Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Considering Changing Document Control Numbers

Document Control QMS

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 jessmccurdy

jessmccurdy

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 4 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 28 February 2018 - 03:47 PM

Last fall I took over the Quality Manager role at our company and have been trying to get everything in order since then and it has been a very tedious process.

We are considering changing the way our documents are numbered so they are easier to identify.

Has anyone done an overhaul on their QMS document numbering system and if so, do you have any suggestions?

 

Currently the document numbering system is just 000 to 3999 - separated by Number Series/Functional Area as shown below.

I'm working on a new numbering/lettering scheme that will make the documents much more easy to identify - shown below the current system.

 

 

CURRENT NUMBERING SYSTEM

000-499                Manuals & Plans

500-999                QMS & Safety

1000-1499            Human Resources

1500-1999            Facility & Security

2000-2499            Customer Service

2500-2999            Operations

3000-3499            Information Technology

3500-3999             Finance/Accounting       

 

PROPOSED NUMBERING SYSTEM

For each category, the Document ID will start with the acronym of the location then department, then information type followed by a 3-digit number.

Numbers will start at 001 and go up with a decimal to indicate version (001.1, 001.2, etc.)

Example: COMP-QMS-SOP-001

 

LOCATION:

COMP

For Company documentation that is not location dependent

MO

For Company documentation that is Missouri related or generated

NV

For Company documentation that is Nevada related or generated

PA

For Company documentation that is Pennsylvania related or generated

 

CATEGORY:

GMP

Good Manufacturing Practices

FIN

Finance

FSMS

Food Safety Management System

HR

Human Resources

HS

Health and Safety

IT

Information Technology

OPS

Operations

QMS

Quality Management System

 

DOCUMENTATION TYPE:

CKL

Checklist

FLOW

Flowchart

FORM

For Blank Forms

MATX

Matrix

MEET

Meeting Related Documentation

OEM

Original Equipment Manufacturer Documentation

PLAN

Plan

POL

Policy

PUR

Purchasing Documents

REP

Report

SOP

Standard Operating Procedures

SPEC

Specifications

TEMP

Templates

TNG

Training

WI

Work Instructions

 

NUMBER:

Numbers will start at 001 and go up with a decimal to indicate version (001.1, 001.2, etc.)

 

 

For each category, the Document ID will start with the acronym of the location then department, then information type followed by a 3-digit number.

Numbers will start at 001 and go up with a decimal to indicate version (001.1, 001.2, etc.)

Example: COMP-QMS-SOP-001

 

  • 0

#2 Danica

Danica

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 60 posts
  • 16 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Yoga, running, mediation, nature, cooking/eating, reading, learning, science/tech, life in general :)

Posted 28 February 2018 - 06:47 PM

Hello,

 

1) I would put the document version into the document control header instead of adding it to the file name.

 

2) If a lot of people other than yourself are to use these documents, I would simplify the prefixes. ex: for SOP related to QMS instead of putting QMS you could put 100-199 are for QMS, 200-299 are for OPS etc. Ex: SOP-123 would be for QMS, SOP-233 would be for OPS, and so on.

 

3) I do not understand why you would not have different 'sets' of documents for each facility in the same bundle. If it was me, I would have a set of documents for each facility that are only accessible by whichever facility the document is applicable to.

 

4) for the 'common' ones I would add them into all 3 document binders and name them exactly the same for all 3 facilities.

 

I would be quite confused if I were to search in your database for documents with the scheme you propose to be honest.

 

I know you want each file name to be as descriptive as possible, but for the rest of your staff I assure you this will create confusion.

 

I had to come up with a system for our mouse colony (back in my research days) with each mouse having a different ID (we were producing more than 10 000 per year for that particular project). Like you, we had mice in 3 locations so this had to be included in the IDs. In the end I was the only one able to ID pedigrees in the colony because I had made it oh so simple I had thought, but it was a mess for others.

 

If you absolutely want to put all the prefix information you mention, I would reduce the quantity of letters for each prefix.

 

Best of luck to you :spoton: :happydance:

 

Cheers

DA


  • 0

#3 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,383 posts
  • 554 thanks
73
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 28 February 2018 - 08:44 PM

I think it could work but it's complex.  I would cut down the categories if I'm honest.  Do you need a location one?  Or is that implied by where the document is stored?  Having categories like GMP, Ops and FSQMS may mean that different people assign similar documents in different places.  Could you not just have them in folders relating to subject?  I would say some level of "document type" is needed but so many?  What's the difference between a checklist and a form?  You could have one which is both?  Does a report which is normally a one off document need to be document controlled?  i think with the complexity you will be permanently tearing your hair out wondering why Maggie from accounts just created a document COMP-IT-FORM-001 when it should have been PA-FIN-CKL-001.


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 mgourley

mgourley

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 901 posts
  • 739 thanks
96
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plant City, FL
  • Interests:Cooking, golf, firearms, food safety and sanitation.

Posted 28 February 2018 - 09:54 PM

As others have said, I think it's overly complex.

 

I get the point of putting things in "categories", but if you are not intimately immersed in the documents, I find that it makes it difficult to locate things.

 

The QA guy at one of our other facilities changed every document along a similar line. When he left, and I had to go cover for a BRC audit, I had no clue what any of these documents were or where to find them on the server. I finally found the "Table of Contents", but I still had to go through sheets of paper to find the doc that the auditor wanted to see.

 

I know I am probably in the minority here, but I number my documents according to the clause of the standard we are audited against (BRC).

Yes, I know, if the clause number changes, the document number will have to change. But with BRC that's every three years, so is not much of a burden.

 

This way, EVERYTHING that has to do with Pest Control is going to be 4.14.x. EVERYTHING that has to do with Control of Operations is going to be 6.1.x.

 

Just  my .02.

 

Marshall


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

#5 Hoosiersmoker

Hoosiersmoker

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 63 posts
  • 24 thanks
2
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 08 March 2018 - 02:31 PM

I agree about being complicated, since there has to be a certain level of involvement and knowledge of senior management down to the production employees everyone should be able to tell the system and documents at a glance. Our documents include the type of document, element number and quality or food safety ID as well as title (FS 2.1.4 Customer Complaint SOP Rev3) Anyone that looks at the title can tell what it is. The document name, revision # and dates, ownership, authorization, document address, number and page info are always in the footer. Previous versions are archived under their respective parent folder. Just my .02c


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

#6 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,149 posts
  • 316 thanks
39
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 08 March 2018 - 03:00 PM

I have policies POL 001 etc.  records REC 001 etc and SOP/SSOP 001 etc  Master list of records defines which belongs to which SQF element, filed numerically for ease of use. I have also added a change log to the bottom of each document regardless of type.....easier for me to manage and the auditor to audit against.

 

Each policy also references any records or sop's by the document number.

 

The last thing you want during an audit is to be trying to remember your own system


  • 1

Thanked by 1 Member:

#7 Nikki R

Nikki R

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 34 posts
  • 8 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female

Posted 08 March 2018 - 04:04 PM

At my company we went simple, we started at 1 and worked up. each document is numbered sequentially as its created. It then has a letter to indicated the version. e.g 1.A any ammendments would make it 1.B and so on.

 

We found that you can get over complicated and people lose interest and don't put as much effort into things as they don't understand it. 


  • 0

Thanked by 1 Member:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users