Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR?s/Observations - ?Top Management? ? Clause 5.4

[Britman - 2012]

Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

We have just been audited and recommended for the continuation of our IS9001 registration, however having one NCR raised.

“Top Management” – Clause 5.4 – At present the company has not set measurable objectives for 2007. (i.e. although a number of metrics are in place and being measured a percentage measurable objective has not been established.”

The auditor is fair and his assessments are carried out in the “real working environment”, however on this one we disagreed.

Background Information – A major client has removed their business from us (about 80% of volume), therefore the business model has also changed along with our previous objectives. The QMS in place has remained stable and robust, however the Quality Plan and Objectives are being aligned finalised under Management guidance (Management Review Meeting Agenda)

When requested the Objectives, MRM notes and employee communications (stating current status of objectives) were presented to the auditor, the objectives are complete and measurable, the only problem the auditor stated is the “goals” & “time” frames have not been finalised.

The reason for this is we needed to see past performances over the current year to identify an achievable “goals” within a sensible time frame.

Auditor’s comments – there must be a set of measurable “goals” and “ timeframe”

My comments – we are meeting the requirements of:

5.1, b, establishing the quality policy, c, ensuring that quality objectives are established, d, conducting management reviews,

5.3, a, is appropriate to the purpose of the organization, e, is reviewed for continuing suitability

5.4.1, the quality objectives shall be measurable and consistent with the quality policy

5.5.3, Top management shall ensure that appropriate communication processes are established within the organization and that
communication takes place regarding the effectiveness of the quality management system.

5.6.2, f, Changes that could affect the quality management system

5.6.3, a, Improvement of the effectiveness of the quality management system and its processes

The main issue was raised against 5.4.1 which only states the objectives need to be measurable; do we need a “target” with a time limit?

The company is Quality Planning (5.4) against a major change; this planning cannot be overnight.

The company is taking a very logical review to achieve objective that will enhance the future of the customer, employees and company growth.

The threads a bit long however, could I have some comments please, I need to reply to the NCR with corrective action, or shall I simply put a “number with any timescale” in our “goals” column?

Thanks

 

[Randy]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

TIME OUT!

You do not have measurable objectives and were still recommended?

The requirement for measurable objectives is an absolute and can't be put off until later.

How was thic NC classified?

 

[Britman - 2012]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

Say it as you see it Randy.

The actual classification - reads "an issue relates to a single identified lapse, which in itself would not indicate a breakdown in the management system's ability to effectively control the processes for which it was intended. It is necessary to investigate the underlying cause of any issue to determine corrective action. The proposed action will be reviewed for effective implementation at the next assessment "

Its strange the actual report has not indicated "minor" / "major"

I could correct it now by adding the "goals" and "timescale", however its a process under control as stated in the thread.

We do measure, we are currently defining that "target", that in its self is an objective.

I am not sure the clause 5.4.1 implies the need for a "target".

Needless to say I will add any "numbers" short term to clear the NCR, correctly changing through Management Reviews.

 

[Randy]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

"Goals and time frames have not been finalized" tells me that objectives have not been established...Unless of course we're playing one of those silly word game things.

 

[Britman - 2012]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

Randy I have attached the information for your viewing, the measurement stated in the objectives have been removed as have doc. control details.

The auditor had the same information, however with recorded results for 2007

 

[Randy]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

The actual word "target" isn't used. Basically, objectives would be a combination of "what and how much", or the objective could be purely "time" based (like starting a new process by a certain date)

Is what you've attached what was in place? If so, I wonder what the problem is?

You have objectives

They can be measured (there will be evidence of their being met)

They are documented

 

[somerqc]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

Wow. I am actually going to use your template to illustrate how our measureables are connected to the system.

I can't see why they wrote a nonconformance. IMHO

 

[Britman - 2012]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

Randy thanks, the auditor did confirm some of the measurements, and the docs, were formated correctly, he was stuck on a "timebase" approach.

 

[Randy]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

You have time (xx/xx/xxxx)

 

[AndyN]

Re: Responding to ISO9001 Audit NCR’s/Observations - “Top Management” – Clause 5.4

Britman:

Are these the actual objectives stated in your quality management system? In review, I'd have to know a bit more about what your organization does.

I can form an opinion about your concern over the CB auditor's finding, but I'm frankly confused over the actual objectives you state in the post attachments. So before we get too excited about the CB auditors issues, I'd like to get clarification on those two points above............