Iso 9001 management reviewIn the context of ISO9001 Management Review has a particular connotation that iscontinued into the latest 2008 variant of the standard. It specifically relates to the reviewof management systems performance and the opportunities for developing furtherimprovement. But this review is just one of several review requirements documented inthe standard, with further review activities being a natural part of the businessmanagement process.Inspections are done routinely by business managers for all sorts of purposes, and havethe usual characteristic of being purposeful and structured with clear decision making asan end result, based on the inspection objectives.All too often auditors perceive that the ISO9001 Management Review has beenconducted as a formality with the only clear objective being to keep the record of thereview straight and visible for audit. A clear lack of what the standard calls commitment.A similar requirement, to inspect product design activity, taken up at the beginning (oreven prior to beginning) of a project, and then at specifically planned stages throughoutthe design process has an totally different response. These inspections are typicallyconducted in a way designed to limit the risk of failure through the identification andcategorisation of risk factors, leading to the development of a strong design strategy.Contributions to the review process are generally widely sought, and the review outputwell documented, with subsequent actions being similarly reviewed.We have therefore two reviews, both forming part of the ISO9001 system requirement,each supposedly conducted by managers having the authority and competence to assessand decide, but markedly different in content and application. Admittedly the above is ageneralized assessment, but is so frequently typical as to be worthy of further assessment.For those who care about these issues the question must be - what is different about themethod and content of the two inspection scenarios?I believe the secret of their difference lies in the nature of the participants. For themandated ISO Management Review the participants almost inevitably see this review asa hurdle to be jumped in the cause of registration. Consequently the participants - if theycant get away from the review will attempt to limit the pain of preparation conduct andoutcome. They achieve this through a process of abdicating responsibility. Theresponsibility of understanding the real purpose of the review; of adequately preparingfor the review; and by delegating responsibility for the outcome to those they see as theirnominee for both the process, and the system at large. Consequently within thoseorganisations we find a Head of Quality being the driver to set up and manage the inputsand outputs for the review, and the same individual continually at odds with themanagement of the company regarding their commitment to quality.
Design reviews - and similar review activities within the Operations area, are markedlydifferent. In the first place they take place because managers believe the review to be anecessary part of successful project planning. Next the staff who participate have aninterest in a successful outcome to the process, and make a contribution that is recognizedand valued.Clearly for any review to be useful and successful a combination of ability - (whethermanagerial or technical) - and interest is essential. The actual participants have to beconvinced of the benefits arising from their efforts and there has to be some added valuefrom conducting the review. In most situations the ISO management review is not seen asa useful application of management time, beyond the necessary retention of registrationobjective.Is there a solution to this problem, or is there indeed a problem? For the purist, who seesthe implementation of the ISO standard as an adoption of both the letter and the spirit ofthe standard as the only way, then clearly there is a problem. For those who would statethat business managers should decide how they want to implement and manage thisstandard, as they can and usually do for other aspects and requirements, there is nodifficulty provided those same managers actually understand what they can but dont do,and the consequences of their decision. Key to this understanding in many if not mostorganisations is the Head of Quality/Quality Manager (which they arent) who implicitlyconnive with management to achieve a review process that could with little extra effortactually have some value. It is this organizational position that adds little real value andcould with advantage be eliminated.Quality means doing things well.If you want to download over free 50 ebook for iso 9001 standard, you can visit:http://iso9001ebooks.infoBest regards