Auditor says 5.6.3 should be discussed in Management Review

Douglas E. Purdy

Quite Involved in Discussions
#51
Just a minor point, if you will indulge me:
"Too many insecure quality folk latch on to the term "continuous improvement" versus the more technically achievable "continual improvement."
There's a subtle difference, but an important one, between "continuous" and "continual."
Wes,

I am reading through this thread because I have a question about a finding received concerning Management Review and wanted to make sure that my issue has not already been discussed. I wanted to nibble at the hook you threw out here. What is the subtle difference between Continuous Improvement and Continual Improvement? I looked in the Free Dictictionary and it has the number one definition for 'Continual' being "recurring regulary or frequently" and then the number two definition being "not interrupted; steady". Is your subtle difference the difference between the number one and number two definition? Just wondering?

Thanks,
Doug
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#52
What is the subtle difference between Continuous Improvement and Continual Improvement?
I believe what Wes is referring to is the following:

Continuous improvement by definition would involve always improving. Technically, this is impossible.

In practice, Quality Systems operate by Continual improvement, meaning a series of staggered changes that result (hopefully) in overall improvement over time.

With respect to the topic of this post, I think the relevance is that the purpose of Management Reviews should be identifying areas for improvement and acting on them. Putting aside debate on whether or not the auditor's NC should be appealed as per the standard, having null items in a MR record obviously does not help this goal of continual improvement...
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
#53
This is from the auditors NCR

Requirement: Clause 5.6.3 of the ISO/TS 16949:2009 Standard states that the output from the management review to include decisions and actions related to resource needs.

Objective evidence: The December 23, 2013 management review meeting minutes did not show that decisions and actions related to resource needs. Since other management review requirements had been met, this NC is classified as minor.



I am inclined to agree with Jim Wynne's post #2... The auditor wrote a shallow finding. It should have been an audit trail. It sounds like a rookie pounce on a sentence in the standard, without evidence that he found a resource issue.


For example, it could go the following ways...


In reviewing MRM records, it was observed there was a problem with resources in the XYZ situation. There is no evidence that needed resources were discussed or approved...that would be a finding.


Scenario #2 ....in reviewi MRM, there was no discussion of resources in the output notes, but there was no item on the agenda that indicated a lack of resources.....auditors notes about an audit train, no finding.


Scenario #3 ... An auditor does not see any discussion about resources, but does not see any particular issue about lacking resources either. It would be an appropriate audit trail to ask about how resources get discussed, or brought into the meeting....but it will likely end as an audit trail.
 

Wes Bucey

Quite Involved in Discussions
#54
Wes,

I am reading through this thread because I have a question about a finding received concerning Management Review and wanted to make sure that my issue has not already been discussed. I wanted to nibble at the hook you threw out here. What is the subtle difference between Continuous Improvement and Continual Improvement? I looked in the Free Dictictionary and it has the number one definition for 'Continual' being "recurring regulary or frequently" and then the number two definition being "not interrupted; steady". Is your subtle difference the difference between the number one and number two definition? Just wondering?

Thanks,
Doug
Nice to see you are still with us, Doug. You had a period where we didn't see you with your regular comments. Mark is on the money here. The nuance in my mind [often a scary place] is one I heard from Deming's own lips 20 or 25 years ago:
"You can do some things continuously - burn a light bulb, run water in a tap, but even then, there is a limit - the water pump breaks, the water source dries up, the piping system to your faucet springs a leak, etc OR the filament in the bulb burns out, a storm knocks down the electric line, you don't pay the bill, etc.

"By continually improve, we mean you are always looking for ways to improve, but, eventually, you reach an optimum point where further improvement is technologically or financially impossible or impractical."

In my own lectures on the topic I say, "continuously implies a second to second improvement; continually implies making improvements in distinct plateaus or stages"

Consider the Funnel Experiment - most folks trying to continuously improve usually end up with results more like tampering with the natural variation in the funnel Experiment.

Control Charting and Design of Experiments techniques allow us to focus on those changes [improvements] which actually give a consistently better result.

A bastardized example of bad use of continuous is the way some folks run around like decapitated chickens trying to implement continuous Kaizen without considering the big picture and net result for the system. Neutron Jack at GE was infamous for touting all his "improvements" and "savings" of billions of dollars, but, because costs and problems were shifted from one sector to another, there never was a net result of billions to the NET EARNINGS of GE.

I believe what Wes is referring to is the following:

Continuous improvement by definition would involve always improving. Technically, this is impossible.

In practice, Quality Systems operate by Continual improvement, meaning a series of staggered changes that result (hopefully) in overall improvement over time.

