Demonstrating conformity with ISO 9001:2008
For organizations wishing to demonstrate conformity with the requirements of ISO 9001:2008, for the purposes of certification/registration, contractual, or other reasons, it is important to remember the need to provide evidence of the effective implementation of the QMS.
Organizations may be able to demonstrate conformity without the need for extensive documentation.
To claim conformity with ISO 9001:2008, the organization has to be able to provide objective evidence of the effectiveness of its processes and its quality management system. Clause 3.8.1 of ISO 9000:2005 defines “objective
evidence” as “data supporting the existence or variety of something” and notes that “objective evidence may be obtained through observation, measurement, test, or other means.”
Objective evidence does not necessarily depend on the existence of documented procedures, records or other documents, except where specifically mentioned in ISO 9001:2008. In some cases, (for example, in clause 7.1(d)
Planning of product realization, and clause 8.2.4 Monitoring and measurement of product), it is up to the organization to determine what records are necessary in order to provide this objective evidence.
Where the organization has no specific internal procedure for a particular activity, and this is not required by the standard, (for example, clause 5.6 Management Review), it is acceptable for this activity to be conducted using as a basis the relevant clause of ISO 9001:2008. In these situations, both internal and external audits may use the text of ISO 9001:2008 for conformity assessment purposes.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Guidance on Clause 4.2 of ISO 9001:2008
Guidance on Clause 4.2 of ISO 9001:2008
The following comments are intended to assist users of ISO 9001:2008 in understanding the intent of the general documentation requirements of the International Standard.
a) Documented statements of a quality policy and objectives:
Requirements for the quality policy are defined in clause 5.3 of ISO 9001:2008. The documented quality policy has to be controlled according to the requirements of clause 4.2.3.
Note: Organizations that are revising their quality policy for the first time, or in order to meet the amended requirements in ISO 9001:2008, should pay particular attention to clause 4.2.3 (c), (d) and (g).
Requirements for quality objectives are defined in clause 5.4.1 of ISO 9001:2008. These documented quality objectives are also subject to the document control requirements of clause 4.2.3.
b) Quality Manual:
Clause 4.2.2 of ISO 9001:2008 specifies the minimum content for a quality manual. The format and structure of the manual is a decision for each organization, and will depend on the organization’s size, culture and complexity. Some organizations may choose to use the quality manual for other purposes besides that of simply documenting the QMS
A small organization may find it appropriate to include the description of its entire QMS within a single manual, including all the documented procedures required by the standard.
Large, multi-national organizations may need several manuals at the global, national or regional level, and a more complex hierarchy of documentation.
The quality manual is a document that has to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3.
c) Documented procedures:
ISO 9001:2008 specifically requires the organization to have “documented procedures” for the following six activities:
4.2.3 Control of documents
4.2.4 Control of records
8.2.2 Internal audit
8.3 Control of nonconforming product
8.5.2 Corrective action
8.5.3 Preventive action
These documented procedures have to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3 Some organizations may find it convenient to combine the procedure for several activities into a single documented procedure (for example, corrective action and preventive action). Others may choose to document a given activity by using more than one documented procedure (for example, internal audits). Both are acceptable.
Some organizations (particularly larger organizations, or those with more complex processes) may require additional documented procedures (particularly those relating to product realization processes) to implement an effective QMS.
Other organizations may require additional procedures, but the size and/or culture of the organization could enable these to be effectively implemented without necessarily being documented. However, in order to demonstrate compliance with ISO 9001:2008, the organization has to be able to provide objective evidence (not necessarily documented) that its QMS has been effectively implemented.
d) Documents needed by the organization to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of its processes:
In order for an organization to demonstrate the effective implementation of its QMS, it may be necessary to develop documents other than documented procedures. However, the only documents specifically mentioned in ISO 9001:2008 are:
- Quality policy (clause 4.2.1.a)
- Quality objectives (clause 4.2.1.a)
- Quality manual (clause 4.2.1.b)
There are several requirements of ISO 9001:2008 where an organization could add value to its QMS and demonstrate conformity by the preparation of other documents, even though the standard does not specifically require them. Examples
may include:
- Process maps, process flow charts and/or process descriptions
- Organization charts
- Specifications
- Work and/or test instructions
- Documents containing internal communications
- Production schedules
- Approved supplier lists
- Test and inspection plans
- Quality plans
All such documents have to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3 and/or 4.2.4, as applicable
e) Records:
Examples of records specifically required by ISO 9001:2008 are presented in Annex B.
