1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

Has anyone had a chance to review the FDIS?

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by Andy Nichols, Jul 31, 2015.

Page 2 of 2
  1. Pancho

    Pancho Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Cypress, Texas, USA
    I don't have the FDIS, but based on the DIS, I find I didn't appreciate one good thing until it's gone, namely the old "preventive action" term.

    Despite the term being a constant source of confusion for some folks, now improvement actions that are not a result of NCs do not have a name other than "continuous improvement". Perhaps the old PAs could have been renamed "improvement actions"? That would have helped clear up the confusion, and leave a sanctioned definition for such process changes. Come to think of it, we will probably call them that ourselves.
     
    Pancho, Aug 9, 2015
    #21
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,107
    Likes Received:
    2,562
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Prevention isn't considered improvement. Improvement is considered to be something which is shown to work and can be made faster, cheaper etc. Prevention is what you planned to do to get it right, but not necessarily faster, cheaper etc - which you may not be able to understand until you've actually made it - you could suffer "analysis paralysis" trying to prevent everything...
     
    Andy Nichols, Aug 9, 2015
    #22
  3. Pancho

    Pancho Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Cypress, Texas, USA
    If "prevention isn't considered improvement", then the drafters misplaced section 8.5.3, right under 8.5 in the 2008 version of the standard! :)

    I guess "prevention" without a change in the system wouldn't be improvement, just as plain "correction" isn't. But I think we both are talking about PA. Anyway, my point is not so much about how broad the PA term should have been, but rather that maybe there should be a name for those improvement actions that are not corrective, whether those are the result of prevention, review, breakthroughs, innovation, reorganization, or other sources.
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2015
    Pancho, Aug 9, 2015
    #23
  4. David Bradley

    David Bradley Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Michigan
    Where is this requirement?
     
    David Bradley, Aug 10, 2015
    #24
  5. Ackack-DC

    Ackack-DC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2015
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    2
    7.1.6 Organizational Knowledge
     
    Ackack-DC, Aug 12, 2015
    #25
  6. Joe Cruse

    Joe Cruse Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Gonna wait till they actually put the official release out before I read anything. Our registrar emailed the customers last week about the FDIS and the beginning of training on 2015 standard to begin in a week or so. I'm sure the released standard probably won't change much from this FDIS, but until there is an "official" new revision, I'm not doing anything, including spending training $$$ on a standard that's not released yet.
     
    Joe Cruse, Aug 12, 2015
    #26
    Ackack-DC likes this.
  7. David Bradley

    David Bradley Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Michigan
    I think that your scenario might be a bit of a stretch as to say it is a nonconformity. Even taking into account the additional information in the Annex, I think it might be a leap. This is an area where I can see differing opinions on the interpretations of some of the requirements. I can see a lot of auditors saying "its implied" and that scares me.
     
    David Bradley, Aug 12, 2015
    #27
    Pancho likes this.
  8. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I have read the new FDIS. With respect to auditing, I could really use a checklist to start the process. How do you audit clause 7.1.4? Perhaps I might suggest that we integrate the HSSE to QMS to cover everything in this section. But I am not sure. I will definitely need a training to audit this standard. Thanks.
     
    MCW8888, Aug 17, 2015
    #28
  9. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,107
    Likes Received:
    2,562
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    How were you doing audits before? In practice, internal auditing hasn't changed, and the requirements haven't changed that much to make attending a course that important (for IA anyways)
     
    Andy Nichols, Aug 17, 2015
    #29
  10. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Thank you Andy. It looks like my IA skills are acceptable to the CB auditors. I just need to get training on the new standards.
     
    MCW8888, Aug 19, 2015
    #30
Page 2 of 2