Peter Fraser
Trusted Information Resource
Folkshjilling said:
It’s not surprising that there is so much divergence of views on this. Looking at ISO9000 and ISO9001 for guidance (not perhaps recommended for documents which suggest that a “driver’s manual” is “software”?), you will find the following contradictory definitions [some paraphrased, my comments in brackets]:
A “management system” is “a system to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objectives”. [I like this]
A “quality management system” is a “management system to direct and control an organization with regard to quality” [Not too bad either]
A “quality manual” is “a document specifying the quality management system of an organization”. [This works for me if eg you have an electronic system and treat the entire system (policies, process definitions including responsibilities, documents and records) as “the way we do things around here”]
”A document that provides consistent information, both internally and externally, about an organization's quality management system is referred to as” a “quality manual”.
[I am really struggling with this. First of all, how many organisations have a manual which isn’t “consistent”? I’ve seen a few – does that by definition disqualify their manuals from being quality manuals (or are they just “poor quality” manuals?)
And why “internally and externally”, and what does the phrase mean? Surely what you do with a document is irrelevant. To me, a “quality policy” is of as much interest to customers, yet its definition makes no mention of “internally and externally”.
And what does “information” mean? I would expect (eg) the quality policy to be included, but it is not one of the mandatory items listed elsewhere. At least this (vaguely) hints at a purpose for a quality manual – folk might understand all this better if the standard made it clear why you need to produce one. Then again they might question the need for one at all.]
“The quality management system documentation shall include a quality manual” … and also “documented statements of a quality policy and quality objectives, documented procedures required by this International Standard, documents needed by the organization to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of its processes, records required by the standard.”
[So how is a “quality manual” “a document specifying the quality management system of an organization” if we have this long list of other stuff as well?]
My view is that you should put the standard (all standards) to one side and define how you run the business (processes, documents, records, roles and responsibilities) then check against whatever standard you feel the need to comply with. Do it in a way that suits the business, and don’t define anything that is not useful to you and your staff. An electronic system with a simple "home page" that tells a user where to find the information they need is ideal.
The "thou shalt" approach has been eased off and usage of flow charts and turtle diagrams are being allowed as alternative. A) The picture paints a thousand words B) It is not so daunting to read.
Sorry to hear about your job! There is a career section here in the Cove...it might have something (even leads) for you. You can also post your resume there, I believe.
