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.

Integrated Iso 14001&9001 documents review

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2008 - Quality Management Systems' started by marta, Mar 20, 2016.

  1. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Hello there,
    I hope you can help. We are a small company with the integrated manual. I have a question about the document control and reviews. Out manual consists of the Quality manual, environmental review, control procedures, subprocedures, policies, forms and records. Each document has its own document version and there is a register for manual changes etc. my question is, when I make changes in the quality manual, I put the revision date and list changes do I in the same time change versions on Control Procedures to match the version and issue date of the manual? If I have issue 2 of The system, do all documents within need to have this date on it? It is slightly confusing. Do I treat all as one let's say book? I guess it would be much easier of it was one book where you have a footer and every time you change one thing, the version and issue date changes, but in our case we have sort of separate parts. Please help.
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Hi Marta:
    We'll do our best. It may be that you should consider splitting out the various components of your manual. If you are struggling with deciding what to update and how, then that's a clue. Why not do the conventional thing and have a) manual, b) procedures, c) forms. It seems to me that
    is too complex for a small company.

    May I ask why you have "records" included? Or "subprocedures"? Or even "policies". This seems to me to be very complicated. Somehow a monster has been created and now that's what you're feeding...
     
    drgnrider and Claes Gefvenberg like this.
  3. Claes Gefvenberg

    Claes Gefvenberg Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    208
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Location:
    Eskilstuna, Sweden
    I understand your confusion, but the answer depends on how you have set your system up: In short, what does your written procedure for document control say? I get the feeling that your setup is more complicated than it needs to be.

    Added in edit: Aha. Simultaneous posting, and Andy is on the same track.
     
    drgnrider and Andy Nichols like this.
  4. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    We do have it separately. Manual, environmental review,legal register, environmental aspects register, environmental objectives. Then Control procedures and process flows, subprocedures like: monitoring and measuring, operational processes, emergency preparedness, training and competence, management review etc and then there are policies : procurement policy, h&s, recruitment etc. we used to have Pas99 before so it was slightly different layout and then we bought this ready system. Company policies are for annual review. Not sure how to sort out those control procedures if I should keep them individually and review annually or treat them as a part of the Manual and when I review manual change their version to match the manual. In the main revision page we mark changes in the system and put date and issue number. Then there is a master documents register with all documents and their versions and issue date.
     
  5. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    I think this might be the problem...
     
  6. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Hello Claes, all documents have their own name, revision and date. And there is a master list for all of documents with the date of revision and planned revision and current versions and when they were reviewed. It is slightly complicated when it comes to review. It says that the
    system shall be reviewed at least annually but for some like environmental aspects, objectives and legal it should be more often. And then internal audits periodically. I guess I will just review fully control procedures, policies and sub-procedures annually. The rest like environmental review and manual etc more often. Will issue the system with a next version and will record if any changes or no changes were made. The thing is when I have the next issue of the system, documents will have different dates on them. That is what is confusing me. It would be easier if I could do it in a way that Review the system, put the same date of issue but different versions. Now as it was all issued together ( when we bought this ready system), all documents have the same issue date as it is the first issue of the whole manual.
     
  7. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Thank you Andy. They had our previous system so they added bits from the previous one. We will see how it goes.
     
  8. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    USA
    Individual manuals/procedures/policies/work instructions should be reviewed as needed, individually or in groups when they affect each other. Revision history can be maintained in the document, in a system's change process, or made apparent through different font along with saved archived previous versions, or other means as suits you.

    No list of documents with revision numbers/dates is required by any technical specification I have worked with except for ISO/IEC 17025. Unless you have a compelling need for such a list, I suggest it creates a non-valuable chore. If you feel you must have such a list, I suggest you keep it separate from the manual so the manual does not need to get an update each time - what a burden that must be! The list, if you must have it, can be considered a living "document" for users' reference only, as it does not contain any actual instructions or acceptance parameters.
     
    Claes Gefvenberg likes this.
  9. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    thank you Jennifer. That is very helpful. It was just confusing as on the list of documents they put a 'planned date for review' and put 3 months from when the system was issued. I guess that was just a suggestion and for us to decide. Cannot imagine reviewing everything periodically!
    Thanks a lot. Will change it as per plan.
     
    Claes Gefvenberg likes this.
  10. drgnrider

    drgnrider Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    I, too, am responsible for the ISO-portion of our QMS and EMS and am working on their integration to reduce my work and that of my auditors.

    Your "review" can consist of the Internal audit(s). Since we audit our systems annually, I have my auditors review the documents and procedures before they audit. If they find anything, I get with the document/process owner and discuss any necessary changes. If a LEAN or 5-S project affects the area or process, I do a special audit to see if anything needs changed within the documents.

    We have document lists for both systems, but do not show a 'planned review date'. As Jennifer noted, (although her's was regarding the entire list), this seems a 'non-value added chore, just another reason to HAVE to continually update this list. We use this list for a multitude of functions, and people have gotten so use to using it to quickly check multiple documents, they would complain if it was missing... this tells me they are checking their documents before use.
     
    marta and Claes Gefvenberg like this.
  11. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    I have used "document trees" before to give structure to a QMS/EMS. It can look like this:

    • Quality Manual
      • Process 1
        • Form (input)
        • Form (output)
      • Process 2
        • Form (input)
        • Form (output)
    And so on...
     
    Jennifer Kirley, drgnrider and marta like this.
  12. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Jennifer, thank you for your replies. Just one more question if you don't mind, regarding the internal audits. On the schedule that we received there are sections: documentation (4.0), management responsibility (5.0), resource management (6.0), product realisation (7.0), measurement analysis & improvement (8.0), all them make sense and then 3 more but with not allocated sections: resources and finance inclusive of purchasing ( For me it is a mixture of resources and product realisation), laws and legislation compliance and the last one is training and competency. Not sure why they have separated those 3 like that. Would you see any sense of that?
     
  13. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    USA
    Marta, are you referring to a schedule for an audit done on you? The elements you cite are from 2008 version.
     
  14. marta

    marta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    It is on the internal audit schedule that was received with the system:). Yes, our system is 19001:2008&14001, not updated to 2015 as yet.
     
  15. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    867
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    I believe your internal audit schedule is based on the clauses of the standard. Each clause is audited on dates specified in the schedule. However, this kind of audit planning is not consistent with the "process approach" being espoused by ISO 9001 standard.

    When you develop you plan for internal audit, create a schedule against the processes employed within your system and NOT on the clauses of the standard.
     
  16. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    I agree with Tony. Internal audits shouldn't be scheduled or conducted according to elements or individual sections of ISO 9001/ISO 14001. It's a common error people make.

    Marta, is this another legacy of your organization buying a "canned" system?
     

Share This Page