Brain drain

L

Laura - 2003

#1
OK peeps, once again the LAu needs your help.

I've just attended a pre-audit meeting.:(

They have four quality procedures and it was suggested that one of the procedures should not be audited because it was written in anticipation of something that is planned to happen and it hasn't happened yet.

I say the procedure should never have been published if this activity hadn't even happened, how do they know that the procedure is correct if they have never done it?

I say the procedure should have been documented as the activity happens (if it ever does). Alternatively, if the procedure had to be documented before the activity occurs then surely the procedure should be tested against the activity prior to publication.

A debate ensued as to whether an n/c should be raised against the procedure. Surely yes, b/c the activity hasn't even happened so there is no evidence that they are acting in accordance with the QP. I can't endorse compliance if they haven't even done the activity yet can I?

OK, boys and gals, I leave this one up to you!


:frust: :frust: :frust:

Lau.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

E Wall

Just Me!
Super Moderator
#3
Catch 22

Lau...As described, I'd have to say that to me this is one of those damned if you do, damed if you don't situations.

My preferred approach is this for implementing a new procedure:
1. Identify what you 'believe' are the critical components.
2. Document and draft a guideline of what must be done, of course leaving room for logical discussion and real-time decision making if there was an error/miscaculation in the planning stage that nullifies a component.
3. Issue guidelines, providing contact listing as needed, under a deviation to be use the first time the procedure is needed. The deviation should direct WHO is to do WHAT and WHEN, including following the guideline, recording actual activities, and submitting data for review.
4. Review the information collected with all relevant parties...what they call in the 2000 version 'stakeholders' include reps from mgmt, supv, qa and operators. Tweek the procedure having it prepared and ready to issue under a deviation for the next time the procedure is used.
5. After repeating steps sucessfully, consider whether it is ready to be published as is, knowing that changes can be made if needed at a later date.

Personally, if the choice is having a unproven procedure or no guideline at all...I'll take the procedure! The key is to work together to fine-tune it for its intended use.

Best Regards, Ei
 
M

M Greenaway

#4
Hmmm a bit like the old chicken and egg.

What would you have done if they were performing an activity that they hadnt written a procedure for ?

Both things cannot happen instantaneously.

What clause of the standard would you have cited your NC against ?
 
E

energy

#5
Your company?

Laura,

I assume that this is Internal Auditing. We have the same thing. Procedures have been written referencing other procedures and documents that are in the draft stage. Audit them, write them up and practice your Corrective Action Procedure. It's all practice for the real thing. I get written up for using documentation that we are in the process of making "official". I like it because it means that our auditors know the difference. Nothing personal. Go for it, Fishergirl!
:biglaugh: :ko: :smokin:
 

JodiB

Still plugging along
#6
No finding. Don't audit to a procedure that isn't implemented. They have just prepared instructions-guidelines-procedures for when the new procedure IS implemented. If the existance of the procedure bothers you then ask for the timetable for implementation and schedule the audit for after that.

We're going to follow the same route that Eileen mentioned; our procedures are already written so that people will know how to do this new thing and released as "draft review". There is nothing that says you can't operate under draft procedures. After kinks are worked out, they are released for "real".

And like energy, in these new procedures we have references to other new procedures that (at this time) are either not written or are still in draft or draft review themselves. What else can you do? You have to start somewhere....
 
E

energy

#8
Positively!

Originally posted by Al Dyer
How about a wrtie-up under 4.2.3 Control of Documents??
That's exactly what we have done. It also forces you to get on the stick in regards to releasing the documents. You get practice in issuing CAR's and measuring "effectiveness". It's like a scrimmage in a football game. And, this is a game. Yes, it is. You know it is. Uh Huh. Yup.:biglaugh: During an interview with a possible Registrar, he expects to see a lot of CAR's during this getting ready process. A lot of em! Over time, they expect to see a decline as procedures take hold. This type of n/c is like a memorandum reminding employees that we have a system and we better start following it! No biggee! :ko: :smokin:
 
M

M Greenaway

#9
Al

The control of the procedure wasnt the problem, it was that there was a procedure for an activity that didnt exist.
 
L

Laura - 2003

#10
Cheers peeps!

Thanks all,

You've clarified a point for me which got lost in the heat of a debate with people who digress and stray from the point....you can see why I got confused.

MG: I was gonna non-conform them for not doing what their procedure says they were doing because their procedure said they were doing something they weren't doing because they hadn't done it yet! Take a breath, bird

They way I see this should be done is that you document an activity and then test the activity and procedure together, and tweak both until they both work. The 'testing' itself is conducted under audit conditions.

I'm gonna go with Eileen, NRG (Fisherboy!) and Lucinda on this.

Keep 'em coming!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Informational USFDA Draft Guidance – Implanted Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) Devices for Patients with Paralysis or Amputation – Non-clinical Testing and Clinical Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
W Body-worn brain stimulator (MOPP isolation requirements) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
J AS9100D Clause Brain Fade - Tool was past due for Calibration AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 11
Ajit Basrur New Study Shows Brain Benefits Of Bilingualism Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
Marc Scientists discover world's earliest known brain World News 0
N Brain teaser revealed - "pre-fairing" with thick PE film After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 0
AnaMariaVR2 Public Health, Vaccines & Brain Drugs courses Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 0
A Struggling with Process and Sub-Process Validation - Brain Catheter Design and Development of Products and Processes 2
bobdoering Capability Brain Teaser - Which distribution do you expect to see Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 5
Stijloor Digital Devices Deprive Brain of Needed Downtime After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 1
M Biocompatibility Requirements of Materials in Contact with the Brain Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 6
Q Whose brain child is 5S? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 10
Ajit Basrur Brain Test :) Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 11
B Another Brain Teaser.... Brain Teasers and Puzzles 2
A Brain Teaser Brain Teasers and Puzzles 9
Q Brain Game - Memorize the number position Funny Stuff - Jokes and Humour 9
D KAIZEN Event "tools to use" Brain Jogger - Your thoughts please Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 12
S Nintendo DS Brain Training game Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 1
G Try reading this - A real brain teaser Brain Teasers and Puzzles 16
U Forum for brain teasers & puzzles Brain Teasers and Puzzles 7
A Another bit of fun - Brain teaser with a maths feel Brain Teasers and Puzzles 8
sathis Brain Teaser Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 3
G Six Sigma Certification By Brain Scan Funny Stuff - Jokes and Humour 6
D Off Duty Balance - Does anyone else enjoy hiking to clear the brain...? Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 9
W Gage R&R (GR&R) Brain Teaser Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 31
GStough Article "Quality Control and Brain Damage", Quality Progress, March 2007 Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 14
Marc Motorists switch satnav (satellite navigation system) on, brain off After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 3
B The ASQ CQE Test - 24 hours till total brain meltdown Professional Certifications and Degrees 33
Marc Researchers Pinpoint Brain's Sarcasm Sensor World News 3
C Brain teaser: Which door to take? Brain Teasers and Puzzles 26
Marc Brain Scans in Hiring - Brain imaging spreads to nonmedical uses Career and Occupation Discussions 3
J R&D (Research & Development) Department - Off-site brain trust IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
A Measurement Brain Teaser - What constant is the basis for the meter? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 16
M Costings For QA - 25% of sales revenue down the drain due to poor quality Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom