The word quality means different things to different people. To companies it often means delivering a conforming product/service to a customer aka meeting their requirements. To achieve this conformity consistently successful companies, implement quality management systems. Rather than re-invent the wheel, ISO 9001 is often selected as the standard to use to set up a quality management system (QMS) In addition, ISO 9001 training is provided to individuals at all levels within the company.
As companies start to implement the system ISO 9001 training can prove useful. Leadership is trained so they are aware of their role in the system and how they can positively contribute to its success. The personnel are trained so they are aware of their need to contribute and implication is they don’t. The project managers who own the project for implementing a QMS get training on the process to go about implementing the requirements of the standard as also their correct interpretation. Auditors are trained in an ISO 9001 training course designed to also teach the auditing requirements per ISO 19011.
So should personnel then start using the documentation as soon as it is complete or wait for the entire system to be documented and for the official launch date. If the system has been implemented correctly then the documented processes should reflect the way work is currently done and not a fictional process. It should not increase the burden for the users. As users start to use their newly documented processes, they can begin to provide feedback on its accuracy as well as the need for change. Personnel therefore should have to wait until the entire system is documented. Yes, organizations could however set an official launch date from which point forth records will be maintained. As such all data prior to the launch date is not then auditable nor is there a requirement to maintain it.
It should also be kept in mind that not every process needs to be documented as also that the organization can determine the extent to which to document the system. The extent to which to document depends on a number of factors including competency. ISO 9001 training is one way of increasing awareness of the requirements of ISO 9001 as also the system. Training may not always result in competency however.
At QMII a number of ISO 9001 training options are available and our training can be customized to meet the clients’ needs. The training is also available in an instructor-led virtual interactive format.
ISO 14001 Management System Certification – Cost versus Value
The most popular type of management systems used today often depends on the type of organization, and how they run their operations. ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Systems is the most popular for companies selling products to the military, along with AS9000:2016 Rev D for aviation, space, and defense organizations. Food processors lean toward ISO 14001:2015 Environmental Management Systems (EMS) and ISO 45001:2018 Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S). The size of the organization can have a significant bearing on whether they get certified or claim to conform. It cost less to state you conform than to conduct the number of audits needed to become, and stay, certified.
Agricultural oriented small and medium enterprises (SMEs) will often opt for EMS. Vineyards, vegetable farms, and livestock farms like ISO 14001. Therefore, it depends a lot on the percentage of SMEs that are in those businesses. In many cases, the percentage of organizations conforming to ISO 14001 depends on the amount of local or government pressure to conform. In Europe and China, ISO 14001 is much higher than in the USA, in part due to government and environmentalist pressure.
Agricultural businesses and those that are getting pressure from socially responsible groups are the types of organizations that become ISO 14001 certified. Meat packaging companies like Smithfield Ham in Virginia (now owned by a Chinese company), is ISO 14001 certified. Only four major Ports in the USA are ISO 14001 certified (Port of Virginia is one) but many countries require the certification. Partly due to all of the food coming into the Ports, but also due to the amount of pollution generated by boats, trains, and trucks that service the Ports. Ports are also now looking at ISO 50001 Energy Management Systems in conjunction with ISO 14001 certification.
One of the key drivers is the desire to meet ISO 14001 Standard requirements in the markets that they want to operate in or sell to. It is difficult to open facilities in most of Europe, the Middle East, and China without having an ISO 14001 certification. Environmental impact, energy efficiency, pollution reduction, and sustainability are considered by government permitting organizations. This is more important for large organizations, but many SMEs also want to sell internationally.
Like other ISO Standards, it takes about a year of internal audits to be ready to claim conformity or get certified to ISO 14001. SMEs, due to their smaller size, could take less time. Medium-size businesses, with multiple locations, may elect to just have their headquarters certified, and state conformity for branches and suppliers. An organization may elect to get its headquarters operation certified and use second-party audits to confirm that its other facilities and suppliers conform to the Standard.
The major cost of becoming certified involves training and multiple audits to get ready for certification. Once ready, a third-party audit is required. Most SMEs could be ready within a year. The actual cost would vary depending on the number of employees trained, and the number of audits conducted before certification.
With good training and responsible staff, most SMEs can become certified. All processes need to be in line with the goal of using environmental best practices. In some cases, the cost of changing current processes can become a barrier. Organizations can consider out-sourcing some processes in order to become more environmentally friendly. Internal and second party audits can help an organization determine what, if any, processes need to be modified or out-sourced.
