Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Document Headers - Minimum Requirements (BRC)

BRC Document control

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

#1 it_rains_inside

it_rains_inside

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 341 posts
  • 94 thanks
45
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 17 December 2014 - 05:15 PM

Hello Everyone!!

 

My BIG project for 2015 is to take all of our 9,345,668,920 documents, burn them all, and start over. (Maybe a little exaggeration there)

 

But in all seriousness, the biggest hurdle for me right now to having a smoothly running QS, is our documents. We've had a new QA Mgr, almost every year, for the past 6 years. Each one starts a program, builds on/over existing documents and whats left now is a huge, redundant, unmanageable, mess. I've checked through related threads, so if I've missed one that already has covered this topic can someone point me to it?

 

I am looking to streamline our documents, make them more user friendly, and audit ready. Starting with the header. Currently we do not even have a unified, company wide header/ document format! The image below represents a majority of them. I have been looking for min. requirements (what HAS to be displayed on the document) but it seems like there are just little blips here and there in the BRC standard about requirements. (Current revision, change history,  ... etc... ) Like for ex: Docs are to be reviewed annually, but does this info have to be on the doc? Or can it be recorded on a separate log? 

 

So I ask you fine folks, care to share?? I have the content, what I am looking for is a solid format. What does your header look like? How do procedures and policies, and forms differ? How do you record changes / change histories? (On a log, on the doc??) Anyone care to share NCs related to their document/ form formats??

 

I am leaning towards removing who prepared and approved, adding a reference section (for BRC, FDA/ODA regs ... AOAC, etc..) Removing ONE of the date boxes, (I doubt you need the date the old one was superseded, the date it was reviewed AND the date it is to next be reviewed (??) I started a doc control spreadsheet that contains the org. author, approvals, review date, changes made... etc, and am using that as a management tool. 

 

Thanks in advance for everyone's input!!!

**Edit** I should also add I've been tasked with some of our Green Sustainability Goals for 2015. Less paper goes hand in hand with what I am trying to do. (Like say if some info is required on header, does page 2 header have to contain same info as page 1 or can it be abbreviated (doc and page # only?) 

 

 

    Company Logo Here

Procedure Title:     

Document No:         

 

Prepared by:   

Issue Date:              

Supersedes:

Approved by:  

Next Review Date:

Approved by: 

Approvals:   


Edited by it_rains_inside, 17 December 2014 - 05:29 PM.

"Peace is the result of retraining your mind to process life as it is, rather than as you think it should be"

                                -Wayne W. Dyer

 


#2 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,623 posts
  • 4926 thanks
985
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:03 PM

Dear it rains inside,

 

Reluctant to be negative about this but - 

 

(1) IMEX this is one of the most likely-to-be-inconclusive quests one can embark on. Prepare to set aside days/weeks of frustration (been there, regretted it  :smile: ).

(2) Different standards / Companies may have differing requirements.

 

Not that i think it's unimportant, the opposite, but IMO there are maybe 3-5 items which are compulsory from an operational consistency POV and the remainder depend on one's degree of love of elegance / pedanticity.

 

I have found that FS auditors seldom really care as long as they can readily  manouevre within the doc.system and it contains the stipulated clauses. ISO, eg 9001, seems to be a different kettle of fish, there are literally reams of threads/arguments dissecting this topic in ISO forums.

 

Personally, when i started doing FS manuals,  I lumped hundreds of ageing, untitled docs, but many of which still in use,  into one jumbo manual and overprinted an appropriate doc.format on every page. Any which i subsequently chose to prioritize,  i later re-issued starting from ground-level again but with a cross-reference in the revision page.

 

Yr first choice of standard is ?

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#3 fgjuadi

fgjuadi

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 898 posts
  • 198 thanks
22
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:33 PM

What ever your document control SOP says  (okay, I realize that is not a helpful suggestion)

I put revision history in a table at the end, and all my footers have "This document is proprietary and confidential blah blah blah"

 

I don't have next review date on mine, I do include revision number.   We have approvals from managers responsible (varies by SOP) , QA, & Plant manager.   I also have page # of # .

 

I love doing this (maybe I'm sadistic?) because it lets me set up my own program the way I like it.  I hate SQF numbering and moving from 2 to 11 can go *^&$*$%^ a  *$&^@&!   Basically I created my table of contents / Master List of Documents / Document Register,  then ran down the list.  For each document I found all of the previous versions I could, removed parts that didn't makes sense, added stuff from regulations / standards, then moved on to the next one.  Refinement comes in time


.--. .- -. - ... / --- .--. - .. --- -. .- .-..

#4 mgourley

mgourley

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,236 posts
  • 918 thanks
191
Excellent

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

Posted 17 December 2014 - 06:57 PM

I keep it simple. The header just has the document number and title. Left justified in the footer is the document number, written by and approved by. Right justified is the effective date, Revision number and the Page of Pages info.

I keep all document change info on a separate master revision list.

 

Marshall



#5 it_rains_inside

it_rains_inside

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 341 posts
  • 94 thanks
45
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 17 December 2014 - 07:17 PM

(1) IMEX this is one of the most likely-to-be-inconclusive quests one can embark on. Prepare to set aside days/weeks of frustration (been there, regretted it  :smile: ).

