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.

Communication - 5.5.3

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2008 - Quality Management Systems' started by Ardaqr, Aug 17, 2016.

  1. Ardaqr

    Ardaqr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2016
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    I think clause 5.5.3 Internal communication requirement are so weak in ISO 9001 and TS 16949 standards. Communication is one of the biggest problem for lots of compaines but i never saw that an auditor stuck on this requirement.

    An effective management system already has to supply good communication for everey processes. In that case 5.5.3 is an unnecessary clause with the current situation or it has to be more clarified and detailed or they have to find a way to measure effectiveness of the communication.

    Every company use e-mail, phone, meetings, communication boards. So ? What is the difference between a certified company and non-certified company ? Is there any best practice in your company ? What is your opinion ?
     
  2. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,178
    Likes Received:
    873
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    If I'm going to use your logic, then it would seem that clauses below are unnecessary:
    5.2 Customer focus - you can't satisfy your customer, if you don't know their requirements;
    5.5.1 Responsibility and authority - normally people know who's responsible for a particular task;
    6.1 Provision of resources - it's plain obvious that you can't produce without resources;
    6.2.1 Human resources-general - why would an organization assign a task to an incompetent person;
    6.3 Infrastructure - can't imagine an organization without this;
    etc., etc., etc.​
     
  3. Nick1

    Nick1 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2016
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    7
    I do understand your reasoning however as Tony showed in his answer, this type of reasoning makes the complete standard useless.

    It is more about what you communicate. At some of the companies we work with the planned regular meetings for all kind of QHSE related activities. The topics of these meeting did vary a lot from: Changes in Labour laws till product deviations that occurred more often than it should.

    In my opinion the difference between a certified company is that a certified company really thinks about all these things and how to effectively communicate. Though, there are a lot of non-certified companies which have all these processes in place.
     
    Atul Khandekar likes this.
  4. Ardaqr

    Ardaqr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2016
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Its not what i mention about. The communication requirements are so important but none of certification compaines deeply questioning that requirements.

    its like "We use phone, meetings etc and than ok no problem, we can continue other clauses for audit".

    But this has to be change, especialy speed and communication skills are so important than ever before. There is a CIO task now and there wasn't a position like that before. In the nearly future the companies which applies an effective process management and communication management via some applications, softwares... will be one step ahead from other compaines.
     
  5. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,178
    Likes Received:
    873
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    CBs may probe further but they can never go beyond the body and the spirit of a specific clause of the standard. Companies who are comfortable with the use of conventional methods of communication should not expect that CBs will raise concerns, or NCs, if they don't use software applications. The standard requires "appropriate" communication process. Determining what is appropriate is not the business of the CB. Manual handing of prescription by physicians to nurses is still effective for some hospitals than electronic medical transcriptions.
     
  6. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    999
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    In my experience, an organization that understands the importance of change engagement also understands the importance of communication. This means going beyond Ardaqr's example of "...phone, meetings etc." Just as corrective action is to be taken in proportion to the situation (e.g., you don't use dynamite to kill a mosquito, nor do you use a fly swatter to get rid of bear), identifying the suitable means of communication for a situation is important.

    Training - There are times it is best done face-to-face, and other times, an electronic method is adequate.
    Product processes - How are product lines changed and when and how do people know when and what to change to?
    Human Resources - If responsibilities change, how is this communicated to not only the individual responsible but everyone else?

    The examples of the importance of communication are practically limitless.

    The thing is, an organization that does embrace proper and effective communication oftentimes doesn't realize that they are doing it. It may not necessarily be formalized beyond a simple communications protocols document. It's like breathing. We all do it...we just don't think about it.
     
  7. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I agree with you that 5.5.3 clause appears to be rather weak. But the new ISO9001:2015 has a more proactive structured approach to communication. The use of a daily stand-up meetings with visual boards has been effective in improving work flow efficiency. Stand-up meetings only lasts for a maximum of 20 minutes following a structured communication plan.
     
  8. Ardaqr

    Ardaqr Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2016
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Our plan was having max.20 minutes meetings but i takes 60 minutes every day :) I guess its another sign for unsufficent communication
     
  9. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Once again the communication must be structured in order to make it very effective. 2 minutes is too short. 15 minutes should be the ideal one to make these very effective.
     