There are many reasons why organizations decide to become certified, but over time, reasons have changed for both small and large organizations. With the new high-level-structure (HLS), EMS is now more similar to other standards. Organizations that use to be ISO 18001 are now considering ISO 45001, which has OSHA embedded in it. SMEs, like larger organizations, appreciate the value of being certified to popular standards and promote their conformity in their promotional material. Many companies that are certified to ISO 9001 have to get the certification to sell to government agencies. Many of the companies that get ISO 14001 certification, feel their end-users appreciate the company for having it.
To be sustainable, an organization needs to consider many factors. These factors typically fall into one of the three pillars of Sustainability – Social, environmental and economic categories. All organizations want to be socially responsible and do minimal damage to the environment, but they have to address the economics of operation. The key is to strike a balance and establish a management system with processes that can be defended in the light of internal and external audits.
– by Peter Burke
ISO 14001-Benefits for Maritime Companies
Environmental accidents in the maritime industry get quick media attention. ISO 14001 does not guarantee that maritime accidents will not happen. It does, however, get organizations to consider their operations from a life cycle perspective of minimizing the impact of their operations on the environment.
The maritime industry has for a while now been governed by the requirements of MARPOL. MARPOL has 6 annexes and as of date all six annexes are in force. The six annexes cover the requirements for prevention of pollution of the marine environment by oil, noxious liquid substances, harmful substances in packaged form, sewage, garbage and air. However, MARPOL does not address the lifecycle operations of the shipping business. From an ISO 14001 perspective this would need to encompass the need for recycling of ships once they are done with their life.
The French Aircraft carrier Clemenceau is a good example of a vessel that faced major issues with being scrapped. Having sailed all the way to Alang, India it was denied entry and had to transit back to French Waters. It was denied access to Alang owing the Asbestos used on the vessel and the potential harm it would have on the scrap workers at Alang. MARPOL also does not address the operations as managed from operations ashore and the environmental impact of the operations of supporting the ships.
ISO 14001 encompasses the entire operations of the company if within scope and encourages organizations to look at all their operations from a lifecycle perspective. This essentially means that when designing office spaces and building ships companies need to start thinking about how they will dispose of waste from the processes in a responsible manner to the environment. Environmental sustainability is a new buzzword and demonstrating commitment to the environment, to stakeholders, through implementation of an internationally recognized standard ISO 14001.
ISO 14001 need not run independent of the existing management system that most maritime companies have conforming to the ISM Code. The requirements of ISO 14001 as with the MARPOL requirements get incorporated into the one management system on which the company operates. ISO 14001 as with other ISO standards is a voluntary standard. As such companies must choose to implement an environmental management system conforming to ISO 14001. Many leading maritime companies have already done so. QMII’s ISO 14001 training is delivered in multiple formats such as executive overviews, internal auditor and lead auditor. The training is also provided in an instructor-led online format and QMII’s instructors, having a maritime background, bring a unique skill set to the class in connecting the requirements of the standard through real life experiences.
What is a Quality Management Systems (QMS)?
Quality Management Systems (QMS) are today extensively a part of an organization. If the TM (top management) is committed, it uses the ISO 9001 based management system to meet customer requirements, ensure customer focus and provide desired outputs. Where the TM/ leadership is immature, they often may implement a quality management system to get the ISO 9001 certification. This decision to have a QMS certification without effective implementation is a waste of money and resources. It is not worth the paper the certificate is on. Or perhaps it is, because having that ISO 9001 certificate may be the passport to win a contract or run a business.
Failed management systems (MS) invariably have a lack of management commitment or worse a leadership who do not understand the cost of not having quality. Such quality management systems are aligned to ISO 9001, but for easy auditing written to the clause structure of the standard. Such systems are written for auditors, who then audit it effortlessly as they can see the system written to the clause structure of the ISO 9001. Leaders forget that MSs should be designed for implementation by their employees.
Organizations do not work to clauses of the ISO 9001. They use the clauses to design a better MS. The organizational structure of any organization takes its direction from the policy (clause 5.2 of the ISO 9001). The policy leads the organization and its functional departments to convert the policy into measurable objectives (clause 6.2 of ISO 9001). These functional division of the organization work to achieve their objectives by functioning per their key and support processes. A quality management system based on ISO 9001 requires the system to work using a process-based management system approach. The idea is to be systematic about working so that customer requirements and expectations are analyzed before being accepted. Once accepted, the organization with the efficient interaction of its processes produces the desired outputs meeting the requirements and specifications as the case may be, and also ensures, where applicable that the statutory directions are met.
