| Author |
Topic |
16 Posts
|
 Posted - 31 October 2007 8:31 |
  |
Hi,
Recently, I had an experience with a CB during pre-audit, when Quality Policy displays were not signed. We showed that the Quality Policy in the Quality Manual was signed by the competant authority (CEO) and that the Policy statement on display was no different. But the auditor did not agree and continued to insist. We however, were firm and we did not want to disturb the signatory of the company to sign in all the displays. Fortunately, the Auditor who came in for the Initial Audit did not raise any issue.
In my opinion, the signature in the Quality Manual is more than adequate.
Any comments
Thanks
|
Japan
11 Posts
|
| Posted - 01 November 2007 4:52 |
|
Hi Viramc,
I definitely agree with you that the signature in the Quality Manual for Quality Policy is adequate enough.
But, during my previous training and establishment of Quality Management System, our consultant prepared to have our Quality Policy with signature of our CEO.
But during the third-party audit they cannot raised an issue on the signature alone.
For a knowledgeable auditor, this is not a big issue, Im sure everyone will agree that the signature in the Quality Manual is more than adequate enough but maybe the one who conducted a pre-audit is not as knowledgeable as you. 
Dencio |
1 Posts
|
| Posted - 01 November 2007 10:00 |
|
Hi,
The laminated display boards, or any other means of displaying the Quality Policy, can easily incorporate the CEO's sign. It would'nt require the CEO to sign each.
i think the question is that why was the sign ommitted, as it could have been easily included.
thanx
|
4 Posts
|
| Posted - 08 November 2007 20:03 |
|
If the organisation is realy COMMITED to quality then the CEO should be happy to sign a master Quality Policy which is then copied and distributed for display. This also communicates the quality message to all levels in the organisation indicating commitment to the quality processes. NOT EVERYONE SEES THE MANUAL in some organisations. But certainly if the CEO has signed the Manaual and policy within it then a finding could not be raised because the policy displayed is not signed, unless this is stipulated within the defined arrangements within the company!
|
|
Administrator
526 Posts
|
| Posted - 09 November 2007 3:56 |
|
A CEO signing a Quality Policy Statement is simply a means to an end... visual demonstration of Top Management commitment. Though nice and desireable, there is no requirement for a Quality Policy Statement to be signed, even within the policy document version; saying this, it is typical.
It is essential, however, for an organization to effectively demonstrate Top Management's commitment. Just a note, ... though it is not a requirement for signing a Quality Policy Statement, as there are other methods for demonstrating Top Management commitment, it certainly is a missed opportunity by Top Management.
One more note ... don't ever agree a nonconformity by an auditor for no signature on a Quality Policy Statement! ... unless otherwise required by the organization's own requirements. As long as the organization is able to effectively demonstrate Top Management commitment, they're good.
|
India
4 Posts
|
| Posted - 21 November 2007 4:11 |
|
Quote:
A CEO signing a Quality Policy Statement is simply a means to an end... visual demonstration of Top Management commitment. Though nice and desireable, there is no requirement for a Quality Policy Statement to be signed, even within the policy document version; saying this, it is typical.
It is essential, however, for an organization to effectively demonstrate Top Management's commitment. Just a note, ... though it is not a requirement for signing a Quality Policy Statement, as there are other methods for demonstrating Top Management commitment, it certainly is a missed opportunity by Top Management.
One more note ... don't ever agree a nonconformity by an auditor for no signature on a Quality Policy Statement! ... unless otherwise required by the organization's own requirements. As long as the organization is able to effectively demonstrate Top Management commitment, they're good.[/quote
Hi Checkmate - Thats a good note. I also feel that if the display of the quality statement of the organization is signed by the CEO/ Top authority , it just adds more weight and is more appealling especially for the people on the ground level. Hence from a requirement prespertive it might not be mandatory but it would certainly add more weight to the displayed quality statement.
Cheers..! Ranjit
|
4 Posts
|
| Posted - 29 November 2007 15:08 |
|
The signing of the Quality Policy displays might not be the only consideration here. The Quality Policy outside the manual is a required quality management system document and therefore shall be controlled. If the signature and date are the only control mechanisms used for the displayed Quality Policy then it would be required.
|
india
21 Posts
|
| Posted - 01 December 2007 13:11 |
|
In my view it is better to display replica of original Quality Policy which bears signature of CEO . For more authenticity and awareness it is essential.
|
|
Administrator
526 Posts
|
| Posted - 21 December 2007 15:03 |
|
Hi Joyz ...
Say, please clarify this statement of yours of November 29 ..."The Quality Policy outside the manual is a required quality management system document and therefore shall be controlled."
Are you saying there must be a stand-alone Quality Policy Statement? If so, really ...how so? Please defend, then.
Alternately, are you saying something else, then?
Cheers.
Checkmate
|
|
Super
243 Posts
|
| Posted - 24 December 2007 9:37 |
|
as everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of 9001, it can be seen that 5.3 does not state that a signature is required additionally ISO9001 does not state anywhere that anything 'has' to be signed - reviewed, approved yes - provide evidence of conformity and effective operation of the QMS again yes.
how the company provide or show commitment is entirley up to them as long as it is appropriate to that company (ie does a one-man' cmpany have to sign his own policy - is that appropriate compared to a company with 1,000 employees?)
one simple fact is that ISO 9001 does not say that a signature is required on any document, record or anything and no auditor can insist that something is signed as long as it can be demonstarted that 'approval' has been given and 'top management' can demonstrate commitment to comply with requirements etc
Hope this helps,
 However, this post is of my own thoughts or advice and may not be representative of the IRCA, any professional body or individual; before acting on any advice given by me please ensure that it is appropriate & sutiable to your requirements
Mr. Jingle |
4 Posts
|
| Posted - 11 February 2008 1:33 |
|
Quote:
Hi Joyz ...
Say, please clarify this statement of yours of November 29 ..."The Quality Policy outside the manual is a required quality management system document and therefore shall be controlled."
Are you saying there must be a stand-alone Quality Policy Statement? If so, really ...how so? Please defend, then.
Alternately, are you saying something else, then?
Cheers.
Checkmate
|