Organizations are free to develop other records that may be needed to demonstrate conformity of their processes, products and quality management system.
Requirements for the control of records are different from those for other documents, and all records have to be controlled according to those of clause 4.2.4 of ISO 9001:2008.
The following comments are intended to assist users of ISO 9001:2008 in understanding the intent of the general documentation requirements of the International Standard.
a) Documented statements of a quality policy and objectives:
Requirements for the quality policy are defined in clause 5.3 of ISO 9001:2008. The documented quality policy has to be controlled according to the requirements of clause 4.2.3.
Note: Organizations that are revising their quality policy for the first time, or in order to meet the amended requirements in ISO 9001:2008, should pay particular attention to clause 4.2.3 (c), (d) and (g).
Requirements for quality objectives are defined in clause 5.4.1 of ISO 9001:2008. These documented quality objectives are also subject to the document control requirements of clause 4.2.3.
b) Quality Manual:
Clause 4.2.2 of ISO 9001:2008 specifies the minimum content for a quality manual. The format and structure of the manual is a decision for each organization, and will depend on the organization’s size, culture and complexity. Some organizations may choose to use the quality manual for other purposes besides that of simply documenting the QMS
A small organization may find it appropriate to include the description of its entire QMS within a single manual, including all the documented procedures required by the standard.
Large, multi-national organizations may need several manuals at the global, national or regional level, and a more complex hierarchy of documentation.
The quality manual is a document that has to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3.
c) Documented procedures:
ISO 9001:2008 specifically requires the organization to have “documented procedures” for the following six activities:
4.2.3 Control of documents
4.2.4 Control of records
8.2.2 Internal audit
8.3 Control of nonconforming product
8.5.2 Corrective action
8.5.3 Preventive action
These documented procedures have to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3 Some organizations may find it convenient to combine the procedure for several activities into a single documented procedure (for example, corrective action and preventive action). Others may choose to document a given activity by using more than one documented procedure (for example, internal audits). Both are acceptable.
Some organizations (particularly larger organizations, or those with more complex processes) may require additional documented procedures (particularly those relating to product realization processes) to implement an effective QMS.
Other organizations may require additional procedures, but the size and/or culture of the organization could enable these to be effectively implemented without necessarily being documented. However, in order to demonstrate compliance with ISO 9001:2008, the organization has to be able to provide objective evidence (not necessarily documented) that its QMS has been effectively implemented.
d) Documents needed by the organization to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of its processes:
In order for an organization to demonstrate the effective implementation of its QMS, it may be necessary to develop documents other than documented procedures. However, the only documents specifically mentioned in ISO 9001:2008 are:
- Quality policy (clause 4.2.1.a)
- Quality objectives (clause 4.2.1.a)
- Quality manual (clause 4.2.1.b)
There are several requirements of ISO 9001:2008 where an organization could add value to its QMS and demonstrate conformity by the preparation of other documents, even though the standard does not specifically require them. Examples
may include:
- Process maps, process flow charts and/or process descriptions
- Organization charts
- Specifications
- Work and/or test instructions
- Documents containing internal communications
- Production schedules
- Approved supplier lists
- Test and inspection plans
- Quality plans
All such documents have to be controlled in accordance with the requirements of clause 4.2.3 and/or 4.2.4, as applicable
e) Records:
Examples of records specifically required by ISO 9001:2008 are presented in Annex B.
Organizations are free to develop other records that may be needed to demonstrate conformity of their processes, products and quality management system.
Requirements for the control of records are different from those for other documents, and all records have to be controlled according to those of clause 4.2.4 of ISO 9001:2008.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING ISO 9001 IN SMEs
KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING ISO 9001 IN SMEs
There are many issues that must be addressed in moving the QMS from the initial state to the desired state. For example, all organizations implementing ISO 9001 will need to consider the unique culture within the organization, its size, and the resources available. Beyond those widely discussed points, three issues that merit particular attention are (1) consideration of the QMS as a parallel function, (2) training, and (3) auditing. Key points associated with these issues are discussed below.