ISO 9001:2015 emphasizes customer focus not only in clause 5.1.2 but throughout the standard to ensure that the Quality Management System based on ISO 9001 appreciates the risks in the context of the organization and consistently produces confirming products and services. It is important that customer focus is maintained throughout, integrity of the quality management system always maintained and if for any reason a non-conforming product is produced then such non-conforming product or service is handled in a manner that the customer is never sent such a product.
For this reason QMSs based on ISO 9001 or for that matter any ISO standard, or an industry specific standard like AS 9100 or say a MS based on ISM Code (for maritime safety) and so on, should work using the accepted PDCA (Plan Do Check Act) cycle. Processes are designed, documented or undocumented to ensure that a good preparation is made at the Plan Stage. Any good QMS interprets the clauses of ISO 9001 for its QMS using clauses 4, 5, 6 & 7 to appreciate the risk and make a good plan before going to the do stage. The implementation of executing the inputs to convert them into desired outputs is done using ISO 9001 clauses under 8.
Any quality management system based on ISO 9001 has to sustain its processes delivering the final product or service by designing them well, resourcing them and monitoring them. Therefore, a strong objective check stage is required to conduct internal audits and to analyze data so that the information provides inputs for better resourcing. Clauses 9 and 10 of ISO 9001 address the check and act phases synonymous with monitoring and decision making by leadership before the next cycle of the PDCA cycle is implemented. The act stage is a vital stage associated with the leadership wherein a management review of the performance of the quality management system is conducted.
For the quality management system to deliver what ISO 9001 is designed around, is only possible if the leadership is genuinely committed to not just have a QMS based on ISO 9001, but uses it to make decisions. The business system and the QMS should be married in a strong unbreakable bond.
ISO 45001 Transition: Change is coming to health and safety
Organizations currently certified to BS OHSAS 18001 have until March 21, 2021 for their ISO 45001 transition. Those who are currently implementing management system conforming to BS OHSAS 18001 will notice some similarities and some differences. Those who are certified to other ISO standards such as ISO 9001 will notice the similarities in the standard owing the use of the High-Level Structure in the new ISO 45001 transition standard. This article discussed the key changes to the standard over the BS OHSAS 18001 requirements. It also highlights certain key aspects for those undertaking an ISO 45001 transition.
Keeping with the High-Level Structure, ISO 45001 in clause 4.1 and 4.2 asks organization to consider the context of their organization or the aspects of their business environment that may impact their operations. The business environment includes both internal and external issues such as new regulatory requirements, new technologies, cultural issues and company values to name a few. Companies need to consider the needs of different relevant stakeholders that may impact their system including the needs of their workers. Organizations are asked to have workers participate in the system development as they complete their ISO 45001 transition.
ISO under the high-level structure has removed the need for preventive action as now the entire standard is designed as a preventive tool. Further to support this is the introduction of risk-based thinking’ both from a strategic perspective and from an operational health and safety perspective. Risk-based thinking and the awareness of personnel of this is key to ISO 45001 transition. There is now a stronger stress of leadership’s role in the system. Leaders must take accountability for the effectiveness of the system and cannot wash their hands of the system. Leaders must not only engage in the system themselves but also engage others as the ISO 45001 transition takes place.. The Clauses under 5 also have a requirement for the consultation and participation of workers. They have to remove the barriers to participation and include even non-managerial workers.
Documents and records are not controlled under the common clause for control of documented information and based on the risk-based thinking there is more freedom allowed with the documentation. Outsources contractors will also need to be controlled within the scope of the system.
Organizations undergoing an ISO 45001 transition, will need to incorporate all these aspects into their system. Care must be exercised when setting up the system to design it around the user and not around the auditor or certification body for the system to be useful in the long run and to drive continual improvement.
Aspects and Impacts: Let’s start here
Every organization needs to consider the aspects of their organization, and the impacts they have on the planet. Understanding the impacts is critical to the sustainability of the organization, and in the long run, the planet.
Most organizations only consider the impacts of their processes in relation to waste created and materials used. While these are important, an organization should consider all aspects of their operation and processes before they start a business. This includes the facilities, people, materials and other elements of their operations. Once operational, they need to continually evaluate all process to look for improvement.
