3 replies to this topic

[Rassmutten]

The company I work for is growing quickly and adding other locations. For this reason, I am looking into changing our controlled document numbering system into something we can use between multiple locations in three different states. Does anybody care to share how you do your numbering system? I would like it to reflect the department and location if possible.

[Shrimper]

We do it this way "1.222.3."

 

1 represents the main facility. 2 represents the document number (i.e. the metal detector log). 3 represents the version number (i.e. version 3 of the metal detector). 

[KellyQA]

I have always worked for SQF certified facilities, so I like to take the clause number and put that in the document number. It makes it easier to reference during audits. I am sure you could modify this for departments instead. I also like to put what type of document it is in the number/document id. 

 

Document types:

Policy/Procedures = POL

Forms = FRM

Registers = REG

etc.

 

X.X.X-POL-XX

X.X.X-FRM-XX

X.X.X-REG-XX

 

 

Example: 

2.1.1-POL-01 Management Responsibility

2.2.2-REG-01 Master Document Control Register

2.5.4-FRM-01 Monthly Internal Audit Form

2.5.4-FRM-02 Weekly Internal Audit Form

 

For you wanting it to reference department and location, you could maybe do the following

1. For departments, make abbreviations, such as Quality = QA, Maintenance = MA, Production = PR. 
2. For locations, make abbreviations or a number system. Example: Detroit, Michigan location could be DET or location 1. Columbus, Ohio could be COL or location 2.

Example: 

QA-DET-POL-01

QA-DET-POL-02

PR-1-POL-01

1-MA-POL-01

 

QA-COL-POL-01

QA-COL-POL-02

PR-2-POL-01

2-MA-POL-01

 

I hope this helps give you ideas and inspiration for document identification!

[Tony-C]

Hi Rassmutten,

 

A system that is easy for everyone to understand is what I prefer, I tend to number the main documents the same as the standard I’m working with as it is then easy to see the correlation between the standard’s requirements and your food safety management system compliance.

 

In this situation, I would use a combination of the previous posts by Shrimper and KellyQA but using lettering rather than a number to denote the site as it makes it easier to identify the document is from that site, for example food safety policies if you had sites in New York, Los Angeles and Las Vegas:

 

NY-POL-1 Food Safety Policy

LA-POL-1 Food Safety Policy

LV-POL-1 Food Safety Policy

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony