ISO Audit Documents
I know what you mean, I don't know the source for sure, but for some reason I think it may have been here: ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group?From years back, I remember ISO internal audits being a very standard structure. You could go from one factory to another and see the same kind of format of CAR and form. I can't remember; was this in one of the original ISO documents (hence the high level of conformity of style)?
Even if it isn't the source I've been reminded there are some really good resources available there. Check it out.
Regards,
Simon
From years back, I remember ISO internal audits being a very standard structure. You could go from one factory to another and see the same kind of format of CAR and form. I can't remember; was this in one of the original ISO documents (hence the high level of conformity of style)?
Hi,
This is the most common example of a NCR -
Attached Files
Never used it myself but you're probably remembering examples of the implementation of this -
1994 version
ISO 9000:1994 emphasized quality assurance via preventive actions, instead of just checking final product, and continued to require evidence of compliance with documented procedures. As with the first edition, the down-side was that companies tended to implement its requirements by creating shelf-loads of procedure manuals, and becoming burdened with an ISO bureaucracy. In some companies, adapting and improving processes could actually be impeded by the quality system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_9001
Basically everyone knew that compliance virtually required the drafting of a manual according to a "formula", including the style/use of CAR forms as well.
Nonetheless the layout / structure is IMO (relatively !) much easier to follow for less imaginative minds than the "process" based model which followed. I used to occasionally browse the latter as a solution to insomnia (pre-internet
A nicely sarcastic telling (British of course) of the developement, layout and flavour of the standard is here -
http://www.systemsth...3-1-article.asp
a sample extract -
It is ironic that ISO 9000, what we would describe as the “control solution” to our problems, separated “design” from “process” (see page 137), making the understanding of this important issue less likely. It also served to maintain the tradition that management could and should be separated from work (see page 62), something Admiral Rickover, rightly in our view, saw as the nub of the problem.
He went on:
“It should be of concern to us that specifications are normally written by manufacturers and therefore usually represent the lowest standard of engineering to which all manufacturers are willing to agree. This should be changed.”
However, ISO 9000 ensured that it was not. ISO 9000 ensured that the manufacturer could determine its own quality system, provided it also satisfied the requirements of an inspector.
Rgds / Charles.C
in the actual ISO-9001 version "Design" it's a PROCESS. And it has inputs (7.3.2) and outputs (7.3.3) as all processes.
The 1994 version was totally modified in 2000 when the standard was more focused in effectiveness and less in “requirement compliance”.
If you see ISO-9000:2205, the REQUIREMENTS are not determined by the manufacturer (or the inspector) The requirements are established by the customer.
I’m a QMS auditor and I have visited food companies that have ISO-9001 implemented and they don’t promote their certification… they keep the certification contract because they are convinced that the QMS are a very good management tool.
This concept also changed: "ISO 9000:1994 emphasized quality assurance via preventive actions, instead of just checking final product"
I read the ISO-9001:2008 draft and it looks that no big changes are expected. So, I think that the 2000 version is a good tool for Quality.
Saludos.