R
rkasparek
Re: Updated Quality Manual for ISO 9001:2008
You'll find lots of pros and cons regarding format in this forum. I have a few quality programs under my belt, and have created the quality programs in different ways. My last one and current one have basically mimicked the format of the specifications that define it. I simply find it easier to assure that I address everything.
Some will tell you that going that way is very unfriendly to the user, but again - that depends on your organization. IMHO, when the organization has not had a previous manual (both of my last 2 cases) - it's easy to break things out per the spec - which has the added benefit that as your people get familiar with the manual, they're also somewhat familiar with the spec - which some auditors see as a plus.
In actuality the spec has a 'flow' that makes sense (to me) and is very useful. You have the description of the management system, which is useful to someone who has not had one before, then you have the management support part (which necessarily must be there before any of the rest can occur) and how you'll manage your resources. In the product realization section you have the bulk of the 'work' product in the form of engineering, purchasing, product and service provision and control of measuring devices to data collection, analysis and improvement. I dunno - call me crazy
but it makes perfect sense (to me).
Every quality management program is different and every situation is different. You have to decide what works best for you. Read through the forums here and decide for yourself
Good Luck!
Rick
You'll find lots of pros and cons regarding format in this forum. I have a few quality programs under my belt, and have created the quality programs in different ways. My last one and current one have basically mimicked the format of the specifications that define it. I simply find it easier to assure that I address everything.
Some will tell you that going that way is very unfriendly to the user, but again - that depends on your organization. IMHO, when the organization has not had a previous manual (both of my last 2 cases) - it's easy to break things out per the spec - which has the added benefit that as your people get familiar with the manual, they're also somewhat familiar with the spec - which some auditors see as a plus.
In actuality the spec has a 'flow' that makes sense (to me) and is very useful. You have the description of the management system, which is useful to someone who has not had one before, then you have the management support part (which necessarily must be there before any of the rest can occur) and how you'll manage your resources. In the product realization section you have the bulk of the 'work' product in the form of engineering, purchasing, product and service provision and control of measuring devices to data collection, analysis and improvement. I dunno - call me crazy

Every quality management program is different and every situation is different. You have to decide what works best for you. Read through the forums here and decide for yourself
Good Luck!
Rick