AS9100 C Clause 8.3 - Personnel Approval Process

[chinadaddy02]

Another question here: paraphrasing clause 8.3 "the organization's documented procedure shall define the responsibility and authority for the review and disposition of the nonconforming product, and the process for approving personnel making these decisions."
In the second part here, I am creating my process for approval of personnel, stating it is based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge. Even though I can put down some kind of minimum amount (of years) experience for this, what do other companies put down as their minimum requirements? Or am I off-base with what I would consider how a person is qualified to make decisions for dispositions for nonconforming material?

 

[Randy Lefferts]

Re: AS9100 C 8.3 Personnel approval process

I think you want to stay away from defining x amount of years experience as criteria for this. Basically, you know what it takes to be qualified so just go with what you know.

As we all know, simply because someone has been doing something for x amount of years doesn't necessarily mean they are even qualified to be doing what they are doing.

 

[chinadaddy02]

Re: AS9100 C 8.3 Personnel approval process

So if I state that "selection of based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge," that would be my parameters? Would that be sufficient?

BTW, are the leaves done turning colors up there?

 

[Big Jim]

Re: AS9100 C 8.3 Personnel approval process

So if I state that "selection of based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge," that would be my parameters? Would that be sufficient?

BTW, are the leaves done turning colors up there?

It may also help to state who makes that judgment.

 

[Randy Lefferts]

Re: AS9100 C 8.3 Personnel approval process

So if I state that "selection of based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge," that would be my parameters? Would that be sufficient?

If that is how you intend to determine the person's qualifications, then yes. If an auditor were to ask you how you determined that "person x" was qualified, then you would show records of that person's competency.

BTW, are the leaves done turning colors up there?

Not quite yet Still as beautiful as ever. I don't think I could ever get tired of the area up here and I have lived here since 1995. (Un)fortunately, I am now working at a place located 3 hours south, so this year I have not been able to enjoy it as I normally do. Am home a day and a half on the weekends so not as much time to look around.

 

[rickpaul01]

Re: AS9100 C 8.3 Personnel approval process

Hi Chinadaddy02,
Seems that I did it in one sentence: Members of the Material Review Board are selected by the Director of Quality.
This is not a new requirement so it has withstood several audits so far.
Hope this helps.

 

[khamdah1]

I have the same issue with this part. The auditor keeps rejecting my procedure because I didn't "define" the "process" for approving the personnel. Here what I have in my procedure:

5.1 MRB authorized member’s selection
5.1.1 The President shall select the MRB members based on one or more of the following:
· Person’s position in the company
· Knowledge of the product/parts
· Person’s interaction with the Customer
· Person’s authority to make decisions on behalf of the company or His/Her department


Can someone share their procedure for reference that defines the process of approving of personnel. Thank you

 

[dsanabria]

Another question here: paraphrasing clause 8.3 "the organization's documented procedure shall define the responsibility and authority for the review and disposition of the nonconforming product, and the process for approving personnel making these decisions."
In the second part here, I am creating my process for approval of personnel, stating it is based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge. Even though I can put down some kind of minimum amount (of years) experience for this, what do other companies put down as their minimum requirements? Or am I off-base with what I would consider how a person is qualified to make decisions for dispositions for nonconforming material?

The intent of that statement is to minimize the risk of someone without proper knowledge or information to make a decision.

You should then write a statement that would meet the requirement of the standard and minimize the risk of some manager making a decision just because they were affected by the results. The decision should emphasize quality over profit.

 

[Mikishots]

Another question here: paraphrasing clause 8.3 "the organization's documented procedure shall define the responsibility and authority for the review and disposition of the nonconforming product, and the process for approving personnel making these decisions."
In the second part here, I am creating my process for approval of personnel, stating it is based on experience, skills, and area of knowledge. Even though I can put down some kind of minimum amount (of years) experience for this, what do other companies put down as their minimum requirements? Or am I off-base with what I would consider how a person is qualified to make decisions for dispositions for nonconforming material?

We use an approvals and signatory authorization form, which details the level of authority and approval limitations of that person. It's stamped by the QA Manager or the Senior QC inspector to show that the person has received documented training for that activity.