Qualsys Documentation Guide
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•3,163 views
Read More: quality.eqms.co.uk/eqms-governance-risk-compliance-software-datasheets Once upon a time, records lived in lever arch-files, filing cabinets and in cardboard boxes. All key documents and records were strictly guarded under lock-and-key by those who knew the rules, and applied them assiduously. Nowadays, records exist all over the business, well beyond the reach of the traditional warden. With everything digital, records are stored on desktops or mobile devices, on clouds or on servers, on intranets or on social media. But what impact has this decentralisation of records had on organisations? In this fast paced, mobile world, documentation is created at break-neck pace. Not only has the internet, remote working and globalisation completely changed the way documents are created, it has transformed how records are exchanged, viewed, interrogated and collaborated upon. Despite the issues with lost company records, only a third of organisations feel their document control procedures are integrated enterprise-wide, according to an AIIM Industry Report. Two in three organisations feel they have failed to integrate document control procedures across the organisation, or have little or no document control policy at all. Not only do these companies risk litigation costs, loosing customer confidence, bad publicity and loosing confidential customer information, they are failing to exploit important knowledge resources. EQMS Document Manager helps you to keep control of records. EQMS enables you to: control access and usage of documented information, as well as the distribution and retrieval of documents. Follow a systematic approach: e.g. follow the Plan > Do > Check > Act cycle. Retain records: have documents to prove that you have done what you said you would do. This supports organisations to meet the requirements of ISO 9001:2015 and other management standards.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (19)
Similar to Qualsys Documentation Guide
Similar to Qualsys Documentation Guide (20)
More from Qualsys Ltd
More from Qualsys Ltd (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Qualsys Documentation Guide
- 1. Qualsys Documentation: Reflections How, what, where, when and why ID: TG.G.Docn Version: 1 Oct 2015 Owner: Peter Pond
- 2. A few Qualsys Documents • Data Sheets • Plans • User Requirements • Change Requests • User Guides • FAQs • Purchase Orders • Test records • Templates • Forms • Supplier records • Staff leave records • Expense Claims • Meeting records • Contacts • Procedures • Emails • Requisitions • Test plans • Correspondence • Accounts
- 4. A short guide to effective documentation completed forms, videos, user guides, test records etc are all documents max of 16 steps to getting them right User Guide needs all 16 stops Completed Expenses form is the express with far fewer comment on piece of code of causal JT each documentation failure has an implicit cost
- 6. Audience Stakeholders 1. Potential clients 2. Technicians 3. Internal administrators 4. Auditors 5. Current clients 6. Colleagues <-
- 7. Objectives 1. Know them 2. State them 3. Hide them 4. Trim them 5. <-
- 8. Medium 1. Web 2. Audio 3. Video 4. Required Form 5. System record 6. Email 7. MS Office 8. HTML 9. PDF <-
- 9. Form • The poor man’s means of record keeping • When is a form not a form? • Our forms QF{nn} for odd specifics <-
- 10. Format 1. Some QF are templates eg a. QF01 – Standard Word Doc b. QF35 – Standard letter c. QF105 – Standard spreadsheet 2. QP08 - general guidance on formatting rules 3. House styles for many things eg a. User Requirements b. User Guides c. Training Manuals d. Datasheets e. Case Studies <-
- 11. Style 1. Formal 2. Technical 3. Persuasive 4. Informative 5. Informal 6. Helpful <-
- 12. Clarity 1. “It means what it says…” 2. Validate accuracy 3. … and unambiguity 4. 05 Mar 2016 <-
- 13. Storage 1. My silo (only in draft) 2. The corporate silo (QQMS kbase) 3. The application in QQMS a. Job Tracker b. Training Manager c. Audit Manager etc 4. The application named in QQMS a. Teamseer b. Jira c. Salesforce etc 5. C I A <-
