A guideline for Developing Quality Manuals, ISO 10013 Standard, suggests a documentation structure for ISO 9001 QMS. This model in the standard proposes use of a three-level arrangement. Most companies I worked with utilize four-level structures instead to include records, A typical four-level documentation structure consists of:
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
ISO 9001 - Naming your documents
Companies use various approaches to titling their manuals, procedures, instructions, etc. For example, one of my customers titled their quality manual as "Quality Management System Quality Manual." This very descriptive title does define the document, but does not appear to be efficient.
This tendency to use long titles and document identifiers like "Standard Operating Procedure" most likely comes from regulated industries. Even though I could not find a requirement for such title formats, many companies still use these apparently outdated and ineffective conventions. If a short name sufficiently describes a document, let's use it. I suggest streamlining all elements of management systems. Consider this and do not make your system more complicated than it can be.
Numbering your documents
No standard prescribes to give a part or a document its number. It is an industry standard to give a document or a component its name, number and a revision level. Similar to part titles that we discussed above, document numbering conventions are often also may be optimized and simplified.
A company had some 130 employees. They had two part number formats: one for procedures, another for drawings. Procedures used XX-XXX number format. Drawings were numbered as XXXXXXX-XXX. One of the drawings had a number 000022-003. Assemblers simplified the system and called it "twenty two."
Do these long numbers identify documents? Yes, they do! Are they economical? No, they are not! My customer's system above allowed seven digits and therefore could deal with ten million documents or part numbers. When I worked with this business, they used some 300 documents. If one plans to grow from 200 - 300 documents to a million, one has a long way to go! It is not only how many documents your QMS uses, reading these long strings with five sequential zeros gave everybody headache. Even though this example looks too complicated, "The Worst Part Number" Grand Prize won my other client. They used 14-digit alphanumeric part numbers!
If you are designing and building a Trident-class submarine, a MIG-27 jet fighter or an international space station, you, most likely, will need millions of parts, so a long part number format would be needed and will make sense. Otherwise, save yourself the trouble of reading all those zeros and make your numbering system practical. One of my customers, who won my "The Best Part Number" Grand Prize, numbered their documents as 101, 102, 103, and so on. Short and sweet!
There is another opportunity for improvement of many QMS - part number designation. Many companies relate a document number to a document type. For example, 20-xxxx indicates a procedure, 30-xxxx indicates a drawing, SOP-xxxx indicates a standard 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 identifier 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 to being able to support new needs.
An alternative approach to part numbering is a "no designation" system, where parts are given sequential unique numbers within a specified format, regardless of their type, material, application or other attributes. After all, isn't the part title the best designator? Seriously, through my entire professional career, I worked only with one company that did not use even document numbers. Their documents were simply identified by titles and a two-digit revision level, like The Prefect Manual 01. - 32538
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
ISO 9001 - Naming your documents
Companies use various approaches to titling their manuals, procedures, instructions, etc. For example, one of my customers titled their quality manual as "Quality Management System Quality Manual." This very descriptive title does define the document, but does not appear to be efficient.
This tendency to use long titles and document identifiers like "Standard Operating Procedure" most likely comes from regulated industries. Even though I could not find a requirement for such title formats, many companies still use these apparently outdated and ineffective conventions. If a short name sufficiently describes a document, let's use it. I suggest streamlining all elements of management systems. Consider this and do not make your system more complicated than it can be.
Numbering your documents
No standard prescribes to give a part or a document its number. It is an industry standard to give a document or a component its name, number and a revision level. Similar to part titles that we discussed above, document numbering conventions are often also may be optimized and simplified.
A company had some 130 employees. They had two part number formats: one for procedures, another for drawings. Procedures used XX-XXX number format. Drawings were numbered as XXXXXXX-XXX. One of the drawings had a number 000022-003. Assemblers simplified the system and called it "twenty two."
Do these long numbers identify documents? Yes, they do! Are they economical? No, they are not! My customer's system above allowed seven digits and therefore could deal with ten million documents or part numbers. When I worked with this business, they used some 300 documents. If one plans to grow from 200 - 300 documents to a million, one has a long way to go! It is not only how many documents your QMS uses, reading these long strings with five sequential zeros gave everybody headache. Even though this example looks too complicated, "The Worst Part Number" Grand Prize won my other client. They used 14-digit alphanumeric part numbers!
If you are designing and building a Trident-class submarine, a MIG-27 jet fighter or an international space station, you, most likely, will need millions of parts, so a long part number format would be needed and will make sense. Otherwise, save yourself the trouble of reading all those zeros and make your numbering system practical. One of my customers, who won my "The Best Part Number" Grand Prize, numbered their documents as 101, 102, 103, and so on. Short and sweet!
There is another opportunity for improvement of many QMS - part number designation. Many companies relate a document number to a document type. For example, 20-xxxx indicates a procedure, 30-xxxx indicates a drawing, SOP-xxxx indicates a standard 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 identifier 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 to being able to support new needs.
An alternative approach to part numbering is a "no designation" system, where parts are given sequential unique numbers within a specified format, regardless of their type, material, application or other attributes. After all, isn't the part title the best designator? Seriously, through my entire professional career, I worked only with one company that did not use even document numbers. Their documents were simply identified by titles and a two-digit revision level, like The Prefect Manual 01. - 32538
About the Author:
Learn more about ISO 9001 documentation and order your Quality Management System documentation today!
