Forum Contributor Posts: 51 |
posted 17 November 2000 11:53 PM
there are some significant cost reductions to implement to the 2000 revisions. The Quality Manual is a mere shadow of its former self. No requirements to list the requirementsa of the standard reduces this document to three pages or less. In addition only five Procedures are required in the new standard vs 16 in the 1994 revision. Savings in Documrnt Control costs can ber realized by dongrading some procedures to work instructions Or, god forbid even to mmemos. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 18 November 2000 04:05 PM
quote:Make a martix and link your documents thru it. Why do you want to structure your documentation after the standard?? IP: Logged |
|
David Mullins Forum Contributor Posts: 248 |
posted 19 November 2000 06:03 PM
ISODOG SAID: "Why would any responsible manager order a FDIS (at $80) when it will be replaced by the IS in six weeks. I amazes me how easy it is to spend other peoples money!" It appears s/he must have spent somebodies money before the IS version comes out! How's the glass house? ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
isodog Forum Contributor Posts: 51 |
posted 30 January 2001 09:32 PM
As shown elesewhere in these forums, it is not necessary to ever send the ASQ any money for ISO 9000 standards. I have never done so. I never intend to do so. I see that as equitable. Dave IP: Logged |
|
David Mullins Forum Contributor Posts: 248 |
posted 30 January 2001 10:30 PM
Excuse my ignorance "isodog", what is the mechanism by which you acquire these freebies? (Review committee?) ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 22 March 2001 08:56 AM
Isodog lost me on this one as well. IP: Logged |
|
2k unregistered |
posted 31 March 2001 07:00 PM
6 procedures required for the 9k2k standard, what are they? 2k. IP: Logged |
|
Khaled El Gohary unregistered |
posted 01 April 2001 12:50 PM
I Go with leave your documentation as is and try to make some additions to it to fullfill the requirements of ISO9001:2000, and i go also with the matrix , but no need to re-structure ur documentation because at the end the new revision of the standard based on business approcah which all aspects of it, execpt some new requirements are covered in ISO 9000:94. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 01 April 2001 01:13 PM
quote: Do a search in this forum for "required documentation" and you will find several threads where they're discussed. IP: Logged |
|
Raffy Forum Contributor Posts: 38 |
posted 19 May 2001 12:06 AM
Hi The pdf_files that was been included in this site post a great help for us. Please find time to look at it. It helps, Raffy IP: Logged |
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
Hop to: |
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!
Main Site Search 