Consideration of QMS as Parallel Function
In the case of all of the transitions depicted, real benefits from the QMS are more likely to be experienced if the QMS is implemented directly into the core structure of the organization. SMEs must be cautious against establishing a QMS that is run separately in parallel to its other systems. In SMEs, the parallel subsystem most commonly exhibits itself as a separate Quality Assurance, or in some cases, ISO 9001 department. Possible reasons for this may include the existence of rigid departmental boundaries in some SMEs or overemphasis on core activities. As Yauch and Steudel [10] note, SMEs tend to focus their attention on “…necessary routine activities (such as sales, production, shipping, etc.) rather than activities aimed at improving processes or systems.” If a SME insists on establishing a separate quality department, its level of effectiveness can be increased by embedding the QMS in widely-used organizational systems where practical. The integration is largely a function of how well the QMS manages to share information with other subsystems and its ability to align with the policies, norms, goals, and values in place throughout the organization.
Training
In SMEs, training and staff development is more likely to be ad hoc and small scale because of modest human and financial resources and the absence of a specific training budget. To prevent the problems arising from lack of education and training, two things must be done:
1. Education of Top Management: The centralization of decision-making processes within many SMEs means that the management can either be the main stumbling block to change or the main catalyst for change. Therefore, any approach to ISO 9001 implementation must involve considerable education for the top management of the organization to create awareness and understanding of the implementation process as a change initiative. Implementing a fully functional and documented QMS requires motivation by top management to appreciate, achieve, and implement the necessary measures to meet the standards’ criteria.
2. Education and Training of Employees: SMEs are often under pressure to quickly gain ISO 9001 registration. Meeting the requirements of the standard in a short period of time can prove a formidable obstacle for a small company. Since most SMEs do not possess the needed expertise internally, they may be inclined to hire external experts to provide the necessary technical expertise and manpower. However, having a functioning and documented QMS requires more than that. It requires ensuring that all employees in the organization clearly know what is expected of them and how they can contribute to the attainment of their organizations’ goals. This will likely require the preparation and implementation of a training plan tailored specifically to the unique characteristics and maturity level of the SME.
Auditing
As emphasized throughout the paper, a QMS is not going to produce the expected results unless it is fully functional. While auditing must therefore verify the existence of the necessary documentation, it must also focus on the functionality of the QMS. The measurement of the functionality and the qualitative and financial impacts of a QMS have been the subject of several studies, including Kaynak [11]. Among the categories used to measure functionality and performance improvement, two are particularly noteworthy for our purposes: management commitment and employee involvement. A QMS cannot be functional in the absence of those two characteristics. Therefore, as a minimum, internal and external auditors should continually verify top management’s commitment to increased company-wide quality awareness and improvement in addition to employee involvement in the design, implementation, operation, and improvement of quality related processes and procedures.
There are many issues that must be addressed in moving the QMS from the initial state to the desired state. For example, all organizations implementing ISO 9001 will need to consider the unique culture within the organization, its size, and the resources available. Beyond those widely discussed points, three issues that merit particular attention are (1) consideration of the QMS as a parallel function, (2) training, and (3) auditing. Key points associated with these issues are discussed below.
Consideration of QMS as Parallel Function
In the case of all of the transitions depicted, real benefits from the QMS are more likely to be experienced if the QMS is implemented directly into the core structure of the organization. SMEs must be cautious against establishing a QMS that is run separately in parallel to its other systems. In SMEs, the parallel subsystem most commonly exhibits itself as a separate Quality Assurance, or in some cases, ISO 9001 department. Possible reasons for this may include the existence of rigid departmental boundaries in some SMEs or overemphasis on core activities. As Yauch and Steudel [10] note, SMEs tend to focus their attention on “…necessary routine activities (such as sales, production, shipping, etc.) rather than activities aimed at improving processes or systems.” If a SME insists on establishing a separate quality department, its level of effectiveness can be increased by embedding the QMS in widely-used organizational systems where practical. The integration is largely a function of how well the QMS manages to share information with other subsystems and its ability to align with the policies, norms, goals, and values in place throughout the organization.
Training
In SMEs, training and staff development is more likely to be ad hoc and small scale because of modest human and financial resources and the absence of a specific training budget. To prevent the problems arising from lack of education and training, two things must be done:
1. Education of Top Management: The centralization of decision-making processes within many SMEs means that the management can either be the main stumbling block to change or the main catalyst for change. Therefore, any approach to ISO 9001 implementation must involve considerable education for the top management of the organization to create awareness and understanding of the implementation process as a change initiative. Implementing a fully functional and documented QMS requires motivation by top management to appreciate, achieve, and implement the necessary measures to meet the standards’ criteria.
