THE NEW ISO 9001:2015 - NIK ZAFRI

WHAT TO EXPECT IN THE NEW ISO 9001:2015 (PART 1)

Disclaimer : Most of the contents here are not the 'actual/literal' text of the actual new ISO 9001:2015. It's the personal interpretation of the author.

0.1 – QMS as a strategic decision, a robust Quality Management Systems (QMS) – to help organization to improve its overall performance and forms an integral component of sustainable development. Design and implementation of QMS is influenced by the context of organization and   (including) the changes.

Definition

a. Strategic– Identification of long term/overall aims and interest and means to achieve them (taking into account coping up with fundamental changes – susceptible to the surroundings (what is happening around you) – law, competition, regulations, standards, trends, new technology, innovation, Research and Development etc.)

b. Robust– a process, system able to withstand or overcome adverse conditions (defects, non-conformance, corrective action request)

c. Improve overall performance – integral component of sustainable development– no system is perfect, it should be improved and become part and parcel of company's culture to achieving excellence.

d. Designed and Implemented by the sort of industry-specific – service/product provided by the company (to achieve such purpose – goals and objectives) – customization/tailor-made (1)

The rest of the content in 0.1 also talks about culture (already covered), external factors – socio-economic conditions under which it operates) – when we talk about socio-economic conditions – it talks about how the process - impacts the general public, public perception, surroundings  – possibly employment opportunity and most important – the organization must realize its financial capacity –not to do something way beyond their ability. Do something that suits the organization ONLY  (2)

Also touched on QMS can differ from one organization to another(See (1) - customization)

0.2 – not much have been changed except more emphasis is given in point no. 2 – ISO 9001 – improved internal communication, better understanding and control of process – reduction in defects and waste 

(the only way to do all these is to adopt principle of “no walls, no politics, no overlapping of duties, no pinpointing, no blaming culture” - so 100 points go to"Improved Internal Communication"  - everything starts here....

and also point no. 4 of 0.2 – ISO 9004 which touches on configuration management; apart from other elements – quality plan, project QM, measurement process/equipment, documentation, (and again - ) financial/economic benefits of the system (See (2), Statistics etc.

Definition

Configuration Management - system engineering process for establishing and maintaining consistency of a product's (or services) performance, functional and physical attributes with its requirements, design and operational information throughout its life.

0.3– comprehensive process-approach explained in better details. What's interesting are the words “understood” and “understanding” are being used. It means that the system HAS to be understood – on company-wide basis.

There is no point making a system only to be understood by a certain 'exclusive top management level'.

How to make everyone understand?

Mind you, I'm not talking about the typical (word by word) memorizing the policy or objectives – remember UNDERSTAND is totally different than MEMORIZE....

- a laymen understanding – is to understand QMS in their OWN work! (refer Job Description and Responsibilities/Authorities) – if these are not clear, DON'T HOPE everyone to understand – you will receive typical provoking comments from them just like when the previous system was implemented - “This is not my job?” “Having ISO is like having NOTHING – no impact – nothing for me” - hence - they don't feel the system!

0.4 including Figure 1 and 2 talk about 'Plan-Do-Check-Act” in much more simple understanding but implementable.

0.5 Something new – Risk-Based Thinking (in fact it's partial risk management) – which I agree 100%.

Definition

Simply look back at your Management Review Meeting, Data Analysis and Continual Improvement Plan (if you have any - if you don't, then 'BIG TROUBLE') – now PROACTIVELY start identifying, assess and prioritize the risks (the effect of "uncertainty") – how do you that? 

Yes, look back at frequent problems in your data? 

And prioritize - put them according to order, mark them with RED, YELLOW or GREEN and discuss the solution further. You can also integrate ITP, HIRARC, SHASSIC, CONQUAS or whatever specific assessment/inspection system you have (if you have one - if you don't, then go for the normal inspection that you do - incoming, in-process and outgoing) etc. into it. 

No overlapping please...let all the system be harmonized and co-exist.

Now, should you have a full (projected) Risk Management Plan before starting the operation? (Preliminary, Design, Interim and Final) – if you have the time – the answer is YES!

Project Management - Critical Path Method - justify the RED ones by thinking outside the box (outside the software) - there must be alternative ways of justifying it. Yes, I have the great CPM and the 'technical S Curve'  but why is there still delay?

