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.

Level 1 policies - risks and opportunities

Discussion in 'IATF 16949:2016 - Automotive Quality Systems' started by Christian Ullrich, Jul 24, 2017.

  1. Christian Ullrich

    Christian Ullrich New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Do level 1 policies need risk and opportunity verbage in the document? We currently have risk based thinking represented in our level 2 processes but not the level 1 policies.
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,002
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Christian, what are "level 1 policies"?
     
  3. Christian Ullrich

    Christian Ullrich New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    The Level 1 policy is a corporate global policy statement for different operations like Product and Process development, Production operations policies. Our level 2 documents are processes, level 3's are work instructions and level 4's are forms. We have added risk and opportunities to our level 2 processes.
     
  4. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,002
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    When you say "do level 1 policies need risk and opportunity verbiage" are you asking if there's a requirement someplace? If so, the answer is not in ISO 9001. In fact, you decide what and how you are going to address risk and opportunity and if/how it needs documenting.
     
  5. David Bradley

    David Bradley Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Michigan
    Back in the early days of ISO 9001/QS 9000, each of the 20 elements typically had a policy (level 1 document), followed by a procedure (level 2 document). After ISO 9001:2000 came out, a lot of folks quit using the individual policies for each section of the standard. I see very few companies that still use separate level 1 documents for each clause or section. I expect to see even less with ISO 9001:2015. As far as the OP's question, if you feel a need to have risks and opportunities outlined in any documentation it would be up to you. As Andy stated above, ISO 9001 does not require or mandate any particular verbiage.
     
  6. johnnymo77

    johnnymo77 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Location:
    Stevensville Michigan
    This is how we have been doing it.

    upload_2017-8-2_16-29-3.png
     
  7. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Somewhat off topic, but...I remember the whole level 1, level 2, etc. era and I never quite understood it. For example, a level 2 procedure...well, is there a level 3 procedure or a level 1 procedure. By Johnnymo77's definition, no, there isn't. So, why not just call a procedure a procedure and call a work instruction a work instruction? Why clutter the management system with extra verbiage?
     
  8. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,002
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    It was a corruption of the original ISO 9001 requirements, RB. ISO 9001 specified in clause 4.9 that process control could be achieved through the use of "documented work instructions, where the absence of such would adversely affect quality"
     
  9. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    The need for the documentation, I understood. It was the need to say "Level 2 work instruction" instead of simply calling it a "work instruction" - the numbered levels never added value, in my opinion.
     
  10. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,002
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Right, it came from the hierarchy created - at least implied - from the way ISO 9001 (1987, 1994) was worded.
     

Share This Page