Many aspects are considered by organizations in order to borrow money to launch a product or service. This is a good place to start. Clearly understanding the impacts the organization will have on the local environment and community is a good step toward launching a sustainable business. Lenders, both private and public, will be more generous lending if they know the organization is considering all three pillars of sustainability; social, environmental and economic.
Generally speaking, recycling an existing structure to a new operational use has less impact than building a new facility. Applying building technics recommended under Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design (LEED) and Energy Star, will also reduce environmental impacts, and improve the operational economics. If new structures are required, considering the site location, building facing direction and proximity to water, public transportation, and workers, will also help the organization conform to LEED and other building Standards. Local communities will be much more accepting of an organization operating in their community if the proper design considerations are considered before construction is begun.
Once operational, every group in an organization needs to evaluate their processes on a regular basis to determine what improvements can be made to the aspects of the organization, and the impacts of there processes. Management is accountable for the operation of the organization, but every department needs to be responsible for their processes. This is not just the manufacturing or production departments, but also sales, marketing, receiving, packaging, shipping and customer services. Organizations are also responsible for the performance of their products and/or services, and often the potential recycling of products.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has established Standards that can be used by an organization to help improve their management system processes and reduce risks. ISO 14001:2015 Environmental Management Systems and ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Systems can be used separately, or together, to provide guidance in improving an organization’s operations. Lenders and communities appreciate the value of a well-run organization that understands the aspects of their operations and addresses the impacts.
What is ISO 14001 Lifecycle Perspective?
ISO 14001 Lead Auditor training introduces students to the ISO 14001 standard and its interpretation as well as the skills needed to assess the effectiveness of the environmental management system. ISO 14001 in its 2015 revision introduces the lifecycle perspective. In essence, the standard asks organizations to use a lifecycle perspective when designing/manufacturing their products/services. This means that instead of a cradle to grave concept organizations need to think of a cradle to cradle concept.
Cradle to Grave
ISO 9001 ‘Requirements for Quality Management Systems’ ushered in a new era of process-based management systems that could be used to improve the quality of products/services being delivered to customers as well as when well implemented to increase efficiency and productivity. However, as productivity, efficiency and quality were being improved; the by-products of the system were not addressed. During the 1980s there were some regional efforts to address the impact of organizations on the environment and ISO 14001 was ISO’s effort to lay down the requirements for a management system that addressed the aspects and their associated impacts. Organizations were expected to take action on these impacts to reduce them. Auditors undergoing ISO 14001 Lead Auditor training were now ready to assess the effectiveness of these systems.
In its initial publication and subsequent revision in 2004 ISO 14001 asks organizations to take a ‘cradle to grave’ approach to managing their impacts on the environment. This meant reducing the immediate impact on the environment. However, with time we learned that this does not address the growing landfill issues being faced by countries globally. To address this issue as well as to align with international efforts to address climate change, rapid depletion of the planet resources and encourage sustainable operations the ISO 14001 standard introduced the concept of ‘cradle to cradle’ in its 2015 revision.
Cradle to Cradle
ISO 14001 defined lifecycle as “consecutive and interlinked stages of a product (or service) system, from the raw material acquisition or generation from natural resources to final disposal.” Life cycle stages can include the acquisition of raw materials, design, production, transportation/delivery, use, end-of-life treatment, and final disposal. A great example of a lifecycle perspective in manufacturing is the recycling of Lead-Acid Car Batteries. Nearly 99% of these batteries are recycled/reused. Major battery manufacturers have programs in place to encourage the recycling of car batteries.
While ISO 14001 does not call for a formal life cycle assessment ISO 14044 provides the guidelines for a life cycle assessment should an organization wish to do so. In determining the end of life disposal organizations may choose products that are recyclable, sustainable and even perhaps biodegradable. ISO 14001 lead auditor training provided by QMII, highlights the concepts of a lifecycle perspective and how to incorporate it into your environmental management system.
Conclusion
ISO 14001 Lead Auditor training enables participants to go back and implement environmental management systems that will benefit their organization, the environment, and stakeholders. It also enables participants to conduct value-adding audits of their systems. The intent of the audit is to identify opportunities for improvement. With the skills, ISO 14001 Lead Auditor training by QMII and the knowledge of a life cycle perspective participants are ready to hit the ground running in implementing and auditing environmental management systems.
Obtaining Top Management Commitment
Who cares about the system?
