Benefits of electronic QMS software

[duckdonald]

what are the benefits of electronic QMS software?

 

[yodon]

They CAN help in organizing, compliance, etc., if the software supports AND it's set up correctly and used properly.

 

[indubioush]

In my humble opinion, the only benefits of QMS software are as follows:

• Access to quality system documentation and data by individuals at a remote locations
• Electronic signature capability
• Reduction in the amount of manually entered quality system data for analysis purposes

And sorry to say this, but if you read Pavanr's posts you will see there may be ulterior motives there.

 

[qualprod]

what are the benefits of electronic QMS software?

Main benefits
-Speed up for review and approval of documents
-Speed up corrective actions management.
- Improve the tracking of tasks into
the management sytems by automatically sending reminders.
-Helps a lot when gathering data which is used for the MR sessions.
- when implemented, quickly, can get monthly kpis and reports.
-And the most important ...
Users are happy, because eases it's use and get more convinced.
There are some others.
The list is long

 

[Ronen E]

-Speed up for review and approval of documents

I think not really. Most of the time spent in the documents review and approval process is spent where a document awaits someone (the critical path or the weakest link) to stop procrastinating and just do it (they will tell you that they are very busy, have higher priorities blah blah blah, but usually it's just good-old procrastinating or bad time management). Second up is time spent in the actual review, when a document is long / complex / controversial / badly drafted and needs sorting out. Both these elements won't be significantly affected by the QMS being electronic rather than paper-based. The only element that will be significantly affected is the delivery/transfer of paper copies for wet-signing, and even that is not big unless the operation is very big or spread across multiple sites.

Users are happy, because eases it's use

Hmmm.... I've seen implementations where users were very unhappy, either because the system was not easy to use or otherwise. It all depends on how well it's done (and in some cases it's just not worth the investment - not necessarily direct $$ spending - regardless of how well it's done).

In general I think that considering only the benefits of doing/having something, without giving account to the costs & downsides, is bad decision-making practice.

 

[qualprod]

I think not really. Most of the time spent in the documents review and approval process is spent where a document awaits someone (the critical path or the weakest link) to stop procrastinating and just do it (they will tell you that they are very busy, have higher priorities blah blah blah, but usually it's just good-old procrastinating or bad time management). Second up is time spent in the actual review, when a document is long / complex / controversial / badly drafted and needs sorting out. Both these elements won't be significantly affected by the QMS being electronic rather than paper-based. The only element that will be significantly affected is the delivery/transfer of paper copies for wet-signing, and even that is not big unless the operation is very big or spread across multiple sites.

Hmmm.... I've seen implementations where users were very unhappy, either because the system was not easy to use or otherwise. It all depends on how well it's done (and in some cases it's just not worth the investment - not necessarily direct $$ spending - regardless of how well it's done).

In general I think that considering only the benefits of doing/having something, without giving account to the costs & downsides, is bad decision-making practice.

I'm not agree, because in the traditional method You hace Ro den the document

I think not really. Most of the time spent in the documents review and approval process is spent where a document awaits someone (the critical path or the weakest link) to stop procrastinating and just do it (they will tell you that they are very busy, have higher priorities blah blah blah, but usually it's just good-old procrastinating or bad time management). Second up is time spent in the actual review, when a document is long / complex / controversial / badly drafted and needs sorting out. Both these elements won't be significantly affected by the QMS being electronic rather than paper-based. The only element that will be significantly affected is the delivery/transfer of paper copies for wet-signing, and even that is not big unless the operation is very big or spread across multiple sites.

Hmmm.... I've seen implementations where users were very unhappy, either because the system was not easy to use or otherwise. It all depends on how well it's done (and in some cases it's just not worth the investment - not necessarily direct $$ spending - regardless of how well it's done).

In general I think that considering only the benefits of doing/having something, without giving account to the costs & downsides, is bad decision-making practice.

Sorry, but I'm not agree with you, because in the traditional method, in order to change a revision of documents,the document Is sent by email, for revision , afterwards, sent for approval, then to communicate to all people involved, converted to PDF, saved in special folder, also you have to make sure evidences are kept, while in a software with just fee clicks, everything is done and quickly.
On the other hand, well said "when Is done very well "
I have seen And tested very well designed systems that really makes the management more efficient.
Regards.

 

[rayhope]

Plea

In my humble opinion, the only benefits of QMS software are as follows:

• Access to quality system documentation and data by individuals at a remote locations
• Electronic signature capability
• Reduction in the amount of manually entered quality system data for analysis purposes

And sorry to say this, but if you read Pavanr's posts you will see there may be ulterior motives there.

Please send the link for article

 

[indubioush]

Plea

Please send the link for article

I'm not sure what article you are referring to.