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.

Context of the Organization-ISO9001:2015

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by MCW8888, Sep 5, 2015.

Page 2 of 4
  1. Ganesh Sundaresan

    Ganesh Sundaresan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    17
    A good creative effort indeed.
    But am I the only one still scratching my head and wondering about the intent of this requirement. Thanks to my ignorance, "context" looks to me more like a start-up thing.
     
    Ganesh Sundaresan, Sep 7, 2015
    #21
  2. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    After reading "my context" I am inspired to be creative as well. The article is very interesting but we still need to provide some objectie evidence during the CB audit.
     
    MCW8888, Sep 7, 2015
    #22
  3. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    722
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    USA
    This is a really difficult question because there is no set way to define an organization's culture. I could ask top managers how they engage their people (5.1.1h) and what kind of issues they face internally (4.1). The answer they give can help me direct the conversation and evaluate if they have made an effort to understand their organization's culture. Not everyone can, or should go to the extent shown in Practical Management, but leaders need to understand their people in order to succeed in engaging them.

    HR Managers may have done more than executive managers in the way of culture. I would be interested to interview them both and compare their answers to see if executive management is supporting other relevant management roles to demonstrate their leadership (5.1.1j) or if the HR manager is operating in a silo.
     
    Jennifer Kirley, Sep 8, 2015
    #23
    MCW8888 likes this.
  4. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Thank you Jennifer. I was afraid you will mention HR whe department tht seem to be very hesitant in ISO audits.Just recently I was asked to interview HR and the manager disappeared conveniently with a valid reason. I was going to give a nonconformance in Managment Commitment but I "turned the other cheek".
     
    MCW8888, Sep 8, 2015
    #24
    Jennifer Kirley likes this.
  5. Ganesh Sundaresan

    Ganesh Sundaresan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    17
    John Kotter keeps Culture building as the last of an 8 step Change Management process. Therefore, doing 7 steps in the right direction and spirit makes it easy to build the Culture in the Organization.
     
    Ganesh Sundaresan, Sep 8, 2015
    #25
    Jennifer Kirley and MCW8888 like this.
  6. barb butrym

    barb butrym New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Nicely put Andy...
     
    barb butrym, Sep 8, 2015
    #26
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  7. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    722
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    USA
    It could be simple fear, or fear of what you would find, or something else. Keep trying. Or, offer to be left alone with this person's records. That may not be possible though, for privacy reasons.
     
    Jennifer Kirley, Sep 9, 2015
    #27
  8. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I'll keep on trying een if HR appears to be illusive at this time.
     
    MCW8888, Sep 9, 2015
    #28
  9. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    722
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    USA
    Sure thing. Make it convenient and as pain free as possible. Make it more of a discussion and less of what this person may be expecting - no sitting trussed up on a hard backed chair under a naked light bulb! The audit process is just an exploration; you are interested to learn how they do competence, because they are sure to have some neat things going on! Show enthusiasm and active interest and respect. You may win the shy ones over in time this way. I hope so anyway!
     
    Jennifer Kirley, Sep 9, 2015
    #29
    MCW8888 likes this.
  10. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Thank you Jennifer. You're giving me such confidence in this area.
     
    MCW8888, Sep 9, 2015
    #30
  11. Keith Dame

    Keith Dame New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Seems more like a process flow chart which also includes other than what would be described as QMS processes.
     
    Keith Dame, Jan 8, 2016
    #31
  12. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    198
    Trophy Points:
    42
    This is an old email and I have been doing quite a bit of struggle on this one. I have revised it since then. Thank you.
     
    MCW8888, Jan 8, 2016
    #32
  13. Stacey

    Stacey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hello!
    Very, very new to this and I am wondering as to what part of the ISO2015 this pertains to? Is this for the Context of the Organization? If so, would the document you have posted be the entire part of 4?

    Thanks!

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jan 12, 2016
    #33
  14. charanjit singh

    charanjit singh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    7
    While talking about context of the organisation, let us not forget that this is a standard for Quality Management System and we should limit ourselves to that end. Otherwise we may be tying ourselves into knots imagining what sort of questions an external auditor may ask. From that point of view, I would suggest the following simple approach, subject, of course to variations/changes depending upon type of a given organisation

    "The purpose of this organisation is (e.g.) to carry out its business profitably, by ensuring that
    1. We meet the requirements of our customers/clients,
    2. The products and services supplied by our vendors, meet our quality requirements, to enable us meet the requirements of our customers.
    3. Our employees are duly trained and motivated to perform as required, in order for us to meet the said objectives."
     
    charanjit singh, Jan 21, 2016
    #34
    Jamie Lill likes this.
  15. charanjit singh

    charanjit singh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    7
    This reply comes to you from India regarding context of the organisation.