Management systems need top management commitment to work well, and yet many systems lack the necessary commitment. You may recognize some symptoms. Policy – ignored. Objectives are barely alive. Corrective actions remain open. Managers seem not to appreciate the value of the requirements. Employees are unsure about the system’s requirements. Proactive identification and addressing of risks/opportunities is rare. Root causes of failure remain in the system. Consequently, the system is not improved. Employees are unaware of what the system should do for them. Management reviews are embarrassing. Leaders either do not show or do not contribute. Top Management Commitment is lacking. Audits may temporarily energize the players. Management representatives ask, “Am I the only person who really cares?”
Who trained the leaders?
Many leaders do not explain their management systems. They may know the importance of certification, but they rarely explain why their system is vital for survival and growth. Why is this? Examine your internal audit program; is it driven by top management’s objectives? Audit your training records. Do they show that leaders are competent and confident to show their top management commitment? Who trained the leaders in their organizational management system? Competent leaders take responsibility for their system. They explain how their system works and why its requirements are so important to them. Unaware leaders blame employees for mistakes caused by their system.
Your system, is it perceived as worthy?
Even if your system is certified, do not expect leaders to support it. Every organization is a system. Does the documented part of this system describe how it converts stakeholder needs into cash (or continued funding)? Is this the management system that was certified or was it some new ISO system built on templates?
Is your system irresistible to the leaders? If not, show how your system converts needs into cash so top managers would not want to lead without it. Try our methodology to appreciate how others have developed systems and gained top management commitment beyond certification. Everyone should fulfill their objectives and earn their bonuses by using and improving the system.
Awareness Leaders Workshop™
Engage us to design and facilitate your one-day Awareness Leaders Workshop™. Select attendees who are leaders by job title and those who are leaders by personality. Include the skeptics!
We listen to your objectives and design your workshop to fulfill your required outcomes. This may need system analysis to result in a diagram that explains how the system converts needs into cash. This workshop is facilitated by our senior management system consultant and auditor, who for over 20 years has helped many willing and reluctant managers to understand and commit to their systems.
Prepare for action
Remove the root causes of what ails many management systems. You want your top management commitment to the requirements of their management system. Clear the backlog of stale CARs and pending actions on identified risks to prepare for the surge of improvements flowing from the renewed leadership of your system.
When you are ready, please email IJ Arora or call 888.357.9001 with your requirements.
What is SMEA and FMEA?
Success Modes and Effects Analysis
An organization is likely to succeed if it understands the system that runs its business. It can then identify where it needs to make improvements and use its system to succeed. QMII help clients to develop their process-based management systems by using success modes and effects analysis (SMEA). SMEA conversely to FMEA focuses on the success areas (opportunities) the organization is trying to achieve and determining what are the potential risks to achieving them. They then taken action to address these risks. While all risks cannot be eliminated based on resource constraints, SMEA provides an opportunity for organization to prioritize the risks and take appropriate action.
To implement SMEA, top management need to analyze and document what their organization does to convert customer needs into cash (success modes). This enables them to see where waste can be eliminated by applying lean principles to achieve lean design, lean manufacturing, lean administration and lean service.This determines the key processes in the system that runs the business. The next step involves working with the process owners to analyze each of the key processes for the fulfillment of process objectives (effects analysis). This results in a flowcharted procedure for each key process. If you’re not fond of flowcharts then any other method of documentation will do. These procedures refer to the interacting processes and supporting documents.
Competent employees, from the recruiting and training processes, are coached by their leaders to use their system to eliminate causes of waste and succeed. These systems include procedures for creating new products and new processes with inputs from successful designs (see FMEA below).
Organizations can use SMEA to build and grow the success of their organizations.
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
FMEAs during product and process design prevent failures of products and processes. A team, representing customers, designers, manufacturers, installers, users and suppliers agrees upon the rules for evaluating risk. The team works through each of the ways in which the process or product could fail (potential failure modes) and assign a score per the rules to signify the frequency and impact of each type of failure (effects analysis).
Failure modes that potentially are the most frequent or could have the biggest impact (or both!) are the highest priority. Teams remove the root causes of such failure modes to prevent their occurrence. These preventive actions make processes and products much more reliable from the beginning.
As you might expect the entire automotive industry now uses FMEA to improve reliability. Yes, not one car maker considered the sudden loss of global financing; a rare failure mode with dire consequences! Organizations that fail to use FMEA have to suffer the many losses due to incapable processes and poor products. Repeated failure may enable them to learn the hard way if they remain in business.