Just match it with your MRM Data...you'll be on the right track.

0.6– compatibility with other management systems – explained in greater details.

VERDICT?

Yes, the new ISO 9001:2015 is attempting to cover and solve ALL kinds of management and technical problems (sound kind of ambitious - don't you think?) – however, lots of cross-referencing need to be made. Act smart for a while...please

(wait for Part 2)

MANAGING BUSINESS IN AN ORGANIZATION - NIK ZAFRI

My lecture (mixed BM & English) for lecturers, tutors and management staff from Faculty of Health and Life Science, Department of Optomery and Visual Science, Management and Science University of Malaysia (MSU) during the Family Day. This module developed to suit the theme of motivation and team building. (This module is also part of our FB Pages - Knowledge Management & E-Smart Learning Solutions)

The Star Global Malaysian Forum - Posted: 27 June 2005 at 2:31pm

Someone has asked me an interesting question that I would like to share with all of you as 'mind probe' to trigger our 'art of thinking capability'.

"I am an Accounting student who has passed with flying colours but still uncertain of what to do. I was called for an interview in a construction industry but I am scared that I might not 'make it' to the next level. Someone said to me that I must know the the difference between academic and competency and how to blend them together when I work, Please help"

It was a difficult question but I have answered to it anyway. In principle :

Academic - is a continual learning process - ending up with Certificate, Diploma, Degree and so on. (Authority - Ministry of Education/Ministry of Higher Learning)

Competency - is a staggard learning process - you will have to undergo one level to another. It's also a process 'having experience' before 'experience' and I called it 'learning to work'. (Authority - Ministry of Human Resources)

Both the above require 'accreditation' from the relevant statutory bodies typically on the Modules, Facilitators/Lecturers and Premise where both nature of courses are provided.

Both academic and competency are two core prequisites for fresh graduates but require a little bit of what I call 'customization to the needs of the industry that you are about to be in'.

In one of my lectures in one of the Malaysian local institution of higher learning - on Knowledge Management (Theme : Knowledge Worker), I have said that an Accounting student may not necessarily end up in an Accounting firm. He may also end up in a Construction Industry. Thus, this is where competency comes in where he has to gain some knowledge in advance about construction industry in order to apply his academic-based accounting knowledge.

After graduation, he may have to spend some money (I call it investment) to attend competency-based courses from CIDB, YSP, NIOSH, NPC etc. etc. Not to the level of becoming a Construction Supervisor or Project Manager but to understand the construction industry itself as he has no experience and don't know 'jack' about the construction industry.

He can also mingle round with some of the 'senior/matured 'technical' students' to gain a little bit of data before ascertaining the accounting knowledge that he may have to know before attending an interview with a Contractor (e.g. the COQ - Cost of Quality as a result of defect/repairing cost analysis and how these data contribute to future effective budgetting - project management or How Procurement (of Raw Materials) and a Quantity Surveyor (Bill of Quantities) interface with his accounting capability)

Apart from the abovementioned, I also ask him to refresh his studies on English Language (topics such as report writing and communication) and ICT - (IT application that may apply to him during his work - e.g. a little bit of knowledge of Intranet/Data Mining, ERP/MRP, CRM and how he can contribute his 'tacit data' towards these 'databases' (the main source) in order to have the output for 'explicit knowledge' (after it has been properly 'tapped' by means of QCC tools aided by computer-based analysis)

That's simply IT! Mind you, I didn't get these methods the easy way but I got it from 'hands-on experience', 'learning by heart' and 'continual improvement of my current knowledge and skills'. But for the fresh graduates, think of what I've said...it may prove you useful..one day!

I chuckled when this guy replied to me :

"Is it that difficult??"

Extracted from http://www.brint.com (Knowledge Management Portal)

Just as air, one cannot hijack KM As Knowledge, and 'management' of it, is not the turf of any one discipline, I view the reported hijacking of KM by Management Consultants rather as un unbalance due to other disciplines not contributing enough to KM. Some say ICT hijacked KM. Others say HRM should hijack KM. In truth I believe each discipline has contributions to offer and collaboration between these disciplines would make true KM possible.