With respect to the topic of this post, I think the relevance is that the purpose of Management Reviews should be identifying areas for improvement and acting on them. Putting aside debate on whether or not the auditor's NC should be appealed as per the standard, having null items in a MR record obviously does not help this goal of continual improvement...
Way to get back on track, Mark! Kudos. The point I think many of us tried to make is that EVERY management review in EVERY organization does not have to consider EVERY minute [tiny] aspect of the operation. Sometimes, it's just a waste of time to say and thus record something like, "Our geographic area is in a long term drought so we did not discuss our plans for evacuation in the event of a flash flood because we believe last year's plans are still good and they are not scheduled for review until our property and liability and interrupted business insurance comes up for renewal next year."
 
M

melunn

#55
Resources should be discussed in a management review but what minutes was the auditor looking at? Quarterly? monthly? I think the auditor was looking in the wrong place.

your management review is likely to be a daily review for these resources. you get an order - do you have the capacity to fulfill that order in the timeframe required in terms of manpower and machinery? can your supplier get the raw material resource to you?

You are likely to have an annual budget review - machines and workforce planned with budgets approved. targets to be met etc. If this annual review said "we need to increase our workforce by 10% in the first quarter to meet customer demand" then i may expect to see that come up in a monthly review as management would want to know how the recruitment process is going.

for those companies that are more involved in the design and development then this resource planning tends to get completed with project plans and if there is doubt about meeting end dates then resource requests would be escalated
 
S

SmallBizDave

#56
At the risk of beating this post to death, I still have an issue with these answers. Looking at this as a Quality Manager, I agree with all those that say a null item is a waste of time and is not needed to meet the requirements for Management Review Ins or Outs.

However, as a businessman, spending time addressing a nonconformance or appeal is a bigger waste of time. So, given the choice, I'd rather spend a small amount of time to protect against a bad auditor (of which there are plenty) by adding a sentence in whatever minutes are applicable that says no resource decisions were made.

I do have a business to run so, while I shouldn't have to do this, it seems like the better business practice and is harmless to my quality folks. I do not advocate doing this at every point where a null item might come up, but there are some common places like MR minutes that there are frequent misconceptions by auditors. As a business owner I'm fine letting others fix the auditing process. Comments?
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#57
At the risk of beating this post to death, I still have an issue with these answers. Looking at this as a Quality Manager, I agree with all those that say a null item is a waste of time and is not needed to meet the requirements for Management Review Ins or Outs.

However, as a businessman, spending time addressing a nonconformance or appeal is a bigger waste of time. So, given the choice, I'd rather spend a small amount of time to protect against a bad auditor (of which there are plenty) by adding a sentence in whatever minutes are applicable that says no resource decisions were made.

I do have a business to run so, while I shouldn't have to do this, it seems like the better business practice and is harmless to my quality folks. I do not advocate doing this at every point where a null item might come up, but there are some common places like MR minutes that there are frequent misconceptions by auditors. As a business owner I'm fine letting others fix the auditing process. Comments?
That's pretty much what I said back in post # 26. It is a simple cure so why not?
 

Wes Bucey

Quite Involved in Discussions
#58
At the risk of beating this post to death, I still have an issue with these answers. Looking at this as a Quality Manager, I agree with all those that say a null item is a waste of time and is not needed to meet the requirements for Management Review Ins or Outs.

However, as a businessman, spending time addressing a nonconformance or appeal is a bigger waste of time. So, given the choice, I'd rather spend a small amount of time to protect against a bad auditor (of which there are plenty) by adding a sentence in whatever minutes are applicable that says no resource decisions were made.

I do have a business to run so, while I shouldn't have to do this, it seems like the better business practice and is harmless to my quality folks. I do not advocate doing this at every point where a null item might come up, but there are some common places like MR minutes that there are frequent misconceptions by auditors. As a business owner I'm fine letting others fix the auditing process. Comments?
That's pretty much what I said back in post # 26. It is a simple cure so why not?
I agree it is a pragmatic "go along to get along" solution, BUT where do we draw the line on kowtowing to "mission creep" auditors? In this instance, the time and cost difference between sucking it up and carrying out the appeal is a tossup. In my mind, I'd want to ensure I don't embolden this auditor to more extensive mission creep. In fact, even an informal phone call to an auditor's superiors "might" result in a reversal without resort to the formal appeal process. Call needs to come from TOP boss of auditee, mentioning the added cost of compliance to an N/C based on an auditor's shaky interpretation of the Standard.
 
S

SmallBizDave

#59
I think we agree in principle. As Big Jim suggested in post 26, I typically use a predefined agenda for Management Reviews. If it already states "no resource decisions were made" then the time spent maintaining a null item is zero. If a decision is made I would change the text.

