Corrective and Preventive Action - Prevent Recurrence is not Preventive Action?

[Matrix45]

I think this question is very similar to previous ones, but don't think it has been answered fully.
Corrective actions are steps that are taken to prevent recurrence
by eliminating the cause or causes of an existing nonconformity. However in the 8D report, 7D is noted as Prevent Recurrence, which is taken as Preventive Action, but prevent recurrence is not Preventive Action?

 

[Roberticus]

Re: Corrective and Preventive Action

The prevent recurrence element of the 8D is an analysis of the root cause of the problem where it occurred (which is addressed with the corrective action), but this analysis is to identify other related parts or processes where the corrective action should also be applied to ensure that a similar problem doesn't occur. For example, parts which undergo the same processes where the problem occurred, or other part numbers with similar features which are identified as at risk of the same issue(s). The purpose of this is to ensure that one doesn't just apply a fix to one specific situation, without identifying where else the solution could be helpful in reducing risk. Although this extended action is preventive in nature when implemented where the problem didn't specifically occur (really is just applying the CA broadly), the overall situation is still considered a CA if initiated due to an identified nonconformity, as opposed to PAs which are initiated due to a risk identified before the symptom happens...

 

[Matrix45]

Re: Corrective and Preventive Action

Thank you Marc. Most people in our organisation confuse 7D with Preventive Action but perhaps renaming the titles to 1D - Build the team, 2D - Describe the problem, 3D - Implement a temporary fix, 4D - Eliminate Root Cause, 5D - Verify Corrective Action, 6D - Implement Permanent Fix, 7D - Stop it Happening Again, 8D - Celebrate Success, would be more appropriate.

Preventive Action (Preventive actions are steps that are taken to remove the causes of potential nonconformities or potential situations that are undesirable. The preventive action process is designed to prevent the occurrence of nonconformities) would not really apply in 8D?

 

[Bev D]

remember that 8D is not proscribed by ISO 9000. They are independent of each other.

as described by Roberticus, the ISO requirement of taking Corrective Action to prevent recurrence is covered in steps 5 and 6. these two steps involve the development and implementation of permanent Corrective Action that will prevent the recurrence of the specific Problem for which the 8D was issued or otherwise utilized.

Step 7 is for Preventive action for potential similar Problems in other products, manufacturing operations, lines or locations. This IS one of thing we can do in compliance with the Preventive Action requirement in ISO9000.

step 5&6 are very different than step 7.

8d is often Customer customized and/or required. revising it to eliminate the Preventive step may not be in keeping with your Customers' requirements.

If you use 8D internally only you can do whatever you want.

 

[John Broomfield]

I think this question is very similar to previous ones, but don't think it has been answered fully.
Corrective actions are steps that are taken to prevent recurrence
by eliminating the cause or causes of an existing nonconformity. However in the 8D report, 7D is noted as Prevent Recurrence, which is taken as Preventive Action, but prevent recurrence is not Preventive Action?

Matrix,

True, the ISO 9000 definition of corrective action is unhelpful in saying prevent recurrence.

And some people struggle with the difference between occurrence and recurrence.

Better to define corrective action as action to stop recurrence of nonconformity.

Preventive action arises from planning, risk assessment and data analysis to avoid future nonconformity (the first occurrence of nonconformity) not from controlling nonconforming product.

Those organizations that persuade themselves that they are taking preventive action by preventing recurrence of nonconformity are in fact light on true preventive action and may not be conforming to clause 8.5.3.

Thinking CAPA instead of PACA is a cause of this. But, we are led to believe, this problem disappears in the 2015 version of ISO 9001.

John

 

[Kronos147]

So a company stocked good product right next to non conforming product. A diligent employee notices, issues a quality alert, and a preventive action is issued to make sure that discrepant product is not shipped to the customer.

Sure, one could say the NCP process should be reviewed, but for the sake of an example...

An action taken to prevent recurrence could be institute a 5S organization program where NCP bins are internally required to be 20 feet from production materials...

just saying there could be an instance of actions take to prevent recurrence.

Also, if an issue was found on one site of a multi-site, and the PAR included sharing the info with other sites to make sure they were not about to make the same mistake could be considered preventing recurrence.

 

[John Broomfield]

Kronos,

Yes, we must include preventive actions invoked by the risk assessments of individual diligent employees.

I should've included employee suggestions as another driver of preventive actions.

Thanks,

John

 

[Matrix45]

Thank you all. As John says, the terminology used in the 7D Prevent recurrence is incorrect as this is corrective not preventive as defined by ISO?

 

[Big Jim]

If you think it is confusing now, watch what happens with ISO 9001:2015.

10.2.1b "evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity, in order that it does not recur or occur elsewhere . . . "

So we have been told that preventive action is going away, or more accurately that preventive action gets a new spin and becomes risk.

An by including both recur and occur in the wording of the new corrective action, we are already having people tell us that all that happened to preventive action is that it became combined with corrective action. The mud didn't get any clearer.

 

[John Broomfield]

If you think it is confusing now, watch what happens with ISO 9001:2015.

10.2.1b "evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity, in order that it does not recur or occur elsewhere . . . "

So we have been told that preventive action is going away, or more accurately that preventive action gets a new spin and becomes risk.

An by including both recur and occur in the wording of the new corrective action, we are already having people tell us that all that happened to preventive action is that it became combined with corrective action. The mud didn't get any clearer.

Jim,

Excellent point!

Note also the order. Recur appears before occur.

Just as preventive action was specified after specifying corrective action in ISO 9001:2008.

Of course, corrective action follows our ineffective preventive action.

Even the title of this thread is putting the cart before the horse.

John