- 14. Confidentiality 1. DCT takes the strain 2. Allow Modification, or not 3. Same principles if not in QQMS kbase 4. If client doc, protecting them <-
- 15. Security 1. Backup 2. Protection from prying eyes a. Passwording b. Data sticks! c. Laptops d. Permissions 3. If in doubt, ask <-
- 16. Availability 1. Ben Gunn 2. In a form that the audience can see 3. The Tree 4. The Key a. ID b. Keywords in Title or Scope c. DCT etc <-
- 17. Review 1. A record’s a record’s a record, but 2. Tempus fugit – DCT to the rescue again 3. Document Review a. Follow your review instruction b. Delete if no longer needed c. If OK, move date of review on to next review d. Otherwise revise doc and upload new version e. Review date automatic if (d) above. f. Move date far on, if review no longer required 4. Audit trail <-
- 18. Disposal 1. Everything will one day run its course 2. DCT strikes again a. Automatic deletion b. Email warning c. Can move the date on d. Archiving only 3. Audit trailing again 4. Client docs special attention 5. Paper docs also <-
- 19. Approval 1. Validation and approval 2. DCT supports again 3. The audit trail as before 4. Or Job Tracker, or sim <-
- 20. Publicity 1. Almost there 2. Not DCT again! a. Variable by Doc if not enforced b. Can get audit trail of receipt c. Can include outsiders by email, but no document access (yet) 3. Notify User <-
- 21. Feedback 1. Surely that’s it 2. Where is P>D>C>A without Feedback? <-
Editor's Notes
- “Documentation is a necessary evil.” or “It’s like sex. When it’s good, it’s wonderful: when it’s bad it’s awful.” Why reflections? Everyone has different tasks. Each task demands different documents. What does Qualsys want? Documents which customers want. Documents which we need. Documents which ISO 9001 etc demand. Everyone gets initially judged by what they are wearing - the cut of their jib. Customer confidence grows when they see good documentation. The ISO auditor requires documentation to the declared and appropriate standard. Proof of job done. “If it isn’t documented, then it isn’t done” Root responsibility. “It’s only as good as you make it.” We’re here to reconsider what we each can do. We may be constrained by the tools we choose. Suggestions from the author and user often tell us more than those from the theorist. Constant challenge and improvement. This session should be a dialogue. It probably won’t be. Do interrupt, though I shall charge on. Reflection by you on how it applies to your documents will come on another day. This Powerpoint is a document, and is available on QQMS, notes and all.
- Before embarking on the process of document construction, validation, publication, protection etc let us be clear of 2 things: 1. all documents have different aims, shape and constraint 2. a record is a document The blue items are currently unequivocally (?) documents, things which we would expect to see in or via QQMS. The orange items not so. All are documents but may be . . . . application records (Jira, Sage, Training Manager, HubSpot etc), items (emails etc) copied to Job Tracker/Journal, workflow Actions from DM, AM, TM etc, items attached to a QQMS module etc. At root, all important corporate documents should have some reference in a Quality Procedure – this is part of our ISO 9001 undertaking. Take a moment to list your doc/record types. Later it may be useful to check for relevance on the 16-point plan.
- Documentation and our ISO9001 promise – this diagram should be in your QQMS Favourites The circled items (QP30 and QP08) are the two most important items, the former like the large portal on a country house, with the doorman, not quite like Cerberus, offering to take our coat but breathing out implications for our proper subsequent behaviour. At root, QP30 says, we promise to behave like this to satisfy the standard everything P>D>C>A with documents to prove that we have done what we said that we would do. And QP08 says this is what documentation is this is why we do it this is when we do it this is where we do it this is how we do it Interestingly this Powerpoint is a document, QP30 and QP08 are documents, and the illustrated diagram is a document. Hopefully they have passed through appropriate processes!
