GAP analysis Vs DATA analysis

It won't be surprising if some of us may think that both terms (Gap analysis and Data analysis) are just the same thing .. but in actuality they are different ..

DATA ANALYSIS is actually much 'simpler' to do in a sense that we just need to compile, analyse and display it in the form of graphs / pie charts etc. Full stop ! It doesn't tell you what is good or bad about the data or graph that has been projected .. it doesn't explains or highlights what else need to be done or eliminated for continual improvements etc .. in short, it is simply a graph or pie chart without any meaningful or constructive messages !

But for GAP ANALYSIS we are expected to do much more than that .. in addition to what we do for Data Analysis, Gap analysis requires us to assess the 'SPACE' between where we are (what is currently being done) and where we want to be (what is required by law/ organization) .. simply put, it highlights which of the variables or requirements that are being met and which are not ..

Gap analysis should tell us which practices (amalan), services or functions have been left out or should be eliminated (accidentally or deliberately) and which one is still needed to be developed or enhanced .. it tells us if there is any 'gap' that we need to improve on .. so that 'where we want to be' can be achieved !

NO. ISU Versus NO. SEMAKAN

Pada kebiasaannya dokumen / prosedur (tanpa sebarang perubahan) akan mempunyai nombor rujukan asal seperti berikut :

NO. ISU = 1
NO. SEMAKAN = 0

Persoalannya : Bilakah No. Isu dan No. Semakan ini berubah ?

Let's look at this scenario / Case Study >>

If we change (pinda) the word 'rektor' to 'presiden' anywhere within the document .. walaupun melibatkan 10 kali pindaan perkataan yg SAMA, it's still considered as 1 PINDAAN .. n each 1 pindaan will cause the No.SEMAKAN to increase from 0 to 1, or 1 to 2,  or 2 to 3 etc .. 

When this Pindaan happens one after another until the No. Semakan has reached > 10 times (ie. on the 11th count), then the No. ISU is increased from 1 to 2, or 2 to 3 etc .. n consequently the No. SEMAKAN will be reset to 0 again .. meaning that No. ISU will increase by 1 count each time AFTER 10 times of Semakan happened .. 

Some of us may feel that if the change/ pindaan is just MINOR (eg. typo error of a word and it does not affects the process) then there is no need for PINDAAN or increase in the nos of Semakan .. for such cases, it would be suffice to just do the correction or edit the 'wrong' letter .. 

Unless if the change is MAJOR, like for example is affects the process / procedure, then a proper PINDAAN n an increase to the No. Semakan should be done .. an example would be a pindaan to something that has VALUE (monetary etc) .. or the power to approve / disapprove of certain projects etc

Wallahu a'lam ;)

GERAK GEMPUR PnP : 17-18 Sept 2013

Last kopek .. in preparation for the upcoming Re-Certification audit of our ISO 9001:2008 by SIRIM on 19-20/9/13 .. 

All the best n good luck to all our Process Owners (POs) especially those who are directly involved with Prosedur Pengajaran n Pembelajaran (PnP) .. 

Thank you to all in the non-acad depts, faculty n Academic Dept esp KJs Pn Shamsinah, Pn Nadiah, Pn Asri, Pn Hadza n Ostad Saiful .. u guys r simply awesome !

Keep up the good work !

KURSUS LATIHAN LANJUTAN KLAUSA ISO 9001:2008

Alhamdulillah, pada Sabtu 24 Ogos 2013 Unit Kualiti telah berjaya mengadakan satu lagi Kursus Latihan khusus untuk Juruaudit Dalaman .. kali ini penekanan diberi kepada KLAUSA ISO 9001:2008 .. Penceramah jemputan ialah En Mohd Rafidi Mat Dahan dari SIRIM .. melibatkan 48 orang Juruaudit Dalaman KPTM Bangi .. diadakan di Bilik E6 KPTM Bangi ..

Selain fokus ke atas KLAUSA ia juga beri penekanan ke atas Proc Internal Audit n Proc PnP .. yang mana ia merupakan skop utama ISO KPTM ..

En Rafidi mengingatkan para peserta kursus supaya sentiasa refer n relate klausa kepada formula PDCA .. ia itu Plan Do Check Action .. sbg contoh >> Klausa 4 n 5 ada kaitan dgn PLAN .. Klausa 7 pula ada kaitan dgn DO .. Klausa 8.2.2 n 5.6 di bawah CHECK .. manakala Klausa 8.5.2 n 8.5.3 di bawah ACT ..

Pada asasnya kerja2 auditing ini memerlukan auditor utk memberi DESCRIPTION rather than PRESCRIPTION .. auditor bukan doctor utk memberi prescription 'ubat' .. meaning that auditor is to just describe or highlight penemuan / findings nya saja .. n bukannya memberi 'prescription' atau cara2 utk correction, corrective action (CA) or preventive action (PA) ..

Tapi kalau ada auditor yang willingly nak bagi 'prescription' brsama findings dia maka itu amat dialu2kan oleh process owner (PO) yang mendapat NCR atau OFI untuk memudahkan dia ambil tindakan suslan utk menutupi NCR/OFI berkenaan .. cuma pastikan 'tips' itu diberi secara lisan / VERBAL .. dan pihak PO pun tidak ''quote' / mencatat di mana-mana yang tindakan yang diambil itu adalah atas cadangan / saranan auditor !

Arahan2 kerja yg melibatkan polisi khususnya, yg dkluarkan melalui media electronic spt sms, email, forum fb etc hendaklah dfollow up dgn black n white spt memo / circular bertulis supaya ada reference yg sah .. arahan electronic hanya skadar utk tujuan ia CEPAT dterima utk makluman n tindakan awal oleh pihak pelaksana ..


Berkenaan auditor giving description only dan tidak bersama prescription itu pastinya akan ada yg masih nak debate .. personally, saya rasa seseorang auditee itu amat beruntung jika dia diaudit oleh auditor yang memberi BOTH description n prescription so that auditee or process owner tu tiada lah dok guessing atau mencari2 trial n error apa tindakan correction n prevention yg perlu dia buat .. auditor may x give the 'answer' on how to close the ncr or ofi, but at least bg tips pun dah sufficient utk bantu auditee dpt sedikit idea on what he needs to do nxt ..

 wallahu a'lam