Your ISO 9001 Quality Management System documentation
at Friday, January 30, 2009
ISO 9001 documentation structure is outlined in the ISO 10013 Standard - Guidelines for Developing Quality Manuals. This standard recommends using a three-level structure. In practice, many companies use four-level documentation model that includes records. 4-level quality management system is shown below:
Quality Manual - level 1
Procedures - level 2
Instructions - level 3
Records - level 4
Actually, the documentation structure starts from the policy. The policy defines, among others, commitments with what standard a company intends to comply with. If you choose to use this approach, your quality management system will have five levels, similar to the structure below:
Quality Policy - level 1
Quality Manual - level 2
Procedures - level 3
Instructions - level 4
Records - level 5
Document titles for your ISO 9001 QMS
As you may have noticed, the titles of the documents in the structure above are quite short. Various companies use different conventions for their document titles. For example, one of my customers titled their quality manual as "Quality Management System Quality Manual."
It is a very typical convention in the medical device manufacturing and other regulated industries to call the second-level documentation Standard Operating Procedures, known as SOPs. Unless one has a level called "Non-standard Operating Procedures," I really do not see a practical or economical reason for long titles like these. As long as the short name conveys the idea and leads us to the right place, let's use it. I will promote this optimization and reduction of waste approach throughout this publication. Let's not make things more complicated than they practically need to be.
Numbering your documents
It is not a specific requirement of the ISO 9001 or any other standard to uniquely identify a part or a document. It is perhaps a common-sense measure and a worldwide practice in any documentation system, to give a document or a component a number and a title, and to identify its revision level. As documentation titles, document numbering is an area for creativity and an opportunity for optimization.
One of my clients runs a small company of some 120 employees. Their documentation control procedure prescribed two numeration systems that dependent on the type of a document. QMS documents had numbers like XX-XXX, and production parts required part number format as XXXXXXX-XXX. One of the drawings had a number 000048-002. Folks on the floor called it "four-eight."
One can certainly use these long-long numbers, but is it practical? So far I did not meet a single company that could justify such an approach. When I audited this client, the organization had less than 250 documents. There were no indications that the company will significantly grow. Therefore, to use document number format allowing hundreds of thousands of numbers could hardly be justified. The most unreadable part numbers I had to deal with was at a mid size company with 13-digit alphanumeric part number format! Try to write those in your audit report!
I hope it is clear that only when extensive part numbers are justified, we do not have other options. If you build helicopters or satellites, you, no doubt, will need millions of parts and therefore will need long part numbers. If not, make your life easy and stay away from all those zeros. The most practical system I worked with used a three-digit format for their part numbers. 202, 203, 204, and so on. Worked just fine!
So far we explored opportunities for improvements in the area of document titles and numbers. Yet, there is another issue with part numbers. Many companies relate a document number to a document type. For example, 20-xxxx indicates a procedure, 30-xxxx indicates a drawing, POP-xxxx indicates a Production Operating Procedure, etc. My practice with a few QMS that used designation approaches showed that "no designation" systems are more practical. Several QMS that used designation I have worked with have failed. Not long ago, one of my clients mentioned that they ran out of range in their document numbering format. The QMS initially permitted for identifying suppliers through a two-digit extension within the part number. While the company grew, the number of supplier increased beyond expectations and eventually the company needed more than 99 suppliers. This resulted in the document number format not being able to support new needs.
To get around this issue, there is a simple solution - a "no designation" system. Part or document numbers in such systems are assigned sequential unique numbers. Areas of use, materials, suppliers, and other attributes are not reflected in part numbers. Moving in this direction, you can simplify your system even more. I worked with a company that did not use document No. at all. That documentation system used just document name followed by a revision number, like Process Validation Protocol AB.
Quality Manual - level 1
Procedures - level 2
Instructions - level 3
Records - level 4
Actually, the documentation structure starts from the policy. The policy defines, among others, commitments with what standard a company intends to comply with. If you choose to use this approach, your quality management system will have five levels, similar to the structure below:
Quality Policy - level 1
Quality Manual - level 2
Procedures - level 3
Instructions - level 4
Records - level 5
Document titles for your ISO 9001 QMS
As you may have noticed, the titles of the documents in the structure above are quite short. Various companies use different conventions for their document titles. For example, one of my customers titled their quality manual as "Quality Management System Quality Manual."
It is a very typical convention in the medical device manufacturing and other regulated industries to call the second-level documentation Standard Operating Procedures, known as SOPs. Unless one has a level called "Non-standard Operating Procedures," I really do not see a practical or economical reason for long titles like these. As long as the short name conveys the idea and leads us to the right place, let's use it. I will promote this optimization and reduction of waste approach throughout this publication. Let's not make things more complicated than they practically need to be.
Numbering your documents
It is not a specific requirement of the ISO 9001 or any other standard to uniquely identify a part or a document. It is perhaps a common-sense measure and a worldwide practice in any documentation system, to give a document or a component a number and a title, and to identify its revision level. As documentation titles, document numbering is an area for creativity and an opportunity for optimization.
One of my clients runs a small company of some 120 employees. Their documentation control procedure prescribed two numeration systems that dependent on the type of a document. QMS documents had numbers like XX-XXX, and production parts required part number format as XXXXXXX-XXX. One of the drawings had a number 000048-002. Folks on the floor called it "four-eight."
One can certainly use these long-long numbers, but is it practical? So far I did not meet a single company that could justify such an approach. When I audited this client, the organization had less than 250 documents. There were no indications that the company will significantly grow. Therefore, to use document number format allowing hundreds of thousands of numbers could hardly be justified. The most unreadable part numbers I had to deal with was at a mid size company with 13-digit alphanumeric part number format! Try to write those in your audit report!
I hope it is clear that only when extensive part numbers are justified, we do not have other options. If you build helicopters or satellites, you, no doubt, will need millions of parts and therefore will need long part numbers. If not, make your life easy and stay away from all those zeros. The most practical system I worked with used a three-digit format for their part numbers. 202, 203, 204, and so on. Worked just fine!
So far we explored opportunities for improvements in the area of document titles and numbers. Yet, there is another issue with part numbers. Many companies relate a document number to a document type. For example, 20-xxxx indicates a procedure, 30-xxxx indicates a drawing, POP-xxxx indicates a Production Operating Procedure, etc. My practice with a few QMS that used designation approaches showed that "no designation" systems are more practical. Several QMS that used designation I have worked with have failed. Not long ago, one of my clients mentioned that they ran out of range in their document numbering format. The QMS initially permitted for identifying suppliers through a two-digit extension within the part number. While the company grew, the number of supplier increased beyond expectations and eventually the company needed more than 99 suppliers. This resulted in the document number format not being able to support new needs.
To get around this issue, there is a simple solution - a "no designation" system. Part or document numbers in such systems are assigned sequential unique numbers. Areas of use, materials, suppliers, and other attributes are not reflected in part numbers. Moving in this direction, you can simplify your system even more. I worked with a company that did not use document No. at all. That documentation system used just document name followed by a revision number, like Process Validation Protocol AB.
About the Author:
Learn more about ISO 9001 documentation and order your Quality Management System tempales today!