- Before taking the 16 steps, let’s remind ourselves of the breadth of documentary possibility. Interesting scenario: an organisation with a department full of blind people whose job is to read, analyse and report on the contents of text in documents received by the company. How on earth do they know what to do and how do they present their results? Access to audio files as their SOP? Braille copy of text for analysis? Siri for reference? Audio input of reports, converted to standard forms, plus auto email for subsequent processing?... All a bit fanciful, but does raise the more general question: what document form works best? What document form works best? Will look at my simple off-the-top-of the head view of the 16 steps in the document life-cycle. User Guides may need the lot. Thankfully not all 16 required by every document every time. This form is self-validating. Wrong entries to wrong person – no payment! Another extreme. You know it’s in the right place. Needs the right JT. Needed only by your peers! If a required document is not present - in the right form - and the right place, then we pay loss of business audit failure duplicated effort next stage hampered costly to retrofit etc
- Audience. Who are we producing this for? What are they looking for? What do they expect? Do they need persuading? How do we appeal to them? What can they afford to pay? ….. Objective. What are we trying to get out of this? Are we subject to regulations, directions, standards? Are we constrained in time or resource in what we do?.... Medium. What shall we use? Audio, video, print, ad, electronic document, spreadsheet, powerpoint …. Form. Perhaps this bypasses the first three! We are filling in a form. Is there a Qualys Form, or derived template? Format. Should we be laying out with particular icons, fonts etc to present a Qualsys house style? Style. Back to step 1 here – what style will be best for the audience – formal, technical, helpful, attractive (ie grabbing attention)….. Clarity. This might sound obvious, but often something means what you say rather than says what you intend - find someone like your audience and get them to validate it… Storage. OK. Now you have a product. Where should OUR copy go? The dreaded CIA, confidentiality, integrity and access….. Confidence. ie confidential. Doc Manager to the rescue. Ensure, perhaps by DCT, it is stored on a need-to-know basis, and barred from that portion of the world you wish not to see it…. Security. The Integrity of CIA. Is the document stored in such a way (backup etc) that it isn’t lost, and protected by lock and key, electronic or otherwise from theft…. Availability. Can those people who need to see it, get at it?..... Review. It’s true today, but when shall we need to review it, so that it remains up-to-date? Doc Manager to the rescue again... If it doesn’t need review it probably needs the next… Disposal. When do we need to consider getting rid? Sometimes you may want to destroy the evidence… Approval. This may be a process requirement, or it’s just sensible, and you may need evidence.. Publicity. What’s the best way of getting this out to your public. For internal stuff don’t forget QQMS… Feedback. Are helpful comments going to get lost. Ok internally – but what of the customer? Is an easy feedback mechanism in place?... The End. This presentation is heavily biased toward EQMS > QQMS facilities, but the same principles need to be observed for each and every piece of documentation that we either generate or hold. If some of the 16 steps can be applied automatically by Document Type or by application, then so much the better. Good luck.
- Can be more than one of these to consider for each document - or doc type. Each has their own view of the world and how they expect to see things. Potential clients. Finance man (bottom line). Standards/Quality (respects knowledge of the terminology and references). Process manager (processing benefits). Technician.. Technician. Internal or external. Need to know and use his language, to be in tune with his expectations, methodologies etc. Use shared terminology. Otherwise endless arguments or complete switch off. Internal admin. Know what they are looking for, and provide it. Auditors. The clearer who it’s for and what it is, the sooner they can tick the box and move on. Just be aware of their depth of interest. Current clients. They will have their own documentation expectations. If they are important (ie more important than the rest, you may need to present stuff their way). They may even expect things of you (eg GDocP). Colleagues. In linked processes your output is a colleague’s input. Make sure it works for them.
- Know them. If you don’t know where you’re going, you’re unlikely to arrive. State them. Some of the objectives may need stating in the document. The reader may not know where you’re going. Hide them. On the other hand, some of them are best kept out of sight, or at least carefully worded! Trim them. The cost of the implied documentation – can you afford to do it this way?
- Same message for all media. Is it right for your stakeholders? Can they access and process it? Have they the hardware? Have they the software? What is the best medium for your audience? Web. Are there security issues? Huge potential, but need to tread with care. Horses for courses. Audio. May be an option. Video. May be just what is needed. The world of You-tube. Required Form. Big advantage when validated stuff wanted in a known place. Can the audience handle it? System record. As good as the system. Huge advantage for validation, restricted choice when data sets are known, and analysis. Email. Such a composite beast that supporting medium for email copies and attachments may be an issue. Email not the repository. MS Office. This covers several different “media”. Considerations come when considering the use of hyperlinks. Are the stakeholders able to use non-internet URLs (LAN refs) etc? HTML. Horses for courses. Stakeholder usage again a consideration. PDF Adobe the lingua franca – huge advantage for general publication. In all cases important to check that stakeholders can use.