2. Education and Training of Employees: SMEs are often under pressure to quickly gain ISO 9001 registration. Meeting the requirements of the standard in a short period of time can prove a formidable obstacle for a small company. Since most SMEs do not possess the needed expertise internally, they may be inclined to hire external experts to provide the necessary technical expertise and manpower. However, having a functioning and documented QMS requires more than that. It requires ensuring that all employees in the organization clearly know what is expected of them and how they can contribute to the attainment of their organizations’ goals. This will likely require the preparation and implementation of a training plan tailored specifically to the unique characteristics and maturity level of the SME.
Auditing
As emphasized throughout the paper, a QMS is not going to produce the expected results unless it is fully functional. While auditing must therefore verify the existence of the necessary documentation, it must also focus on the functionality of the QMS. The measurement of the functionality and the qualitative and financial impacts of a QMS have been the subject of several studies, including Kaynak [11]. Among the categories used to measure functionality and performance improvement, two are particularly noteworthy for our purposes: management commitment and employee involvement. A QMS cannot be functional in the absence of those two characteristics. Therefore, as a minimum, internal and external auditors should continually verify top management’s commitment to increased company-wide quality awareness and improvement in addition to employee involvement in the design, implementation, operation, and improvement of quality related processes and procedures.
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR ISO 9001:2008
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR ISO 9001:2008
This Implementation Guidance has been developed to assist users in understanding the issues that need to be considered during the co-existence period between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008.
While the changes between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 are expected to have a limited impact on users, some arrangements regarding implementation are needed.
Note: To reflect the limited scope of the changes the term “implementation” is now being used to make a clear distinction with the former “transition” from ISO 9001:1994 to ISO 9001:2000, when there were significant changes throughout the standard.
A wide diffusion of this implementation guidance is recommended, in particular the comparison table between ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 9001:2000, given in Annex B to ISO 9001:2008.
ISO 9001:2008 has been developed in order to introduce clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and to improve compatibility with ISO 14001:2004. ISO 9001:2008 does not introduce additional requirements nor does it change the intent of the ISO 9001:2000 standard.
Certification to ISO 9001:2008 is not an “upgrade”, and organizations that are certified to ISO 9001:2000 should be afforded the same status as those who have already received a new certificate to ISO 9001:2008 No new requirements were introduced in this edition but, in order to benefit from the clarifications of ISO 9001:2008, users of the former version will need to take into consideration whether the clarifications introduced have an impact on their current interpretation of ISO 9001:2000, as changes may be necessary to their QMS In order to assist organizations to have a full understanding of the new ISO 9001:2008, it may be useful to have an insight on the revision process, how this revision reflects the inputs received from users of the standard, and the consideration given to benefits and impacts during its development.
Prior to the commencement of a revision (or amendment) to a management system standard, ISO/Guide 72:2001 Guidelines for the justification and development of management system standards recommends that a “Justification Study” is prepared to present a case for the proposed project and that it outlines details of the data and inputs used to support its arguments. In relation to the development of ISO 9001:2008 user needs were identified from the following:
- the results of a formal “Systematic Review” on ISO 9001:2000 that was performed by the members of ISO/TC 176/SC2 during 2003-2004
- feedback from the ISO/TC 176/Working Group on “Interpretations”
- the results of an extensive worldwide “User Feedback Survey on ISO 9001 and ISO 9004″ by ISO/TC 176/SC 2/WG 18 and similar national surveys.
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 ISO14001:2004.
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:
- No changes or minimum changes on user documents, including records
- No changes or minimum changes to existing processes of the organization
- No additional training required or minimal training required
- No effects on current certifications
The benefits identified for the ISO 9001:2008 edition fall into the following categories:
- Provides clarity
- Increases compatibility with ISO 14001.
- Maintains consistency with ISO 9000 family of standards.
- Improves translatability.
This Implementation Guidance has been developed to assist users in understanding the issues that need to be considered during the co-existence period between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008.
While the changes between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 are expected to have a limited impact on users, some arrangements regarding implementation are needed.
Note: To reflect the limited scope of the changes the term “implementation” is now being used to make a clear distinction with the former “transition” from ISO 9001:1994 to ISO 9001:2000, when there were significant changes throughout the standard.
A wide diffusion of this implementation guidance is recommended, in particular the comparison table between ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 9001:2000, given in Annex B to ISO 9001:2008.
ISO 9001:2008 has been developed in order to introduce clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and to improve compatibility with ISO 14001:2004. ISO 9001:2008 does not introduce additional requirements nor does it change the intent of the ISO 9001:2000 standard.
