posted 23 November 1999 03:59 PM               

Good point. I guess when I presented the types I should have included choice three, a combination.

Regards,

posted 26 November 1999 04:32 AM               

I struggle to apply the concept of document levels (1,2 and 3) to the companies that I work with because they all have different requirements. This is what I do;
DO start by defining the processes in the company that are critical for the companies success, even if this has no relation to ISO requirements. Make sure the processes cut across dept boundaries. With this single act you will obtain more benefit than any ISO programme (IMHO of course).
DO use flowcharts for processes.
DO NOT overdo this (I once heard that Mercedes have only 9 main processes).
DO start to define Policy Guidelines, items that are not a true process but are important to aid and assist the main processes ie How you control the documentation, what is your Purchasing Gifts Policy etc.
DO use simple text for guidelines.
DO define the detailed work instructions, if possible by department. You will find that people like the idea of Guidelines and Main Processes, but cannot relate to them because it is not their day-to-day business. So encourage departments to define activities in their own areas, even if its not relevant to ISO ie How to process an invoice. From this you will get self-analysis, improvement and transparency.
DO use simple text for this, in a format that can be easily changed by the department.

By now you probably have a streamlined, transparent and efficient company, that your auditor will not understand and will do his best to kill. You now have two options.
A. Produce a detailed handbook/blurb/speel that shows the auditor how you satisfy the standard. Do not let anybody else in the company see this.
B. Produce an equivalence table that points the auditor in the direction of the relevant process/guideline/work instruction. Be prepared for hassle here because the auditor will have problems to find what he want

To be honest, the truth is that with a little experience you are able to implement a system that is practical, useful, and realistic for the company, AND satisfy the auditor. The gap between the two get narrower. However I still tend to favour the idea of producing a useful system for the company, and a great blurb of a handbook for the auditor, naturally with links between the two. I think maybe this is because I have never worked in any bomb making environments.