On the other hand, if there were a pattern of NCs like this I would definitely make a protest to reign in the auditor. And there will certainly be items that can't or haven't been covered by statements like this and when we have to we should certainly challenge the mission creep.
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#60
I agree it is a pragmatic "go along to get along" solution, BUT where do we draw the line on kowtowing to "mission creep" auditors? In this instance, the time and cost difference between sucking it up and carrying out the appeal is a tossup. In my mind, I'd want to ensure I don't embolden this auditor to more extensive mission creep. In fact, even an informal phone call to an auditor's superiors "might" result in a reversal without resort to the formal appeal process. Call needs to come from TOP boss of auditee, mentioning the added cost of compliance to an N/C based on an auditor's shaky interpretation of the Standard.
If you look back at post #26 I said this should be appealed.

I would also say that it makes your management review notes more tidy if you indicate "none at this time" or words to that effect.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Auditor says a Minor Nonconformance will become a Major Nonconformance General Auditing Discussions 8
G Dangerous Act - Auditor says major nonconformance for safety (risk) issue Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 21
E FMEA Action Plan Threshold (RPN) - Auditor says Action Plan for an RPN > 84 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 21
tony s Auditor says our Quality Manual is deficient. What can you say? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 58
B Medical Device Directive 93/42 EEC - Clinical Trials - Because the auditor says so? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 18
J IATF 16949 Internal Audit question - Auditor's responsibility Internal Auditing 6
W Redacting Info Before Giving to Auditor ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
T Quality auditor legal right to see Board meeting minutes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
V Certified Auditor - Need of additional certification specific to industry ( GMPs) ASQ vs ECA vs others Professional Certifications and Degrees 1
V Internal Auditor Competency KPI IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
R American Petroleum Institute - Becoming an API Auditor Professional Certifications and Degrees 2
B Lowest cost way to pass Lead Auditor exam ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
B Internal Auditor Competency - Product Auditors Internal Auditing 9
U Internal Auditor not trained but done Audit for some process Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
Z Auditor Findings ISO 14001:2015 vs. 45001:2015 ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 6
B IATF16949 audit requirement - Auditor request UCL and LCL must be show Xbar-R, IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
A Becoming an ISO27001 3rd Party Auditor Career and Occupation Discussions 4
L ASQ's Biomedical Auditor Course Test ASQ - American Society for Quality 1
M Tips on preparing for IATF 16949 Internal Lead Auditor exam Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
G Same parts but new customer - What will the auditor ask me? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
Gun46 ISO 9001 : 2015 Lead Auditor Exam General Auditing Discussions 16
K %GRR was between 10-30% so we have to have a "backup plan" per auditor IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 15
S ISO 13485 Lead Auditor - Debate between our Quality Team and Regulatory Auditor - Internal Auditor Training ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 17
R ISO 45001 Lead Auditor Exam paper Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
B Internal and external auditor competency to CSR's IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 20
A Our auditor told if we didn't have a patent we would have to do a validation or verification ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
W Certification for IATF Lead Auditor will expire in 2020 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
D Impartiality of Internal Auditor ISO 9001/13485 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 18
Ed Panek Auditor driving us nuts - ESD requirements ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 23
A OHSAS 18001 external auditor finding personal interpretation? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 5
S IRCA Lead Auditor training and Exam tips Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 5
L ASQ CBA biomedical auditor - CBA primer material is enough to study? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
B VDA 6.3 Qualification as Process Auditor training course and exam VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 0
F ISO 21001 Educational Organizations Management - How to become an auditor Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
J Getting training either from ASQ or from SAI Global - ISO 9001 Lead Auditor training Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
P ASQ Certified Biomedical Auditor (CBA) Certification Preparation 2019 ASQ - American Society for Quality 3
M Medical Device Design Control Auditor Recommentations General Auditing Discussions 19
G Third party auditor mentions no grace period for calibration Calibration Frequency (Interval) 22
D Where (in US) can I get the VDA Auditor Edition book? VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 3
S AIAG CQI Auditor Qualification and 3rd Party Certification Requirements General Auditing Discussions 2
M IATF 16949 7.2.3 Internal Auditor Competency - Trainer's competency Internal Auditing 7
C Recommendations for UK-based ISO 13485 internal auditor training ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
Sidney Vianna AS9100 News July 2019 AAQG/RMC CB Auditor Workshop - Presentation Materials AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
D Scope of Facility - Our auditor asked us last week for our "Scope of the Facility" AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 12
A ISO 9001 lead auditor as Full time career India Career and Occupation Discussions 2
J Manufacturing Process Auditor Requirements - IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
GreatNate ISO 9001:2015 Lead Auditor Course? (who to take with) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
A External Auditor issue with Internal Audits Internal Auditing 7
Q Internal Auditor competence for ISO 14001 ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 11
S IATF 16949: Is "Certified" Internal Auditor mandatory? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9

Similar threads

Top Bottom