Certification to ISO 9001:2008 is not an “upgrade”, and organizations that are certified to ISO 9001:2000 should be afforded the same status as those who have already received a new certificate to ISO 9001:2008 No new requirements were introduced in this edition but, in order to benefit from the clarifications of ISO 9001:2008, users of the former version will need to take into consideration whether the clarifications introduced have an impact on their current interpretation of ISO 9001:2000, as changes may be necessary to their QMS In order to assist organizations to have a full understanding of the new ISO 9001:2008, it may be useful to have an insight on the revision process, how this revision reflects the inputs received from users of the standard, and the consideration given to benefits and impacts during its development.
Prior to the commencement of a revision (or amendment) to a management system standard, ISO/Guide 72:2001 Guidelines for the justification and development of management system standards recommends that a “Justification Study” is prepared to present a case for the proposed project and that it outlines details of the data and inputs used to support its arguments. In relation to the development of ISO 9001:2008 user needs were identified from the following:
- the results of a formal “Systematic Review” on ISO 9001:2000 that was performed by the members of ISO/TC 176/SC2 during 2003-2004
- feedback from the ISO/TC 176/Working Group on “Interpretations”
- the results of an extensive worldwide “User Feedback Survey on ISO 9001 and ISO 9004″ by ISO/TC 176/SC 2/WG 18 and similar national surveys.
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 ISO14001:2004.
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:
- No changes or minimum changes on user documents, including records
- No changes or minimum changes to existing processes of the organization
- No additional training required or minimal training required
- No effects on current certifications
The benefits identified for the ISO 9001:2008 edition fall into the following categories:
- Provides clarity
- Increases compatibility with ISO 14001.
- Maintains consistency with ISO 9000 family of standards.
- Improves translatability.
Hidden Businees Opportunities
The ISO 9001:2000 Standard has been revised after eight years. And the buzz is rapidly reaching a crescendo. We continue to receive numerous emails and phone calls regarding the impact of the new release. First, let me dispel any anxiety about the November 15, 2008 official “2008” release. There are no new requirements. The changes are largely interpretive, and focus on terminology clarifications. The changes to the ISO 9001 amendment, however, will have considerable benefit.As a back drop, keep in mind that ISO 9001 is not just an International Standard for a Quality Management System. It is the world’s most recognized business management standard. And it makes a strong business case. It focuses attention on leadership, business planning, organizational business processes, your customers (internal and external), measurement and reporting, and continual improvement. That translates to improved business results and a sustainable competitive advantage.
Overview of the Changes
The points of clarification focus on outsourcing, documentation, management representative, employee competence, design verification and validation, process monitoring, control of nonconforming product and corrective and preventive action. But bear in mind, no “shalls” (requirements) were added or removed.Examples of select changes include: In an attempt to clarify the term “outsourcing,” notes were added that require the organization to identify processes (and the control of these) to be completed by an external party. With respect to documentation, the changes focus on improving the compatibility between ISO 9001 and ISO 14001.The only significant addition to the management representative sub clause was to require that the MR be a member of the organization’s management team. This means a contracted person could serve in this role as long as he or she is also considered part of management. The management representative does not have to be full-time.With regard to competence of employees, a note was added to make training more pervasive throughout the organization. Training applies to all employees directly or indirectly responsible for delivering a service or producing a product (everyone that is part of the quality chain). A complete listing of changes can be found in Annex B (Table B.1) of the Standard. Also, note that there is better alignment with ISO 14001:2004.
Comments
Overview of the Changes
The points of clarification focus on outsourcing, documentation, management representative, employee competence, design verification and validation, process monitoring, control of nonconforming product and corrective and preventive action. But bear in mind, no “shalls” (requirements) were added or removed.Examples of select changes include: In an attempt to clarify the term “outsourcing,” notes were added that require the organization to identify processes (and the control of these) to be completed by an external party. With respect to documentation, the changes focus on improving the compatibility between ISO 9001 and ISO 14001.The only significant addition to the management representative sub clause was to require that the MR be a member of the organization’s management team. This means a contracted person could serve in this role as long as he or she is also considered part of management. The management representative does not have to be full-time.With regard to competence of employees, a note was added to make training more pervasive throughout the organization. Training applies to all employees directly or indirectly responsible for delivering a service or producing a product (everyone that is part of the quality chain). A complete listing of changes can be found in Annex B (Table B.1) of the Standard. Also, note that there is better alignment with ISO 14001:2004.
Comments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)