difference between QMS and QS
Christian Morgenstern
does someone of you know which are the differences between the terms
"quality management system"
and "quality system"?
Thanks and Greetings,
Christian
Clytemnestra
directed at the organization's outputs, while the quality management system is
in effect quality control applied to the quality system itself. Eg a quality
system might say 'we use testing procedure ABC to make sure our widgets meet
standard XYZ' while the QMS says 'this is how we can be confident that procedure
ABC is sufficient to ensure compliance with XYZ'
"Christian Morgenstern" <chri...@scr.siemens.com> wrote in message
news:b9y0a.3696$io.1...@iad-read.news.verio.net...
Craig Cochran
Here's my take on the difference: A quality system (QS) is based on
traditional quality control and quality assurance disciplines:
inspection, documented procedures for just about everything, basic
process control, records of every activity, and the like. Most of the
control of a "quality system" was directed downward, manifested by
management dictating what everybody needed to do at lower levels of
the organization. People used to characterize ISO 9001 as "do what you
say, and say what you do." Consistency was the outcome, and sometimes
that meant consistently good and sometimes it meant consistently
mediocre. Being successful was not necessarily a requirement of a
quality system, but you'd better follow your procedure! The 1987 and
1994 editions of ISO 9001 were titled "quality systems."
A quality management system (QMS) attempts to broaden the application
of the system, utilizing it to drive the overall success of the
organization. ISO 9001:2000 is titled a quality management system.
Some of the themes of a quality management system are top management
leadership, measurable results, customer satisfaction, and continual
improvement. The intent is that the system is used to actually manage
the organization for success, not just control production and
inspection activities. ISO 9001:2000 does a decent job, in my opinion,
of defining a system that any organization can apply to good effect
(even non-manufacturing organizations). It still requires some basic
managerial wisdom, though. Stupid organizations will misuse ISO
9001:2000 just as they did the 1987 and 1994 editions. It's a little
harder to get away with now. By the way, my own preference is to drop
the term quality from the title "quality management system" and just
call it a management system.
Here's some more information I宋e written about the differences
between a quality system and quality management system (in the form
of a comparison between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:1994):
http://www.iienet.org/public/articles/index.cfm?Cat=354 (IIE Solutions
Magazine, Dec 2001)
All of this, of course, represents nothing more than my own humble
thoughts on the subject. I'd be very interested in hearing additional
(and opposing) thoughts.
CC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Craig Cochran
Center for International Standards & Quality
Georgia Institute of Technology
USA
Nolf Jean Michel
"Christian Morgenstern" <chri...@scr.siemens.com> a écrit dans le message
de news: b9y0a.3696$io.1...@iad-read.news.verio.net...
jones
"Nolf Jean Michel" <pich...@free.fr> 写入消息新闻
:3e7ac078$0$2715$626a...@news.free.fr...
> Quality Management System is what you do to manage your Quality System !
>
>
>
> "Christian Morgenstern" <chri...@scr.siemens.com> a 閏rit dans le
R&O
16949/2002:
"Particular requirements for the application of ISO9001:2000 for automitive
production and relevant service part organisation".
Have a nice week end,
Fausto Oggionni
from Italy
"jones" <jone...@sina.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:b5hpv9$297n2b$1...@ID-141683.news.dfncis.de...