- 1. And now for a history lesson. The history of Forms. Forms were known by 1753 – the UK marriage licence, and probably long before. Thereafter bureaucrats grew fat on forms. In 1890 tabulators were born for US Census forms, and by 1944 UK computers born for message forms, to win the war. And now here we are with web (1989) and mobile apps (1993/2007?). “The Form is dead, Long live the Form”. A form is therefore any assemblage of related data presented in a predefined layout, as true now as it was in 1753. And some of them are even now printed on paper, completed and scanned, to feed some greedy server. For us they are now generally either An electronic template (Word, Spreadsheet etc) to be completed and stored (or signed, scanned and stored), or The online screen of an application for collecting (and subsequently presenting) a set of data For us in Qualsys, mixed in with true forms, our Quality Forms contain checklists of guidance or format or aide-memoire. But many forms are not QF: The Document Details screen in Document Manager is a Form. Indeed it is a modified Form dependent on Document Type. Job Tracker Job is a Form. Again, the rules for its completion will vary according to the Job Type chosen. A Job Description is a QF Form (until we introduce EQMS Personnel Manager, of course). A Software Licence Agreement is a QF Form, 95% the same set of standard words. Etc etc Therefore, where there is no application waiting for your details, there may be a generic Quality Form specified in a Quality Procedure. QF’s are yours to define and use. They are there to ensure completeness and consistency. Create and use them.
- Nothing much to say here. Where there’s a Form use it, and if it’s no good, get it improved or replaced. Where there isn’t, QP08 points to general formatting guides to ensure consistency and professionalism. If there isn’t a house style for your set of documents, then agitate.
- Formal. Formal proposals demand wording from the limited business vocabulary which will not raise eyebrows – prolix?! Aaargh!! Technical. Data is, or data are? .. Know your audience – use the terms they know. Persuasive. Soothing and charming may be the call for this document. Again, suit the language to the audience - appeal to what will excite them. Informative. For manuals etc, the expectation is for clear, accurate, straightforward statements of what they need to know – they are not there for entertainment. Informal. Very rare, and with extreme care. You are in business and so are they. Safer to have fun in your own time and with your colleagues. Helpful. Think of the client need when giving technical guidance. Those who are in need of it, need all the help they can get. TEST what you write by running it through someone you think can help.
- 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.' H Dumpty Most authors know exactly what they are saying – until they read it back! 2. Almost everyone else is a better judge of what your words mean. You have the disadvantage of knowing what you meant before you wrote them. 3. Often the same words may play two tunes at the same time, even if it is only irony, or the supply of punctuation. Must slip in the GDocP recommendation – some of our clients will throw up hands in horror if they see 5 Mar 2016, heaven forfend 5/3/2016! It can take a long time to mend broken fences.
- Your iPad, laptop, PC ok for early drafting, but do make sure that they are secure. SyncToy – use it. Regular dumping of work in progress onto corporate servers makes sense. Docs when ready should be held on QQMS (suitably protected) unless greater security thought necessary. The Ben Gunn principle should not apply. It needs to be easily found by those who need to find it. Ben Gunn again. These constraints may be applied by the system or by you. You need to be satisfied that they are. C = Confidentiality: docs only seen by those who need to see I = Integrity: docs protected from adulteration (modification) by those without authority A = Availability: docs made known and available to those who need to see.
- The big C is much assisted for QQMS Documents of known DCT’s. Access restrictions can be applied beforehand. They can be automatically imposed, or left open to modification. What of the other modules? How far do Job Tracker, Audit Manager, Training Manager, SalesForce etc protect your documentation. It’s up to you to protect your files from those they do not concern. Whether it is ours or the client’s document, we have a duty to protect either copy or original from prying eyes.
