duckdonald
Registered
what are the benefits of electronic QMS software?
Main benefitswhat are the benefits of electronic QMS software?
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.-Speed up for review and approval of documents
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 $$ spending - regardless of how well it's done).Users are happy, because eases it's use
I'm not agree, because in the traditional method You hace Ro den the documentI think not really. Most of the time spent in the documents review and approval process is spent where a document awaits someone (the critical path or the weakest link) to stop procrastinating and just do it (they will tell you that they are very busy, have higher priorities blah blah blah, but usually it's just good-old procrastinating or bad time management). Second up is time spent in the actual review, when a document is long / complex / controversial / badly drafted and needs sorting out. Both these elements won't be significantly affected by the QMS being electronic rather than paper-based. The only element that will be significantly affected is the delivery/transfer of paper copies for wet-signing, and even that is not big unless the operation is very big or spread across multiple sites.
Hmmm.... I've seen implementations where users were very unhappy, either because the system was not easy to use or otherwise. It all depends on how well it's done (and in some cases it's just not worth the investment - not necessarily direct $$ 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.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.
Please send the link for articleIn my humble opinion, the only benefits of QMS software are as follows:
And sorry to say this, but if you read Pavanr's posts you will see there may be ulterior motives there.
- 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
I'm not sure what article you are referring to.Plea
Please send the link for article