1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

Has anyone had a chance to review the FDIS?

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

  1. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    With the FDIS released only days ago, has anyone seen any of the contents? One aspect I had seen was the watering down of the Internal Audit requirements, which had been clearer (to me at least) on reasons to schedule audits. I had read that there had been some minor wording changes like "operate" changed to "implement". Anyone got something?
     
    Somashekar likes this.
  2. Randy

    Randy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Location:
    Greenwood Arkansas
    Andy I'm just starting to take my training on it from my former employer. I'll let you know
     
  3. Dimeji Folami

    Dimeji Folami New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Can you help with a copy of the standard please? Did is what I have for now and I have read and read but waiting for the GPS to see the final amendments.
     
  4. Dimeji Folami

    Dimeji Folami New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    I have been able to draft the ISO 9001:2015 QMS outlined chart for implementation with the DIS ready for modification based on FDIS.
     
  5. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    The FDIS is the only available standard at the moment, as the final version isn't due for release until September (currently). As with all ISO standards, they are copyrighted and you should not obtain/use unauthorized copies.
     
    Tom Waite and Claes Gefvenberg like this.
  6. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    USA
    Honestly I've been holding back until the final version comes out, since these documents are copyrighted and must be purchased.

    Dimeji, regrettably those of us who have the documents are not permitted to share them because of the copyright.
     
    Claes Gefvenberg likes this.
  7. Claes Gefvenberg

    Claes Gefvenberg Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Location:
    Eskilstuna, Sweden
    I will get hold of it and start doing our gap analysis when my vacation ends on Monday.
     
  8. Scott Kruger

    Scott Kruger Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    2
    I don't have it but I'm beginning to sit through BSI's webinars. I'll wait until the final version to buy the standard. My only real point of interest at this time is how it's going to impact companies like mine that carry both ISO-9001 and ISO-13485.
     
    GStough likes this.
  9. Jane Bennett

    Jane Bennett New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    I didn't read the changes to internal audit as watering down at all. Rather the reverse. For example, it calls for the audit criteria and scope for each audit to be defined. Importance of processes concerned, changes affecting the organization and results of previous audits are all to be 'taken into consideration' for planning, establishing, implementing and maintaining the program...
     
  10. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Audit criteria and scope were in 8.2.2 of v2008, so no change there. The "importance" of processes was there too, however, organizations didn't understand that, so did one or two audits a year - which means that all processes are (apparently) of equal importance (I'd like to meet the CEO who believes THAT). I thought at least clearly stating that customer feedback was important as being a step in the right direction to a practical input to doing audits more than once or twice a year...
     
    Stijloor likes this.
  11. Somashekar

    Somashekar Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    27
    I did go through the FDIS last week. I will read it again a few times. The main thing that strikes me at most places is about the Internal audit and third party audit. Training about this as I feel must be loaded with case studies. Certainly a challenge to the fair and impartial audit proceedings. The FDIS does make a meaningful impact and looks to give a further push to the TOP MANAGEMENT to understand themselves, and play a progressive part in the management system. (Hope they can see it too)
    The context of the organization should be an eye opener to the leadership. This must make them see what can work for them rather than copy styles of different organization and culture. Consultants must come out of prescribing common solutions and formats and assist clients to recognize their context better.
     
    Tom Waite and Andy Nichols like this.
  12. David Bradley

    David Bradley Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Michigan
    I've gone through it. I can see some real problems ahead. If a company wants to use it as a business management tool, it provides a sound foundation. However, if a company is looking for registration due to a mandate and is only interested in obtaining the flag, it is going to cause a lot of pain. There can be a lot of interpretations. As it is, I see too many auditors saying the current 9001 "implies" this or that. It is going to take a while for the dust to settle.
     
    Mikishots, Devashri and Somashekar like this.
  13. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    We can take some comfort in that 1) this time the ABs are involved, unlike when the 2000 change came out and, that means b) the CBs have to have a plan. This is totally different to the last major 3 year change over. Depending in the CB auditor got slim to none on training before. This time, however, I can vouch for the fact that my CB has had extensive training and awareness for EVERYONE - from sales to CSRs to auditors. We won't be caught napping...
     
