1. Hello and Welcome to The Quality Forum Online...Continuing in the spirit of People Helping People !
    Dismiss Notice
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.

Feedback on continual improvement

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by NattyG, Apr 12, 2018.

  1. NattyG

    NattyG Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Just a quickie- I've made a quick statement in our QMS manual to cover continual improvement.

    It Reads, "(MY COMPANY) is dedicated to continual improvement, bases actions upon strategic decisions and risked based thinking; considering all aspects of the QMS including interested parties."

    Is this enough to cover continual improvement?

    Feedback appreciated- my strategy is to keep it simple stupid! Cheers in advance
     
  2. hogheavenfarm

    hogheavenfarm Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Nothing you can write in a manual will "cover" continual improvement, but if you can readily supply documented evidence that you cover those four things on an ongoing basis, then you practice continual improvement whether you state it in a manual or not.
     
    yodon likes this.
  3. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    615
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    1. If the first language of the manual is English, the grammar could use some tweaking.
    2. A manual isn't needed. Would the organization's QMS fall apart if the manual wasn't there? What is the purpose of the manual?
    3. To hogheavenfarm's point, you can write whatever you want, but if there is no evidence supporting what the organization says it does, then your statement does not "cover" it.
    4. If those are your activities, the people applying them can hopefully explain HOW the activities are aligned with continual improvement.
    5. Which part are you trying to keep simple - the manual or the management system?
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  4. NattyG

    NattyG Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    My first language is English- what grammar would you tweak?

    Yes, I realise a manual isn't needed I was asking if the statement as posted would cover the section of continual improvement in my QMS manual.

    I have documented information, to "cover" or evidence or whatever verb you prefer, continual improvement. I'm simply filling gaps in the manual.

    The manual is kept simple as you said, it isn't really needed- it's a supplement.
     
  5. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    571
    Likes Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    When you say you are "filling gaps", does that mean you're using an "outline"? Is this outline clause-based or process-based? If you're manual is structured against your organization's processes, you may need to describe only the processes within your QMS. On those who opted to have a "regurgitation" of the clauses of the standard, usually they will need to describe how each applicable clause is being fulfilled by the organization.
     
  6. NattyG

    NattyG Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Yep tony, you've nailed it :) that's exactly what I'm trying to achieve.

    We've already outlined our processes. I'm simply putting a statement in the manual.

    For the relationship between processes & clauses, I have a separate 'clause matrix' document where I highlight which processes satisfy which clauses.
     
  7. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    615
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Your original statement | "(MY COMPANY) is dedicated to continual improvement, bases actions upon strategic decisions and risked based thinking; considering all aspects of the QMS including interested parties."

    In no particular order...

    Recommendation #1 | "(ORGANIZATION NAME) is committed to continual improvement and bases such actions upon strategic decisions and risked-based thinking, while taking into consideration requirements of Stakeholders (or interested parties if that's the term your organization prefers) and the Quality Management System."

    Recommendation #2 | "(ORGANIZATION NAME) is committed to continual improvement. Actions focused on continual improvement take, as a minimum, the following into consideration:
    • Strategic objectives of the organization;
    • Risk-based thinking (or identification and assessment of potential risks);
    • Requirements of Stakeholders; and,
    • Requirements of the Quality Management System."

    Recommendation #3 | "(ORGANIZATION NAME) is committed to continual improvement, taking, as a minimum, the following into consideration:
    • Strategic objectives of the organization;
    • Risk-based thinking (or identification and assessment of potential risks);
    • Requirements of Stakeholders; and,
    • Requirements of the Quality Management System."
    I guess I'm still struggling with why you have a manual. This "outline" approach or supplement, is more of WHAT you are doing, not WHY. As Simon Sinek says "People don't buy WHAT you do, they buy WHY you do it." If the document isn't going to add value, it's simply creating more work.

    If I was to create such a document, I would want to make sure it was going to add value to the organization and not become just an extra document that needs to be updated from time to time, even though it isn't used.

    After all, if you have the clause matrix, is this manual still required? It feels a bit redundant to me.
     

Share This Page