Which of these are Processes and should have Process Maps and why?

Re: Which of these are processes and why?

michellemmm said:

Peter,

Maybe the attached process map will help in outlining of input and output....

This map shows one way of describing the process. It is not the optimum...

M

Click to expand...

Michelle

Thanks. Rather than helping me to understand the "input - transformation- output" definition of a process, it confirms what I think is important:

The objective of the process (ie "why you do it") is:
1 "to ensure customer properties are identified, verified, stored and maintained for incorporation into products
2 to maintain optimal inventory level."

That is clear, understandable and concise, and anyone involved in the process will know why they are doing it.

And taking your first "Input/Output" example, I don't see how an "Inventory Report" etc is "transformed" to create "Excess or Obsolete Inventory". The report doesn't change (although it is needed for the process to work), and Excess or Obsolete Inventory isn't created by the process (although it is identified by it).

To my mind, the "Drawing, Documentation, CTQ list, Sampling Plan and Promised Delivery Date" etc aren't "transformed" either.

But this does help me understand the reasoning behind your earlier quote about a process being ongoing.

Re: Which of these are processes and why?

Peter Fraser said:

Michelle

Thanks. Rather than helping me to understand the "input - transformation- output" definition of a process, it confirms what I think is important:

The objective of the process (ie "why you do it") is:
1 "to ensure customer properties are identified, verified, stored and maintained for incorporation into products
2 to maintain optimal inventory level."

That is clear, understandable and concise, and anyone involved in the process will know why they are doing it.

And taking your first "Input/Output" example, I don't see how an "Inventory Report" etc is "transformed" to create "Excess or Obsolete Inventory". The report doesn't change (although it is needed for the process to work), and Excess or Obsolete Inventory isn't created by the process (although it is identified by it).

To my mind, the "Drawing, Documentation, CTQ list, Sampling Plan and Promised Delivery Date" etc aren't "transformed" either.

But this does help me understand the reasoning behind your earlier quote about a process being ongoing.

Click to expand...

I think this discussion is somewhat hobbled by the fact that the examples being discussed are at sub-subprocess levels.

The whole input - transformation - output concept is pretty clear at the high level, full process level of view.

Purchasing - Manufacturing - Shipping.

But when you get down into the sub-activities, these transformations are not always so clearly defined. That is why it is useful to specify what are processes, and what are really subprocesses or smaller activities.

While the principle is the same, at the transaction level, the diagram becomes awfully fuzzy.

peter, I agree that understanding "why" a process is done is important, and knowing what the actual steps are is important too. The details of inputs and outputs are just a natural part of that process. Soemtimes we overthink it.

Where it becomes important is when you try to align and improve processes, typically at a manager or supervisor level. Then, flowcharts and such become useful tools to see bottlenecks and waste.

Re: Which of these are processes and why?

Peter Fraser said:

And taking your first "Input/Output" example, I don't see how an "Inventory Report" etc is "transformed" to create "Excess or Obsolete Inventory". The report doesn't change (although it is needed for the process to work), and Excess or Obsolete Inventory isn't created by the process (although it is identified by it).

Click to expand...

The report you mentioned is the result of process of evaluation / analysis / segregation of inventory items, physically or virtually.

This process may not directly affect product quality every time...When you look at big Q (quality of management system) as opposed to little q (product quality), material management affects all aspects of the business and their ability to deliver what customer wants on time...

Re: Which of these are processes and why?

Helmut Jilling said:

I think this discussion is somewhat hobbled by the fact that the examples being discussed are at sub-subprocess levels.

The whole input - transformation - output concept is pretty clear at the high level, full process level of view.

Purchasing - Manufacturing - Shipping.

But when you get down into the sub-activities, these transformations are not always so clearly defined. That is why it is useful to specify what are processes, and what are really subprocesses or smaller activities.

While the principle is the same, at the transaction level, the diagram becomes awfully fuzzy.

peter, I agree that understanding "why" a process is done is important, and knowing what the actual steps are is important too. The details of inputs and outputs are just a natural part of that process. Soemtimes we overthink it.

Where it becomes important is when you try to align and improve processes, typically at a manager or supervisor level. Then, flowcharts and such become useful tools to see bottlenecks and waste.

Click to expand...

Have you ever used "process approach" outside of auditing?

If yes,.....Can you give an example?

