What to Document in ISO 9001:2015 Clause 4.0 up to 6.0.

Thank you for the explicit explanation. Imagine having to verify an organization's implementation of QMS when you don't understand it that much your self. My interview and verification tomorrow will be conducted with more confidence and better understanding. Much appreciated. Although you could do another video explaining how to verify implementation of the ISO requirements

Masokay po sana kung merong mga examples.

Awesome ; thanks alot for your information and explanation sir; from india

I remember General Patton stating, "if everyone is thinking alike, then no one is thinking"
What I have discovered through my 25 plus years of auditing, is that documents are the worst sorts of an attempt at control. Invariably, they eventually become so stale over time as to no longer represent their original intent I find this to be true of almost every organization I have audited.
Documents created to describe cross functional activities of an organization, are rarely maintained, and commonly so convoluted through text descriptions, they are near impossible to sort out. its not uncommon to discover members of an organizations management who are unfamiliar with its written policies relative to its cross functional activities.
Worse yet is the assumption that work instructions are a method of process control, only academia could construct such nonsense.
All one need do is ask themselves, is your vehicle complicated to operate? when was the last time you read through its operation manual? Does the fact one does not read their vehicle operations manual each day before driving, indicate they don't understand how the vehicle works, especially after operating said vehicle for 2 or even 4 years time. Practice makes perfect, and after several hours at the controls, most operators are well versed in their vehicles operation. The same can be said of an organizations shop floor operators, and its staff.
I find that its the staff functions which bear the least understanding of processes, especially when such processes are cross functional, I also find that process mapping and not detailed step by step functionality is a most effective tool for staff and management to understand and improve said processes.
I find quality or environmental or safety manuals to be a complete waste of resources. They are usually written by someone functioning at a clerk level and then rarely maintained. after their initial authorship. Like policy statements, they are nothing but nonsense.
Most auditors who ask employees about how they adhere to the organizations policy statement, get the deer in the headlights look from the operator. This is generally because policy is a strategic statement and operations is a tactical function. Management and Supervision are not very effective at defining how one supports the other to the operations folks.

Not to say that documents relative to an organization are invalid in all cases, however, ISO could learn quite a bit from the Financial crowd, especially relative to process narratives, relative controls, and the testing of the validity of such controls.

If you still think, in this day and age, that a document controller is a person, you don’t understand ISO and have no clue on how to use technology.

Hey guys, what's QMR? Thank you.

how do you do that?

Your video is good. HOWEVER,
. Why ISO needs to complicate everything?
They need to be straightforward, with simplicity of words and presentation. Simple systems will be adopted.

Hi, thanks for your work. It's really very helpful :)
Are you really sure that 7.5.2.c requires us to have in all documented information a strict information who and when approved it? You don't have to have all documentation in word or pdf, you can have them in some tool where it's not possible to add such information but as long as you can prove that it was approved before publication (you know who approved it and when) it should be ok.

For example, process maps that we have in a separate cloud base tool, where we have a approval workflow for each process. We have clear evidence who and when aprroved it to be publish, relevant version of a process. We don't have to have information on a process map who and when approved it (of course we can, but I don't think that it's mandatory).

Another example, we can imagine that we're creating a training in Power Point, save it to PDF and put in some tool that automatically send invitations to employees who should perform the training and monitor who did it. Before we will put the training to the tool, we're gather feedback from our colleagues and Manager and implement their suggestions. We have evidence in email box that it was revised and approved, so we don't have to have information on a first slide who and when approved it (of course we can, but I don't think that it's mandatory).

What is your perspective on that?

Is Quality manual mandatory

What are the mandatory documents

I had watched so many videos for same...yet I find your description most amazing...keep up the good work man!

Very informative and well explained. It helps us to easily understand QMS.

Excellent video