Simple and effective way to maintain Training Matrix

[QE1993]

I work at a midsize company, around 110 employees.

I am running into major problems with Training. Namely, I'm not quite sure how I can easily and quickly manage what document, rev, and date everyone was trained to and compare that to what they are supposed to be trained to to determine any gaps.

I have set-up an excel matrix that "assigns" relevant procedures to each job description. (looks something like the attached).

I then set up an excel matrix that lists all our documents and every employee. The idea was that I would update that matrix with the date and document rev that the employee was trained to. (example attached).

Twice a year, I was planning on comparing the two matrices to see if I cuold find any gaps.

As you can see, this is incredibly time consuming and manual and is easily prone to mistakes. I've already started to neglect the Training matrix.

I am the only Quality Engineer that is working on the QMS on top of doing the daily QE tasks. I don't have a doc control staff (who I would ideally task with dealing with the training matrix), and I'm afraid I'm going to drown myself in maintaining training records.

I don't mean to come of as pretentious, but I don't know how else to make this point...it seems a little below my pay grade to be updating excel matrices all day.

There's got to be a simpler way.

We do use IQS - a QMS software - does anyone have an experience with this? The only way I've figured out how to maintain training here is still very time consuming (adding individual documents to each employee and deleting and updating them every time they are trained to a new rev.).

Any suggestions?

 

[doccont]

My company (a 501c3 charitable organization) has 400+ employees and in excess of 4,000 documents (procedures, work instructions and production specifications) and we document training via an excel matrix where training documentation forms are saved to a folder on our network and the matrix hyperlinks to the document. Fortunately, we have a dedicated employee doing nothing but updating the training matrix. Short of purchasing highly expensive software, this is the best option we have found to document training.

 

[Kronos147]

Food for thought, make training a mandatory step in the document change process.


To expand on that: you could make a corrective action to make this your new policy and move forward with your records as is and not do the GAP. (If the Risk is managed)

 

[QE1993]

Food for thought, make training a mandatory step in the document change process.


To expand on that: you could make a corrective action to make this your new policy and move forward with your records as is and not do the GAP. (If the Risk is managed)

Sorry, I'm not really following? Training is a mandatory step in high-risk document changes. I still need to manage who is trained to what. With almost 110 employees, I need to be able to look at something and right away know if they were trained to that document and to what rev...in case I missed them during a training for an update.

 

[AndyN]

Food for thought, make training a mandatory step in the document change process.


To expand on that: you could make a corrective action to make this your new policy and move forward with your records as is and not do the GAP. (If the Risk is managed)

I have had to deal with this and have fought this (overly simplistic) approach. Training is to develop skills. Often changes are due to things which have zero impact on competency. It's a waste to force everything down the "training" process.

 

[AUDITGIRL]

I think what Kronos is trying to say, is to make things a bit easier for you, start a CAPA on Training. Draw a line in the sand, if you will. Update your Document change control process to require training as part of the release of that document.
I would also add that, as we all know, many minor changes occur in documents so add an"is training required" yes/ no section to eliminate needless training.
Quality will be signing off, so they can review if training should have been performed and/ or ensure training records are present.
This will ensure training is done, however, unless you update the training matrix regularly or have someone helping you out with the spreadsheet, it will be time consuming every 6 months.
If you can, have document control update the matrix with the trained employees. Then you can just perform your verification.
Good Luck!

 

[QE1993]

I think what Kronos is trying to say, is to make things a bit easier for you, start a CAPA on Training. Draw a line in the sand, if you will. Update your Document change control process to require training as part of the release of that document.
I would also add that, as we all know, many minor changes occur in documents so add an"is training required" yes/ no section to eliminate needless training.
Quality will be signing off, so they can review if training should have been performed and/ or ensure training records are present.
This will ensure training is done, however, unless you update the training matrix regularly or have someone helping you out with the spreadsheet, it will be time consuming every 6 months.
If you can, have document control update the matrix with the trained employees. Then you can just perform your verification.
Good Luck!

Thanks for the input. I don't have a doc control staff, which is the problem. I don't have time to update matrices all day, so I was trying to figure out a quicker solution.

We have a CAPA on training open and the line has been drawn. I require training for all high risk document changes. That is all in place. I still need to maintain all of that - I still need to know what revision an individual was trained to in case they missed a training session. I'm not talking about a retrospective gap assessment, I"m talking about a gap assessment every 6 mos. moving forward to make sure all training is up to date.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying. Are you saying not to have a matrix at all?

 

[AUDITGIRL]

A training matrix is the easiest visual to use for sure, but, if you do not have the manpower to keep it up, then it is useless to you.
If you have a system (Document Change/ Engineering Change or the like) that you can add training requirements into as a requirement prior to closure, then it will be more manual, but it will handle the job. I would suggest having a matrix of job titles and required docs so you know who needs what. In the beginning, I would verify all of changes to make sure they were performed correctly (as part of your CAPA).
and later, instead of performing a biannual audit of the matrix. Pull a handful (or more depending on the quantity of the output) and audit/ verify that the correct people have been trained on the documents that you have reviewed. It won't be a 100% answer but it will keep you from a straight jacket (at least for that issue) .

 

[AndyN]

and later, instead of performing a biannual audit of the matrix.

Is this a requirement? Help me understand why doing 2 audits a year of training is something to do?

 

[QE1993]

and later, instead of performing a biannual audit of the matrix. Pull a handful (or more depending on the quantity of the output) and audit/ verify that the correct people have been trained on the documents that you have reviewed. It won't be a 100% answer but it will keep you from a straight jacket (at least for that issue) .

This is a great idea. Thanks!

I have a matrix of Job Descriptions and the documents that JD needs (it's attached in my original email), it's good to know I"m on the right track with that.