You only need one high level process map to show the sequence and interactions of processes to meet minimum ISO requirements. (However just having process maps alone no matter how many you have is not really evidence that you understand the interactions, just the sequences of processes and subprocesses).

Other than the high level map, you can pick and choose what to process map according to what adds the most value to your companies business/quality system.

qualityboi said:

You only need one high level process map to show the sequence and interactions of processes to meet minimum ISO requirements. (However just having process maps alone no matter how many you have is not really evidence that you understand the interactions, just the sequences of processes and subprocesses).

Other than the high level map, you can pick and choose what to process map according to what adds the most value to your companies business/quality system.

Click to expand...

Can you direct me to the ISO "Shall" section that says you need one high level process map?

michellemmm said:

Can you direct me to the ISO "Shall" section that says you need one high level process map?

Click to expand...

Michelle the original poster wrote "should"..."Which of these are Processes and should have Process Maps and why?"

But I'll bite anyway, let's not call it a shall but a "truism". Tell me the name of your 3rd party registrar that lets you get ISO TS 16949 certified without having at least one process map, I want their number! I think its universally understood that having a process map is the easiest way to show the sequence and interactions of your processes and I would think that you "should" have at least one to meet minimum requirements if one was going to meet that requirement using a process map.

I know this is a fundamentally wrong approach but we asked our consultant who is a 3rd party TS 16949 lead auditor typically how many process maps does he come across when auditing in our industry he stated anywhere from 20 to 30 and stated that we wouldn't get through an audit without at least one at a high level and he had worked for our registrar in a prior life.

qualityboi said:

Michelle the original poster wrote "should"..."Which of these are Processes and should have Process Maps and why?"

But I'll bite anyway, let's not call it a shall but a "truism". Tell me the name of your 3rd party registrar that lets you get ISO TS 16949 certified without having at least one process map, I want their number! I think its universally understood that having a process map is the easiest way to show the sequence and interactions of your processes and I would think that you "should" have at least one to meet minimum requirements if one was going to meet that requirement using a process map.

I know this is a fundamentally wrong approach but we asked our consultant who is a 3rd party TS 16949 lead auditor typically how many process maps does he come across when auditing in our industry he stated anywhere from 20 to 30 and stated that we wouldn't get through an audit without at least one at a high level and he had worked for our registrar in a prior life.

Click to expand...

In fact, the standard does not require a process map. One of my friends (a CEO) obtained ISO certification for his organization from DNV without a single process map or turtle chart.

If the objective of constructing process map is to obtain certification or pleasing the auditors, then the whole thing is a waste of time... Auditor does not have to satisfy your stakeholder....

They all become generic at a high level... Why not modify ISO's model? And just because a company has ISO certification and randomly identified inputs, processes, and outputs does not mean they understand the application of process approach.

Paul’s question was: Which of these are Processes and should have Process Maps and why?

I think it is worth while reviewing TS176...

https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/3554880/Process.doc?func=doc.Fetch&nodeid=3554880

Every organization is unique with different system and needs. Sales purchasing Manufacturing Shipping is a useless process map for any organization. Didn't they know this order before ISO require them to identify/define processes?

I have been involved in application of process approach since 1983. All my project plans have been based on process approach. I guess you can call me a seasoned practitioner of process approach.

michellemmm said:

In fact, the standard does not require a process maps. One of my friends (a CEO) obtained ISO certification for his organization from DNV without a single process map or turtle chart.

Click to expand...

Auditors 'expect' a high level map to show the 'Interaction of Processes'. You don't need a 'Process map' (flow charts or what every you want to call it), and you are right there is no written requirement for a high level process map, but if you want to 'make it easy' for an auditor, a map helps.

Personally, I would want one because it makes it easy to see how an organization (or system) works because I'm more of a 'visual' person than I am a 'text' person. They're relatively easy to make.

Marc said:

Auditors 'expect' a high level map to show the 'Interaction of Processes'. You don't need a 'Process map' (flow charts or what every you want to call it), and you are right there is no written requirement for a high level process map, but if you want to 'make it easy' for an auditor, a map helps.

Personally, I would want one because it makes it easy to see how an organization (or system) works because I'm more of a 'visual' person than I am a 'text' person. They're relatively easy to make.

Click to expand...

I agree with Marc.

Think about driving directions. I do much better with a simple hand-drawn map and landmarks as opposed to written directions.
I found that the MapQuests and the Googles provide too much detail which confuses me.

Stijloor.