- The big I, which I have here called security rather than integrity, concerns protecting from loss – in IT terms subjected to periodic backup – if it is in QQMS, then you can be assured that this is being done. Making the thing available to be seen or updated by only select people depends on how and where it is stored. Though QQMS docs and other electronic items may be stored in applications with password protection, this is not the case for stuff on datasticks (aargh!!!), email attachment, or even the average laptop. Password protection on the file itself may be possible, but then all security is relative. We live in an increasingly insecure world. No more leaving the back door open because you live in the country!
- And the big A. For those not familiar with Treasure Island – shame on you – Ben Gunn is the marooned sailor who knows where the treasure now lies. “Them as ‘ides can find, say I - them as ‘ides can find.” Apart from initial distribution to the intended parties, with appropriate directions to read, eat and never divulge that they have received it! you need to place it where, for those with a legitimate need, it can be found, and with ease. Perhaps as a PDF, if the original is in an uncommon application… It is obviously a good idea to check this out if it is important. For QQMS docs, the tree is helpful where there is a familiar known repository, but search by part ID or keywords in Title or Document Scope or known DCT are often a much quicker way of finding things but only if you know how Ben Gunn has been burying them.
- If a document is a correct record, then it is not subject to documentary review. It will not change with time. Otherwise, to assure that it is kept up-to-date we may need reminders to review. EQMS and the DCT may be the answer. With its automated mechanisms to remind you when it is time to review a dating item etc. The process will be familiar to you all. 4. For ISO 9001 evidential purposes, using the DCT option to demand reasons for change can provide such an audit trail of review.
- In this modern world, disposal means recycle. The standards for Record keeping, which guide our own Public Records Office, go into great detail about the length of time a document should be kept, the means by which it should be archived, whether it should be redacted or recycled!, the capacity for bringing it back from the dead etc. We have a simpler model, where we essentially (for the moment) set up a regime (via the DCT) where we can program to receive warnings that a document should be considered for archive, or a warning that it will be archived when that period is expired. The latter can be very useful for publicity material which is known to have a restricted shelf life. If we really want to dispose of a document, dispatch it, reduce it to the status of a John Cleese parrot, then we shall need to take action behind the application’s back, at least for the time being, since for us in EQMS, Delete = Archive. As for review, the Change Log may be of use. What we do with client documents when we are done with them, will be dictated by the clients and we should be clear with them what they want. Paper documents or electronic files stored elsewhere need their disposal properly considered. Secure disposal may be especially important for paper, and electronic documents too are best disposed of when no longer required.
- The formal approval of documents is assisted by QQMS. Within Qualsys we have never attempted to use the EQMS functionality to cover the process of document creation (checking with peers that it is accurate, clear, of the right shape and form for its audience etc) before being submitted for the Mr Del Monte touch. This does not mean that we should not be doing every bit of due diligence first. Nothing should ever reach the stage where it gets refused at the last fence. DCT assists again with the Controlled Document and Approval Path. Here the ISO 9001 evidence of process is automatic. Use of Job Tracker workflow may be a way of ensuring and recording approval of Documents produced, or indeed other applications. This will be up to the process declared.
- Number 15. Again EQMS/QQMS has the facility to send notifications of new or revised versions of Documents to QQMS users, but unless they have access to the system, they cannot see the Documents. Publicity can be made real by the inclusion of “external” parties as notificees who can access and see the documents which we tell them about, but we have not taken this step with QQMS, and rely on Qualsys staff arranging any supply of Documents to our (potential) clients via the web or email as they think fit. 3. Extra facility in EQMS to further publicise, by notification, but with the same constarints. Other considerations when publishing. Commercial in confidence markings? Password for update? Trusted recipient? Pdf with password for update? No simple rule, and the software changes. Be aware.
- 1. Step 16. Almost there? For EQMS users, there is a system-aided option. Direct Feedback to Document Owner, if DCT allows, and facility for response via ToDo with messages to email. Document usage can be monitored too. For non-QQMS users, how do you engineer feedback? What is the point of feedback? Discover if right tone for its recipient? Despite validation, not correct? – You need to know. Potential improvements? – You may even get contributions which could enhance your message. Might provoke new ideas for development in this or related area? Finally, can give you that badge of excellence, and proof of excellence?!! 2. For documentation, this is the perfect illustration of the completion of the Quality lifecycle.