Paul L. Jansen Ph.D., MBA
Read & Sign www.eqnomy.tk

Nik Zafri's Response

Yes Paul, I couldn't agree with you better...there appear to be many claims from Management Consultants cum Auditors such as 'the then' AA and their consulting counterpart and many more about championing the issue of KM - and perhaps using KM as a platform to intergrate all the previous MBO, TQM, ISO, Financial Tools, ICT, Corporate Governance, HRM etc. etc. into one roof (which is quite impossible to do) till everything went lost into limbo?

To me as I said ICT is just making the defined business core process (HR, R &D, Marketing, Sales, Operation, Procurement, Inspection, QA/Safety/EMS, Delivery, Storage etc.) a lot faster. Remember the word KNOWLEDGE-BASED...thus knowledge here I think refers to experience, skills/competencies, education/academic and the ability to customize all those to the organizational needs - bottom line - profit - it will always go back to the original purpose...what's in it for the organization?

e.g. what's ERP/MRP without basing itself to a properly defined core process? Or better, what is 'e-enabling' for if not e-enabling a process or chain of processes. What's Data-Mining, SAP Solutions - what kind of datum, what kind of solutions - again, we talked about win-win situation - the solution should spell customization to the organizational needs - not ICT customizing organization to their needs. The datum and solution should spell analysis and the analysis should spell money/budget/forecast/finance and of course...what is the next action? or better..what's our branding?

Looking back into the macro - what's knowledge-based economy without a knowledge-based management? One is the father, the latter is the son but the son badly needs to be well-groomed first...not to be a jack of all trades which the son couldn't achieve...what if the son failed to comply with 'the too high expectations' from the father?

The Star Global Malaysians Forum - Posted: 28 February 2006 at 7:12pm

Queries by e-mail

(note : I have done some editing in order to protect certain information)

anonymous wrote:

1.How do you define knowledge management (KM)? How is knowledge management different from information management?

I can answer you from the organizational point of view. I will skip the 'philosophies'.

Knowledge Management is simply defined as - capturing, organizing, and storing KNOWLEDGE and EXPERIENCE of individual workers and groups within an organization and making this information available to others in the organization.

The difference of KM and IM is that IM is the mechanism to KM. IM (again in the organizational viewpoint) is defined as the entire process of defining, evaluating, protecting, and distributing DATA within an organization. (IM nowadays is very much related to ICT)

Note : Data - tacit (raw) and explicit (having undergoing finalisation process throughout the 'pipeline')

KM cannot function without IM as IM cannot function without ICT.

KM as I also see it (personally) is another evolution of TQM due to their similarities but with ICT and IM around, it is now known as KM.

anonymous wrote:

2. Do you agree that besides managerial and generic skills, KM managers need to have the technical or functional skills (specific KM-related skills to support knowledge processing or activities such as knowledge sharing, codification, mapping, auditing, etc...) to perform their KM roles? Why?

AGREED 100%. Technical is a MUST in the quest to becoming K-Workers. In the organizational point of view, competency or competent worker is actually related to 'having necessary qualifications, experience and technical skills' where these elements should be 'customized to the needs of the organization/industry' (generic)and NOT vice versa.

I will have to stress the fact that all Managers are KM Managers for their own/respective unit, department or section otherwise customization will not take place effectively. Of course, in some organizations, they have KM coordinators - usually parked under HR and/or IT Department.

The coordinator's basic functions is to perform IM processing and if he/she is from IT department, they need to find some solutions to 'e-enable' these processes. There are big to small scale meetings (SGA oriented) will take place usually to brainstorm on certain information and identify critical data to be garnered out.

The members of the meeting comes from various departments usually to choose the process owner' of such information going to be discussed. This information will eventually be turned into 'explicit' from 'tacit' having achieving unanimous agreement. Finally, a process flow will be drawn up and if there is a need to 'e-enable' the flow, then IT will come into the picture. The 'committee' headed by the 'process owner(s) will feed the information to IT and IT will do the rest - making things 'go a lil bit' faster - for example - data mining/capturing, classifying, coding, interface, real-time data for fast decision making.

anonymous wrote:

3. While performing your KM roles, have you ever experienced lacking some KM related skills? that are the factors viewed as contributors to such situations?

So far so good. The only setbacks that would likely to appear if :

a) I do not do a proper research to understand what sort of industry that I'm in (which I always do)
b) Cooperation from the 'target' is not given, (resisting to change)
c) office politics - bureaucracy
d) no transparency

That would be all for now..hope the above helps.