FMEA works best as a preventive action tool within a process-based management system (see above).
QMII facilitates failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and success modes and effects analysis (SMEA) for our clients.
Management review: A Necessity or Improvement driver
The management review is a critical step to ensure sustained success of the management system, yet this is often left to the relevant manager to document to meet the system standard requirements. A myriad of reasons is given for a management review not being done within the timeframe as defined by the organization. These include unavailability of senior management due calendar conflicts, waiting on inputs from department heads and sometimes just a lack of commitment by leadership.
Even when conducted ‘timely’ the review is often done purely out of necessity of meeting the requirements of the standard. The review, however, is a critical step for the success of the system and enables the continual improvement of the system. Leadership may, at times question, why money invested in a Quality Management System; that certification to ISO is not delivering the intended ROI. The answer often lies in their lack of commitment to the system as perceived by the users of the system.
Why are my reviews not driving improvement?
Management reviews when done out of necessity become a documentation exercise. The responsible manager collects all the data and analyzes/evaluates it for presentation to management. They proudly share these presentations with whomsoever asks about the management review. The ISO standards (e.g. ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and others) in clause 9.3 give the requirements for what shall be included in a management review. However, the review need not be limited to just these topics.
In consulting, QMII has often heard, “But we do daily reviews with our team and weekly updates with the managers”. Why not record these as a part of your management review? Do keep in mind that ISO standards ask organizations to conduct management reviews at planned intervals. It does not say it has to be a meeting or be held in a boardroom or the planned intervals need to be equally spaced. When the system is incorrectly implemented, or the standard incorrectly interpreted it often leads to a weak foundation of the system. Soon users of the system are complying and doing what has been documented rather than asking “is this really correct for us?”
With the passage of time, the lack of commitment percolates through the system to where the person tasked with championing the system, such as a quality or environmental manager, is fighting a lone battle. This lack of commitment may be apparent from the lack of decisions by management to issues presented in the review. At times the concerned departments are trying to drive their own agendas, and this creates conflict and disconnect. Also, in recording the outputs of the review, the decision and actions from management must be recorded. QMII, often finds these missing.
How do I improve my management reviews?
To do so the organization must first understand the intent of this clause in the ISO standards. Clause 9.3 (under the high-level structure) asks management to review their systems to ‘ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, effectiveness and alignment with the strategic direction of the system.’ This, in essence, must be the guiding principle for the management reviews.
This is the reason why these reviews must be done holistically. It is this guiding principle that will determine the intervals for the review. Clause 5.1 of the ISO standards (those aligned per the HLS) asks leadership to take accountability for the effectiveness of their systems. The management review is the platform via which they can assess if the system is effective in meeting their policy as set. The management review is also where management reviews the system and determines the required changes in the context of the organization, the needs of the interested parties to determine new risks, if any changes to the policy / strategic direction needs to be made and resourcing needs.
Engaging Leadership and the rest of the team
There is no mantra that will deliver sure-shot success. I wish there was one, for I know many an organization that would willingly invest in it! However, educating management on the WHY of the management review has often helped. If need be consider external consultants to deliver the message. Additionally, you can consider these three steps to get more engagement:
- Gather review inputs from management team: This is a good method to get everyone involved. Pass around a draft meeting agenda so all system users can prepare for the review (should you be having a meeting) and can provide their inputs /items that they need management’s decision on. It is also an opportunity for them to gather opportunities for improvement from users of the system.
- Use a review format that works for leadership: Document how your reviews are done exactly the way they are done within your organization. Perhaps some agenda items are discussed on a quarterly basis and others on a weekly basis. The intent is not to please an auditor but to use this tool to drive improvements through the system, as needed. Remember, the guiding principle discussed above.
- Communicate the outputs of the review …. including leadership’s decisions. While the standard does not require this, it is implicit in ensuring continual improvement. Communication is important but the outputs of the review need not to be communicated to the entire organization. Perhaps relevant parts to the concerned managers and their teams. It demonstrates to the users of the system that management is involved, is aware of the problems and has provided decisions on various matters presented.
Management Reviews …. Improvement Driver
When done correctly management reviews become the springboard for improvement throughout the system. It comes at the end of the ‘Check’ stage of the PDCA cycles leading into the ‘Act’ stage for continual improvement. It enables leadership to assess how well their system is doing. It delivers, in the long run, the engagement needed from users of the system and the ROI that leadership are seeking in their quality management system.