 

Dear Charles,

 

Thank you for your input, I've already spent days/weeks/ MONTHS being frustrated about our current system, so I at this point I am welcoming the frustration that would come along side a quest for improving that system, at least the frustration I incur while attempting to improve the doc system would (hopefully) result in a better built system when all is said and done (Meaning - I'm already frustrated so any frustration incurred hereon / within is no greater frustration than the frustration I am already possessing ..(oh yeah, did I mention I really love using the words frustration/ frustrating! :happydance: ?) I am totally losing it. 

 

My first standard of choice would be BRC. The standard does not offer too much in the way of guidelines or requirements. In close second would be FDA

 

What ever your document control SOP says  (okay, I realize that is not a helpful suggestion)

I put revision history in a table at the end, and all my footers have "This document is proprietary and confidential blah blah blah"

 

You are right, not helpful at all MM! The docs have what the doc control SOP says they should have, problem is - who determined what is needed and what is not? IMO we are missing some vital pieces that would be extremely helpful during review times and during audits, meanwhile we have the originator of the doc on there (which most of the time is individuals who are no longer even with the company!!) 

 

More or less, I was looking to see what has worked for other folks, and what hasn't. We gt cited once for having a document taped to a machine that had a date older than a year old. (All docs should be reviewed annually.) Well the doc was reviewed, nothing about the procedure was changed, the date was changed on the master... but no one knew production had taped a copy up on the floor for quick reference. If we had left off the date we would have never had a problem.

 

While i understand refinement comes in time, I think I get a format/ header that I like (which seems like a sensical place to start) get through revising/ reformatting some of the docs and then find out I left out something that HAS to be on there or discover I could have left something off. I have attempted this feat a few times this year to no avail. I haven't found a format with the needed requirements that has stuck! 


"Peace is the result of retraining your mind to process life as it is, rather than as you think it should be"

                                -Wayne W. Dyer

 


#6 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,623 posts
  • 4926 thanks
985
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 17 December 2014 - 08:22 PM

Dear it rains inside,

 

Yr last post illustrates one of the three hardest decisions IMEX, viz, choice of (a) page numbering system (b) revision system, © controlled documents.

The choice of 3 above is usually unregulated and the problem IMEX inevitably focuses on hard copies. People with workstation PCs/intranets everywhere presumably have less problems.

 

(a) offers minimally (i) sectioning restarts, (ii) use of numbers, (iii) numbers + letters, (iv) use of manuals 

(b) offers minimally (i) re-issuing all a document for every change, (ii) only updating the corrected page, (iii), =(ii) combined with a master mapping page

© offers permutations unlimited for hardcopy. i have tried almost all i have seen described -  rotating paper colors,rotating logo colours, embossed paper, stamps, ingenious/colored PC-generated footnotes. Someone always find a way to break the system, especially in overtime. The cleverest options usually take excessive effort to implement so tend to be self-defeating. May as well use the simplest choice and accept the time for checking around, eg footnotes.

 

People have written whole books on this topic. :smile:

 

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#7 it_rains_inside

it_rains_inside

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 341 posts
  • 94 thanks
45
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 17 December 2014 - 08:58 PM

Dear it rains inside,

 

Yr last post illustrates one of the three hardest decisions IMEX, viz, choice of (a) page numbering system (b) revision system, © controlled documents.

The choice of 3 above is usually unregulated and the problem IMEX inevitably focuses on hard copies. People with workstation PCs/intranets everywhere presumably have less problems.

 

(a) offers minimally (i) sectioning restarts, (ii) use of numbers, (iii) numbers + letters, (iv) use of manuals 

(b) offers minimally (i) re-issuing all a document for every change, (ii) only updating the corrected page, (iii), =(ii) combined with a master mapping page

© offers permutations unlimited for hardcopy. i have tried almost all i have seen described -  rotating paper colors,rotating logo colours, embossed paper, stamps, ingenious/colored PC-generated footnotes. Someone always find a way to break the system, especially in overtime. The cleverest options usually take excessive effort to implement so tend to be self-defeating. May as well use the simplest choice and accept the time for checking around, eg footnotes.

 

People have written whole books on this topic. :smile:

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

Dear Charles,

 

Please take no offense, but you are totally bumming me out. 

 

Why does this have to be so hard?!?!?!? UGH!!!!


"Peace is the result of retraining your mind to process life as it is, rather than as you think it should be"

                                -Wayne W. Dyer

 


#8 Shyguy77

Shyguy77

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 120 posts
  • 62 thanks
12
Good

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 December 2014 - 09:19 PM

IRI

 

 

I feel yours and everyone else's pain in this NOT SO SIMPLE task.  I embarked on this journey myself at the beginning of 2014 and after months on frustrations got it down to what i feel is easy to keep up to date and will satisfy our BRC auditors. I have 3 main areas in my system. The documents them selves, a register to list all the "9,345,668,920 documents and a change log for each of the documents to keep track of revision numbers/letters, dates and the reason for the revision.

 

My Documents consist of only:

 

-Company Name/Logo

-Document Name

-Document #

-Revision #/Letter and Date

 

The register goes into a little more detail consisting of

 

-Document Number

-Document Name

-Location of Document

-Current Issue/Revision Date

-Approval

-Last Review Date

 

 

Hope this helps you out a bit and good luck with your project.



Thanked by 1 Member:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users