Management Review Input/Outputs - Most Items Discussed in Other Meetings

[quest]

We publish inputs to management review quarterly. Our top management wants to hold review meetings to decide upon outputs. My cynical side says this is so he does not have to read and take action on the inputs provided.

The problem is that when I begin to formulate an agenda for this meeting, I find that everything reported upon in our mgt review inputs are being discussed, measured and addressed elsewhere, ie. CAPA's, quality meetings, internal audits, mrb meetings, etc. so there really is nothing new to discuss except perhaps the quality policy and quality objectives.

While I am happy that we are addressing necessary improvements and needs when they occur and not just quarterly, this leaves me drawing a blank as to 1 - what to discuss in the meeting and 2 - what to publish as outputs.

I have read through the other threads and looked at the forms posted. All gave me ideas but none addressed what others do when management review inputs are just a summary of what is already being done!

Any suggestions?

[Duke Okes]

If I understand your post correctly what you are saying is that you do not need a separate management review meeting. If all the topics, discussions & decisions are made as part of other meetings (e.g., weekly/monthly/quarterly operational review meetings, MRB meetings, audit closing meetings, etc.) then that's what your management review process is ... several separate meetings that include the management review process.

Quality policy & objectives are better covered as part of the strategic planning process.

If you so state this process in your quality manual/procedures, etc. and that's what you do, then it's fine from a compliance standpoint.

The questions really is whether the metrics related to quality indicate that the process is working (e.g., is performance moving in the right direction?).

[atitheya]

I agree with Duke Okes. As it seems you Management Review Process seems to include your other meetings as well.

Now what remains to be seen is wether the Top Management has been a part of these other meetings and discussions!!.

Also if Top Management wants a meeting to review the QMS and various aspects, so be it (even if it is repetitive!!!). It is their prerogative how they want the review to be carry out.

What can be done is, as you said, putting the summary of other meetings and discussions in the agenda point and the decisions reached therein for his/their review and final approval (with reference to any documented evidence of earlier decisions reached) alongwith anything else that needs to be discussed if not already done. Some data analysis on any specific subject / process may also be included.

The review results of this agenda and final decisions alongwith actions to be taken with responsibility and target dates, thus can be published as quarterly outputs (if the top management also thinks so!). This will consolidate your review decisions and should make it easier to keep a track of progress on these decisions. Also it will authenticate the decisions once more.

I once encountered a similar situation and upon discussions, the management concluded that more frequent meetings and discussions may be a part of business/operation meetings, their results including the progress since then were reported in the agenda, any additional points discussed and management review completed for a given period, say three months (quarterly). What happened was, that in smaller meetings, the discussions were not evident to the entire Review committee, and thus reporting them in the final review session was fruitful for company wide comments and implementation.

I hope this helps.

[Colpart]

Whilst I acknowledge the potential pitfalls, I like this approach and I encourage organisations to adopt it. Not only is it an efficient way of conducting management review but it also helps the cynics to realise that quality is about running the business and not a separate topic that needs its own individual meeting.

I do suggest an annual review and summary of what has taken place at the other meetings to make sure all of the necessary items have been addressed and dealt with.

[quest]

Based upon your very logical comments, I have decided that the agenda will be a compliation of the decisions/actions cited in our other meetings and a discussion on their status, were they effective, are they complete, etc. This information is included in the mgt review inputs anyway so it is a natural progression to discuss their effectiveness in the review meeting.

Thank you for your assistance.

[Cari Spears]

Originally Posted by quest

...the agenda will be a compliation of the decisions/actions cited in our other meetings and a discussion on their status, were they effective, are they complete, etc.

Good plan.

[EtobiLad]

Originally Posted by quest

We publish inputs to management review quarterly. Our top management wants to hold review meetings to decide upon outputs. My cynical side says this is so he does not have to read and take action on the inputs provided.

The problem is that when I begin to formulate an agenda for this meeting, I find that everything reported upon in our mgt review inputs are being discussed, measured and addressed elsewhere, ie. CAPA's, quality meetings, internal audits, mrb meetings, etc. so there really is nothing new to discuss except perhaps the quality policy and quality objectives.

While I am happy that we are addressing necessary improvements and needs when they occur and not just quarterly, this leaves me drawing a blank as to 1 - what to discuss in the meeting and 2 - what to publish as outputs.

I have read through the other threads and looked at the forms posted. All gave me ideas but none addressed what others do when management review inputs are just a summary of what is already being done!

Any suggestions?

Other meeting outputs are fine, Just make sure you cover your SHALLS (under 5.6 Management reviews) and evidence to proved its discussion as output results..

[RCBeyette]

Outputs can also include action items.

So let's you had several CARs that were not being addressed by their recipient. Output = Joe Smith to update CARs 1,2 and 3 by <insert date>.

Outputs can then become inputs to your next review as you discuss the status of the action items.