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.

Maintain an Organisation Chart or not?

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by Glenn0004, Jul 20, 2016.

  1. Glenn0004

    Glenn0004 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Under ISO 9001:2008 we maintained an organisation chart as a way of demonstrating roles and responsibilities. In truth this document was never used for anything other that satisfying the external audit. While looking at ISO 9001:2015 and trying to remove the maintenance of documents that only satisfy the external audit, I'm considering moving away from the organisation chart and to focus on defining RACI for each documented process (Level 2 and 3) and work instruction (Level 4). Given that there has been a expectation that we maintain an organisation chart, is defining the RACI for each process enough to comply with requirements for responsibility and authority?
     
  2. hogheavenfarm

    hogheavenfarm Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    42
    One of the things our customers always ask for at the start of every new project, a copy of our QM and an org chart. They want to know who has the responsibilities too, and what the chain of command looks like. Sometimes they want additional information added to the chart as well, One of the big Japanese firms wanted me to note on the org chart the 'contact person' for each functional department. I thought it was amusing since they had made it very clear to us that we could only contact them through their 'single point of contact' person.
     
    normzone and Glenn0004 like this.
  3. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    862
    Likes Received:
    982
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    We had an organizational chart to show our structure to new hires and to visually identify resource gaps within our organization. We did not maintain it for ISO 9001.

    This may sound simplistic, but can't your roles/responsibilities be addressed in your documentation (i.e., procedures, process maps, work instructions)?
     
    David Bradley, normzone and Glenn0004 like this.
  4. pkfraser

    pkfraser Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Aberdeen Scotland
    Glenn
    Did the org chart really "demonstrate responsibilities"? I have yet to see one that does - they tend to reinforce the departmental view of an organisation, which is not very helpful for the "process approach".
    You are on the right track to use RACI for your process descriptions - get the process definitions correct, and a role involvement analysis can be an automatic outcome. It also answers the "internal communication" requirement very precisely. And if you identify process owners for each process, you have covered the accountability aspect of managing your system. Whether the people who are identified as "responsible" for taking action actually have the "authority" may be harder to demonstrate, however...
     
    normzone and Glenn0004 like this.
  5. Glenn0004

    Glenn0004 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Thanks for your reply - For whatever reason (perhaps from previous audit) there expectation that we maintain an organisation chart to demonstrate roles and responsibilities within "Top Management". As the RACI will indicate the person Accountable for a process along with those Responsible, my gut feeling is that this should be enough to communicate responsibilities (and satisfy the external auditor). Our new hires go though company induction where this is addressed and are able to see organisational reporting through active directory...I'm beging to see more value in defining and documenting the RACI within the level 3 and 4 process documentation as opposed to maintaing an org chart to keep the auditor happy.
     
    normzone likes this.
  6. Glenn0004

    Glenn0004 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Good point..in reality the org chart only indicated the departments that fell under the responsibilities of each member of top managment...our standard work instruction template that contains the RACI also refers to the Accountable person (role) authorising the Responsible person (role) for completeing the task as defined.
     
  7. pkfraser

    pkfraser Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Aberdeen Scotland
    Now that is another issue(!)
    I reckon that the "normal" definition and use of RACI is confusing, which is why we say that the Process Owner is Accountable (ie takes the credit of the process works, and has to get it sorted if it doesn't - but does not necessarily have to be involved on a day-to-day basis). See attached for an explanation...
    ["Authority" is more of an HR / management issue, where you do not let someone loose in a process unless they have the competence to make decisions as required]
     
  8. pkfraser

    pkfraser Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Aberdeen Scotland
    Sorry - I am either responsible or accountable for forgetting the attachment...
     

    Attached File(s): 1. Scan for viruses before using. 2. Report any 'bad' files by reporting this post. 3. Use at your own Risk.:

    Atul Khandekar and normzone like this.
  9. David Bradley

    David Bradley Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Michigan
    One of the biggest issues in using an org chart is they normally show structural relationships but really don't get into roles. In my opinion, most roles, authorities, responsibilities and even competencies are reflected much better in the local documentation.
     

Share This Page