    The 'Context of the Organisation' clause being a new addition, there is bound to be a lot of difference of opinion especially when it comes to 3rd party audits. The thing to remember is that the standard is 'quality management system' standard and not a general management standard. So from that point of view,

    What is the context of your organisation? It may be, for example,
    'To manage your business profitably by supplying the product/service that satisfies your customer's requirements' -

    Who are the interested parties? Basically -

    1. Your customers- who expect quality product/service you have agreed to supply.
    2. Your suppliers whose customer you are and expect to receive quality-product/service that you have ordered.
    3. Your employees, who need to be trained and motivated to carry out their respective processes so that you can meet the customer requirements. and,
    may be (if applicable)
    4. statutory body whose rules and regulation you are expected to comply with, when dealing with the particular product /service.

    How you are ensuring the above, can be addressed in response to the remaining clauses of the standard.

    It is immaterial how you explain your system whether by charts, graphs, pictures or whatever, as long it is clear, simple and unambiguous.
     
    charanjit singh, Jan 22, 2016
    #35
    Jamie Lill and Jennifer Kirley like this.
  16. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    722
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    USA
    I agree. It is, and should be based on an organization's needs and preferences. Much of this can be handled in tables, matrixes etc. What they probably do need is a plan, and a system of some sort. When starting out it is often tempting to make something more complicated than it really needs to be, out of concern that is what is expected.
     
    Jennifer Kirley, Feb 2, 2016
    #36
    charanjit singh likes this.
  17. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    2,560
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    This is a great question! The reason that "context" is in (all of) the ISO management systems standards is in part due to the fact that the use of the standards has changed over the years. The original ISO 9001 (and 9002 and 9003) were used contractually between customers and suppliers. Each requirement could be tailored to suit the circumstances. For example, if a customer wanted their supplier to get better control over their measuring equipment, or document controls, supplier controls etc, they would invoke those specific requirements. What suppliers did, wasn't really a quality management system, but quality assurance through taking action in areas of weakness, identified by their customer(s). Instead, it was a patchwork of requirements, often completely unrelated to each other. Not linked in what we understand, today, to be a management system.

    However, once independent 3rd party certification became possible, this contractual use stopped. Suppliers had to install and operate a full quality system and be certified instead. Because it wasn't clear (from the 1987 and 1994 requirements) how everything was supposed to work together, it was not unusual for the QMS to be disjointed. In effect, the people involved in creating the management system obtained what they needed by whatever they thought were the best means - and ended up with Frankenstein. An example would be the use of a quality policy statement which committed the organization to "Meet and exceed customers' expectations", when in reality, the customer just wanted them to make it like the agreed specification - nothing more nor less. Another example would be the creation of masses of detailed procedures and work instructions which didn't consider the competency of the people doing the work. So detailed were they that even simple computer use was described in overly simplistic terms: "Type in x and hit enter"

    The use of a management system has changed over the years. Customers are no longer employing supplier development. Instead they rely on 3rd party ISO certification. The supplier organizations are expected to implement a management system which complies with the relevant ISO requirements - in a systematic manner, taking into consideration their "interested parties" and their "context", such that the design of the management system "flows", from context, to policy, to objectives, to process (and controls), measurement and so on... The days of "Say What You do..." are well and truly over! (Thank heavens!)
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2016
    Andy Nichols, Feb 2, 2016
    #37
    Somashekar likes this.
  18. Somashekar

    Somashekar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    27
    One of the purpose more emphasized in the quality management system standard is about continued existence of the organization over period of time in order to assure providing products and services to customers. Understanding and managing the context of the organization supports this and assures customers about your stability.
     
    Somashekar, Feb 2, 2016
    #38
  19. Somashekar

    Somashekar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    27
    Changes made in the quality management system and keeping it integrated is such an important element of the QMS. Many of the changes are forced from outside the organization. The context helps you to be in grip with what is outside of the organization...
     
    Somashekar, Feb 2, 2016
    #39
  20. charanjit singh

    charanjit singh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    7
    A question for the Moderators. We have at least 4 threads for virtually the same topic, viz.

    1. Context- New standard
    2. Context of the Organisation- ISO 9001-2015
    3. Clause 4 in the Standard
    4. Section 4.1 & 4.2 on Context of the Organisation-Visual Representation.

    Will it not be helpful if we could combine all the four into a single thread? Otherwise we might miss some useful opinions expressed in one thread but not the others. Please examine. I am posing this question in all the four threads, so everyone can think about it.
     
    charanjit singh, Feb 2, 2016
    #40
    Atul Khandekar likes this.
Page 2 of 4