Management Review Corrective Action - Can I get some clarification on this?

[Casey Cochran]

I got an internal audit finding and was wondering if it is legit.

"During review of management review, the quality objectives were discussed as required by ... procedures. It was found that elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal. It is not evident in the output that corrective action was initiated to correct this issue."

I could not find that results of mgt. review needed a corrective action. I could see maybe putting it on our action plan but this is an issue that is monitored and worked on daily. (the biggest issue we are facing) We never thought it had to be documented as a result of mgt. review. It is documented in all our daily activities . The person who gave it to me is a lead auditor from outside our plant. They could not give a strong argument on where it states that it has to be.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

[Rob Nix]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

...elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal

If there is nothing in your system stating that "not being at the company's goal" is a breakdown of some sort, then no CAR is necessary. Most of our goals are not being met yet - that's why it is a goal! When it is met, we may select a new goal (which will obviously not be met for awhile).

And your statement about an "action plan" is on target. Somewhere in your system you likely state what you are doing to reach those goals. That is your "output".

The key to your post is:

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

They could not give a strong argument on where it states that it has to be.

[RCBeyette]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

"During review of management review, the quality objectives were discussed as required by ... procedures. It was found that elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal. It is not evident in the output that corrective action was initiated to correct this issue."

I could not find that results of mgt. review needed a corrective action. I could see maybe putting it on our action plan but this is an issue that is monitored and worked on daily. (the biggest issue we are facing) We never thought it had to be documented as a result of mgt. review. It is documented in all our daily activities . The person who gave it to me is a lead auditor from outside our plant. They could not give a strong argument on where it states that it has to be.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

5.6.1 talks about "...assessing opportunities for improvement and the need for changes to the quality management system, including the quality policy and quality objectives."

5.6.2 talks about reviewing "process performance".

5.6.3 talks about decisions and actions related to "improvement of the effectiveness of the quality management system and its processes" and "resource needs."

So, getting back to the source of the finding which, while probably not worded in the best manner possible, sounds like there is a possible issue. Your organization had two goals and did not meet the goals. There was no evidence that the results were looked at and a decision made so that goals could be met (i.e., change the goals or review resource allocation).

Was there evidence stating that management made a conscious decision not to take action?

[QualityPhD]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

I got an internal audit finding and was wondering if it is legit.

"During review of management review, the quality objectives were discussed as required by ... procedures. It was found that elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal. It is not evident in the output that corrective action was initiated to correct this issue."

I could not find that results of mgt. review needed a corrective action.

Try looking up the requirement that states... "where planned results are not achieved, correction, and corrective action shall be taken as apporpriate..." I do not have my TS standard in front of me... but, it is a requirement.

[Coury Ferguson]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

I got an internal audit finding and was wondering if it is legit.

"During review of management review, the quality objectives were discussed as required by ... procedures. It was found that elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal. It is not evident in the output that corrective action was initiated to correct this issue."

I could not find that results of mgt. review needed a corrective action. I could see maybe putting it on our action plan but this is an issue that is monitored and worked on daily. (the biggest issue we are facing) We never thought it had to be documented as a result of mgt. review. It is documented in all our daily activities . The person who gave it to me is a lead auditor from outside our plant. They could not give a strong argument on where it states that it has to be.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Casey,

Which standard are we talking about: TS or ISO9001:2000?


Coury Ferguson
Program/Contracts Manager

[Casey Cochran]

TS 16949

There is evidence that it was discussed @ management review. There is no evidence that it was decided not to issue a CA. Just the fact that none got issued. I tried to argue the evidence available that it is reviewed by management daily regarding this issue. This is why we made no action plan to address the issue. It is being addressed and very strongly.

Thanks for your help so far.

[Caster]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

I got an internal audit finding and was wondering if it is legit.

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

"During review of management review, the quality objectives were discussed as required by ... procedures. It was found that elements of OTP and service levels were not at the company's goal. It is not evident in the output that corrective action was initiated to correct this issue."

I could not find that results of mgt. review needed a corrective action. I could see maybe putting it on our action plan but this is an issue that is monitored and worked on daily. (the biggest issue we are facing) We never thought it had to be documented as a result of mgt. review. It is documented in all our daily activities . The person who gave it to me is a lead auditor from outside our plant. They could not give a strong argument on where it states that it has to be.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Casey

Could this have been it? I guess it depends on how you look at QMS processes...and when you look at their results ...if found not to meet target during mgmt review, I would expect some kind of CA.

8.2.3 Monitoring and measurement of processes

The organization shall apply suitable methods for monitoring and, where applicable, measurement of the quality management system processes. These methods shall demonstrate the ability of the processes to achieve planned results. When planned results are not achieved, correction and corrective action shall be taken, as appropriate, to ensure conformity of the product.

[Caster]

Originally Posted by Casey Cochran

TS 16949

There is evidence that it was discussed @ management review. There is no evidence that it was decided not to issue a CA. Just the fact that none got issued. I tried to argue the evidence available that it is reviewed by management daily regarding this issue. This is why we made no action plan to address the issue. It is being addressed and very strongly.

We have a similar problem here. Lots of action, but no documentation.

I call it the difference between 'splain and show.

If it is written down anyone can show the auditor, if it is all just happening, it needs someone to 'splain.

I need to be convinced that all the quick, undocumented, unplanned action (aka fire fighting) is better than a little formal planning.....but what do I know...