Wednesday, May 12, 2010

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR ISO 9001:2008

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR ISO 9001:2008

The Justification Study identified the need for an amendment, provided that the impact on users would be limited and that changes would only be introduced when there were clear benefits to users.

The key focuses of the ISO 9001:2008 amendment were to enhance the clarity of ISO 9001:2000 and to enhance its compatibility with ISO 14001:2004.

A tool for assessing the impacts versus benefits for proposed changes was created to assist the drafters of the amendment in deciding which changes should be included, and to assist in the verification of drafts against the identified user needs. The following decision making principles were applied:

1) No changes with high impact would be incorporated into the standard;

2) Changes with medium impact would only be incorporated when they provided a correspondingly medium or high benefit to users of the standard;

3) Even where a change was low impact, it had to be justified by the benefits it delivered to users, before being incorporated.

The changes incorporated in this ISO 9001:2008 edition were classified in terms of impact into the following categories:

1. No Changes or minimum changes on user documents, including records.

2. No changes or minimum changes to existing processes of the organization.

3. No additional training required or minimal training required.

4. No effectes on current certifications.

ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL STATE OF THE QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The implementation of an ISO 9001 conformant system must recognize that it is but a step in a long-term development of a continually improving QMS. Unfortunately, it is often the case that ISO 9001 is taken as a means to an end, where the implementation of a QMS is not the primary objective, rather certification is. As a result, SMEs may end up with stacks of documentation waiting to be processed that adds no value, but cost.

According to the requirements of ISO 9001, an organization must develop only six documented procedures: (1) control of documents, (2) control of quality records, (3) internal audits, (4) control of non-conformities, (5) corrective action, and (6) preventative action. A quality manual and several records are also required. The development of other procedures, work instructions, and other documents is largely at the discretion of the organization. From the very beginning of the process, it is therefore essential that SMEs establish a balanced view between a short-term focus (marketing/sales) and a long-term focus (achieving company-wide quality awareness through TQM). ISO documentation should be considered as an enabler along that way and SMEs must guard against the creation of unnecessary documentation.

However, even when such a view is adopted, many SMEs struggle to move from their initial state to a fully functional ISO 9001 QMS. Over the last several years, we have been involved in ISO 9001 implementation projects in seven different SMEs. The SMEs have ranged in size from approximately 20 employees to 500 employees. The SMEs have been drawn from a variety of sectors in Virginia, including manufacturing, distribution, and services. Based on our experience, we developed a schematic of initial states of an organization in terms of the

existence and functionality the documentation required by the standard while functionality is equated with an effectively operated QMS that leads to increased customer satisfaction and continuous improvement of business results. A successful QMS must be fully functional and appropriately documented. With that in mind, there are four main states in which SMEs can be located in the beginning of the implementation process:

1. Complete Death: No documentation, no functioning This is the state in which there is no indication of the existence and functionality of the QMS. No documentation exists and no processes are in place to help ensure the quality of the product. Relatively few companies will find themselves in this situation.

2. Informally Alive: No documentation, some level of functioning Many SMEs exhibit an organic structure characterized by an absence of standardization and the prevalence of loose and informal working relationships. SMEs operating in this state are more likely to rely on people rather than a system. In such situations, key personnel may resist documentation for two key reasons “(1) documentation is considered a waste of time and (2) documentation of processes and procedures makes the individual less dependable” . SMEs in this state perform some or all of the processes required by ISO 9001 and the QMS may function fairly well. However, they are not willing and ready to document those processes unless there is a cultural change lead by top management.

3. Formally Death: Some level of documentation, no functioning SMEs categorized in this state have documented processes and procedures at some degree, however, the documents are generally not followed and do not necessarily reflect the actual manner in which the organization undertakes its operations and management. This situation highlights the fact that the mere existence of documentation does not necessarily lead to a functional QMS. Moreover, such a situation may help perpetuate the view that ISO 9001 is a way for SMEs to market their products and services but that implementation of the standard requires stacks of documents that offer no value.

4. Formally Alive: Some level of documentation, some level of functioning Each SME considered in this state, achieves a unique combination of the existence and functionality of processes and procedures that may or may not be required by ISO 9001. As illustrated in Figure 2, this situation is closest to the desired state of full functionality (100%) of the ISO 9001 QMS and full documentation (100%) of this functionality