Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Examples

L

Lejon77

Dear All,

I am very new to Elsmar Cove but have been going through various threads related to non conformance, corrective actions and preventive actions.

I have a situation where I have been tasked to improve the existing CAR process. Our company has global operations which means we have sites in China, America, Japan, Europe and so on. Our existing CAR system allows everybody to raise CAR and every CAR is meant to be corrective action (which is not feasible). There are many threads related to non conformance, corrective action and preventive action with good suggestions but I could not find any practical example where I could see the prioritisation of non conformances based on specific criteria or guidelines.

I would appreciate if you could share with me examples of how you are prioritising non conformances in your organisations. Also, what level of action could be taken based on impact assessment e.g. correction, containment or full 8D? Any thoughts please!

Thanks a lot for your contribution..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Leader
Admin
Re: Corrective Action Request Assesment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Examp

Dear All,

I am very new to Elsmar Cove but have been going through various threads related to non conformance, corrective actions and preventive actions.

I have a situation where I have been tasked to improve the existing CAR process. Our company has global operations which means we have sites in China, America, Japan, Europe and so on. Our existing CAR system allows everybody to raise CAR and every CAR is meant to be corrective action (which is not feasible). There are many threads related to non conformance, corrective action and preventive action with good suggestions but I could not find any practical example where I could see the prioritisation of non conformances based on specific criteria or guidelines.

I would appreciate if you could share with me examples of how you are prioritising non conformances in your organisations. Also, what level of action could be taken based on impact assessment e.g. correction, containment or full 8D? Any thoughts please!

Thanks a lot..
Welcome to The Cove. Some thoughts for you:

1. I understand the practice that any employee or associate could initiate/trigger a corrective action request. But, let's face it: many people use the corrective action request for spurious, trivial and wrong reasons. For example, if someone believes that the menu should change in the cafeteria, they initiate a corrective action request, a technician in the field would like a newer digital multimeter, triggers a CAR, etc. I've seen a number of organizations trying to deal with excessive CAR's simply because they allowed that system to be abused. So, my first piece of advice is:
  • (re) educate the work force on the purpose of the corrective action process and what is supposed to be used for, AND
  • have a filtering step, whereby someone duly qualified "validates" the issue as a valid corrective action request, before it is officially entered into the system
That in itself, should reduce the number of spurious issues being mis-entered in to the CAR process.

2.In addition to that, and more specifically to your question, I would advise against different protocols and methodologies in the CAR System. A simple way to prioritize the handling of valid requests is to assign customized deadlines for corrective action responses, implementation and verification of effectiveness. If you have a critical issue that needs urgent fixing, don't alllow people excessive time to respond, implement and verify that corrective actions were effective. Instead of a typical 10 business days to devise a corrective action plan, give them 24 hours, instead of 60 days for implementation, give them 5 business days (assuming it is feasible to accomplish that), etc.

In that manner, you keep one system, one protocol, but you use deadlines to make people prioritize the most important fixes.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
D

Duke Okes

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

I teach companies to use a matrix to decide what level of action to take. X-axis is frequency of problem, Y-axis is impact (actual or risk). Each axis is labelled Low, Medium & High levels.

If both are low, do Correction only (contain and remediate the problem). If medium freq or impact, then do both correction and Corrrective Action, but only to the Physical/Direct cause level. If High freq or impact, then take all the way to System/Root cause level.

Had an article in The Auditor presenting this. Perhaps you could contact them and ask for a sample issue.
 
L

Lejon77

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

Thanks Duke Okes! This is exactly the type of response I am looking for. Could you please send me an example of it (much appreciated!) and also I would highly appreciate if you could tell me the name of that article (if you remember) then I can contact The Auditor and get the sample issue.
 

Ajit Basrur

Leader
Admin
Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

Thanks Duke Okes! This is exactly the type of response I am looking for. Could you please send me an example of it (much appreciated!) and also I would highly appreciate if you could tell me the name of that article (if you remember) then I can contact The Auditor and get the sample issue.

You could find in this MS Excel spreadsheet from Tenneco

I have also attached the MS Excel spreadsheet.
 

Attachments

  • Global8D.xls
    1.1 MB · Views: 1,225
L

Lejon77

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

I have also attached the MS Excel spreadsheet.[/QUOTE]

Thanks Ajit Basrur for your response. Its a very good way of doing 8D but what I am looking for is somewhat criteria for me to prioritise CARs. For instance, if we have many CARs sitting in our database then taking action (correction, containment or full 8D) based on impact/risk. Is there any good way to prioritise CARs based on impact or risk if so then a practical example of that would be very much appreciated. The challenge for us is to prioritise our CARs and then decide what level of action is needed against associated risk/impact.
 
D

Duke Okes

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

Let's use an example I use in class. Assume we've found that some data entered into a database is incorrect:

1. If it's only one or two (could be more) and the data isn't used for any critical applications (e.g., it's just a record of who entered the library building), then perhaps just correct the data and move on.

2. Same database but the number of errors is 8-14, or the data is people who enter a cooking area to deliver a package, then correct the data and find out the immediate cause (e.g., perhaps the person entering the data has dyslexia, and is a short term substitute for the regular worker who is on medical leave). Get that person out of the job.

3. Same situation either the number of errors is large (30+), and/or the data is people who enter a high-security environment (e.g., access to critical info or materials), and/or the person is one of 20 people who do the job and was recently hired. Change the job hiring process to screen for dyslexia.

Title of article was "Are Your Nonconformities Nuisances or Problem Statements?"
 
L

Lejon77

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

Thanks Duke Okes for yet another good explanation. Now could you tell me what would you include in "Impact/Risk"? Any suggestions? I appreciate you mentioned in your previous reply that we should be prioritising based on frequency and impact/risk but would be helpful if you shed light on "impact/risk".
 
D

Duke Okes

Re: Corrective Action Request Assessment and Prioritisation Criteria - Practical Exam

Impact/risk is implied.

Low risk for a library (incorrect visitor info likely insignificant), medium risk for a cooking area (contamination by unknown source if database not accurate), and high risk for an area where info/materials are high-security need.
 
Top Bottom