    Somashekar and David Bradley like this.
  14. Claes Gefvenberg

    Claes Gefvenberg Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Location:
    Eskilstuna, Sweden
    I thought I would have the the FDIS by now, but no such luck... Fortunately there are just a few other things to keep me occupied. ;)
     
  15. Ackack-DC

    Ackack-DC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2015
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    2
    I've been going through it with the TAG meetings. By itself, it is shaping up to not be too bad. Being the next version of the 9001....there is some pain. Like Somashekar says, there is a lot more Top Management involvement required. Also, the Preventive Action, since no one seemed to really understand it, was taken out as its own clause, and sprinkled throughout the standard as risk based thinking.

    One of the requirements I find peculiar is the Knowledge base sharing. What that clause essentially says is that you can no longer have that Old Joe on 3rd shift who never shares what he knows because he thinks it is his job security. So, now either he shares what he knows or there is risk for a nonconformity.

    I've said the following before, and I will say this again: I personally think that those who will find the new version easy will be the companies with a mature 9001 QMS in place already. They will just have to perform a gap analysis of where they need to revise some areas in their own QMS, where to add certain parts, relieved that they can shave off something they hated. They can keep what was working for them and get rid of things they considered bulky and that they were only doing it as a requirement of the standard. The new standard answers the complaint "there are too many documented procedures required" and "this standard has me do things I don't want to do or I never do". A very important thing is that everyone is going to also buy the 9000 update because there are MANY new wordings and phrases and the 9000 is where they are going to be addressed.

    New comers will find it a lot harder, especially if they just want the certificate for customer purposes. The 9001:2008 has all of this rigid framework you can build a template off of for doing good business, but the 9001:2015 is trying to be a whole lot more flexible for both manufacturing and service-based businesses. So, there are parts that are not crystal clear on what they should do, and that can lead to getting dinged on requirements they didn't realize they should have had better in place. This flexibility and emphasis on risk based thinking encourages top management to really know their business and help them make decisions based on all interested parties. It should be easier for smaller businesses who know what they do and how they do it and helps to keep everything lean (with their own ideas of how to do it those ways).

    Also who will find it a lot harder, possibly the hardest, are going to be the auditors, because they are going to have to really know the system more, the processes more, have to look at fewer checkboxes to tick (do you have 6 documented procedures, do you have a quality manual, etc) and have to look at more process flows and effectiveness of the business itself.

    People are chomping at the bit for the FDIS, but I would wait for its actual release. Especially if you have a mature QMS in place. There already have been several changes made from the DIS, and I project we (the US) are going to have a few last comments after the TAG meeting in August that may get addressed with appropriate rationale.
     
    Somashekar and Claes Gefvenberg like this.
  16. Claes Gefvenberg

    Claes Gefvenberg Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Location:
    Eskilstuna, Sweden
    Sounds like a relevant analysis. :)
    Exactly. No need to rush things, but I want to get going with the gap analysis.
     
    Ackack-DC likes this.
  17. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    837
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    The FDIS is out, Ackack.
     
  18. Gray Warner

    Gray Warner Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    2
    I have read the FDIS using various methods. The standard is much more readable through my ISO 9001:2008 eyes, as I understand change from the present framework. The more ambiguous clauses in my view are 4.1 Understanding the organization and its context, and 4.2 Understanding tube needs and expectations of interested parties. I am tempted to ignore the notes in 4.1, as they are TMI without really providing any helpful guidance. Once past that mind-warping area, the FDIS reads pretty well if you already have a mature QMS. The published correlation matrix for ISO 9001:2008 to the DIS still works pretty well for the FDIS.
     
    Claes Gefvenberg likes this.
  19. Somashekar

    Somashekar Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    27
    The details in the Planning (clause 6) with the use of direct words is appealing. The use of direct words across the standard is making it simple and effective.
     
  20. Ackack-DC

    Ackack-DC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2015
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Sorry, I meant wait for the official release of the standard, not the release of the FDIS.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.

Share This Page