    Atul Khandekar likes this.
  10. normzone

    normzone Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2015
    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    27
    We now transition into the topic of "Conducting Effective Meetings".

    Almost nobody does, it seems to be a dying art. But it's beautiful to watch one in progress.

    Everybody comes in having read the previously shared agenda, or clueless if they chose not to.

    Topics are discussed in order, and if something is either too complex to solve in the time slot allotted or off topic then it goes on the list to address in another meeting or different communication format.

    The person running the meeting has to be informed, polite, and strict. That's a tough combination to find in one person who actually cares.

    I pride myself on my meetings ending on schedule. I will let them run astray of the agenda if the communications are adding value, but once they turn into whining or get too far off topic it's back to the agenda.
     
    Atul Khandekar and RoxaneB like this.
  11. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I can guarantee that your auditor would like to see evidence f a proactive meeting.
     
  12. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    999
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Are you saying that you believe normzone's strategy to be lacking in a proactive approach?
     
  13. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    999
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    While I haven't read it...yet..."Death by Meeting" has been recommended as a good read by a former boss. She was not, by the way, suggesting in a passive-aggressive manner that my meetings were ineffective. I think she wanted the team to find ways to help other meetings that we attend - but not chair - improve.

    This is a great approach, as long as the meeting agenda is sent out with sufficient time for any new items to potentially be actioned by the responsible. Too often, I receive an agenda 30 minutes before the meeting with no time to look into the new topic. So, we have the meeting, I can't resolve or explain anything, and it is tabled for the next meeting, thus slowing any forward momentum. Frustrating for all, unfortunately.

    Bingo! These daily meetings are not necessarily problem-solving venues, yet some organizations elect to use them as such. The end result is only a few people get to speak up...others feel left out...resolution is half-baked...and everyone leaves feeling frustrated. Not a good way to start one's day!

    If it can't be resolved in under a minute, I request that people take their discussion off-line (out of the meeting...once we're done). They can either reach out to the group later with the resolution or bring it to the next meeting.

    The balancing act is a bit of a struggle at times. Professional compassion with diligent timekeeping is a skill that not many have or consider worthy of developing.

    Like you, I want my meetings to end on time. We all have things to do and I wish to respect my colleagues' time (as well as anyone who has the meeting room after me or another meeting that could be delayed because I held people up). So often, I hear "I know we're a few minutes over but if you could just stick around for a bit longer."...or worse "Who has a hard stop at XX:XX?" This demonstrates poor planning and a lack of respect when it happens at every single meeting. Stuff happens. I get that. Emergency issues crop up. From time to time, a meeting will take longer, but this should be the exception, not the...well....norm. ;)
     
    Atul Khandekar likes this.
  14. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Call it whatever you want. A 15 minute stand up meeting to review the plan for the day, who's going to do what and when and changes to days work can be very effective in reducing the risk of not accomplishing the day's work plan.
     
  15. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    999
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I was not calling it (what you mean by 'it', I do not know) anything - I was attempting to understand your comment to normzone's post. That's all. :) Normzone posted his process for running what he considers to be an effective meeting and, with no indication of agreement/disagreement to his post, you indicated that an auditor would want evidence that this meeting was proactive. That led me to infer that you believed his format was not proactive; I was simply requesting that you help me understand. No offense was intended.

    It does sound like Ardaqr's organization attempts to do a daily meeting, 20 minutes max, to communicate what's happened, what's going on, and key information. And it's great that it works for your organization, MCW8888. Unfortunately, Ardaqr's situation appears to be that the meetings take significantly longer than what they should and that they are not working for the organization. Normzone did an excellent job at providing some detailed advice and tips that Ardaqr could use to help get his organization regain control over those meetings and find value in them.
     
    BradM likes this.
  16. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Toyota has a structured stand up meetings with only 5 questions like: What is that is the target condition? What is the actual condition? What obstacles do you think are preventing you from reaching the target condition? Which one are you addressing now? What is your next step (PDCA cycle) What do you expect? When can we go and see what we have learned from taking that step? You can make any 5 questions. The meeting must be attended by the critical process owners. Perhaps there should also be a white board where each process owner can write his/her notes. Sorry if my short response was not favorable to you RoxanneB. I just want to be a part of the solution.
     

Share This Page