CB finding on Management Review Meeting

#11
I'm always concerned when people suggest that weekly meetings are part of any review of something systematic. It's like looking at the last journey milage your car did and trying to determine who many miles a year you do.

The review is supposed to take a 30,000 ft look at if the business is headed towards achievement of its goals and objectives. Attempting to do this weekly and a low level and without reference to the other things in the management system, isn't going to be an effective review. It may cover the agenda, but that's not the same thing...
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Randy

Super Moderator
#13
Review is not required to be a singular event and can be an ongoing, continual process.

As an auditor it doesn't have to work for me, it only has to work for them
 
R

Reg Morrison

#14
As an auditor it doesn't have to work for me, it only has to work for them
I agree. Management reviews, just like everything else in a QMS can (and should) be customized to match the needs of the organization. There is no one size-fits-all approach.

If I had to choose between management assessing the health of the QMS too often or the opposite in those booooooooring, ineffective, annual meetings, I have no doubt, I would choose the hands-on, present management.

If I am a supplier to Toyota and my airbags are killing their customers, I should not wait a quarter or a semester to collect data to see how many people my product has killed in order to learn if I am fulfilling objectives and goals.
 
#15
Review is not required to be a singular event and can be an ongoing, continual process.

As an auditor it doesn't have to work for me, it only has to work for them
Aha, but it's NOT that simple! What are you looking for them to show you it works? Are you saying that everyone who does management review knows what they are and how to do them? You never found anyone who missed how to join the dots up?
 

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#16
You're assuming that management isn't involved in the weekly meetings. There is no evidence that management hasn't reviewed the required items, just that it didn't happen in the "management review meeting."

The problem with ISO is that we use "labels" to describe something. So many people have a system which includes a "management review meeting/record" as if it is a static thing. In most companies, especially smaller ones, management review is an ongoing process and occurs daily at all types of "meetings." But that is hard to document, so a "formal management review" is used to create something for the auditor.
Golfman... I tend to not assume and that is what my reflection within brackets are up there.
While what you say is all perfect , the auditor is there to assess not as an in man with abundant time, but he has got a task to do per a schedule and get on with his other tasks while the organization manages and improves the QMS they have established.
If an organization wants to make the auditor's task that much easy, as well as improve upon the established QMS, in order to be certified (Lets remember that it is the choice of the organization to be certified and not of the auditor) then the standard is just providing you tips to map into your activities.
There is no call for any management review meeting or a meeting minutes. If an organization is smart, (its management included) records of salient reviews of management with several of the processes (see the tips in the standard) at several times ongoing can be adequately demonstrated, by proper indexing, sequencing, timely retrieving.
When you have an agenda set up for this and it does not cover the requirements as in the standard, (Tips again) the auditor is not obligated to do the smart task of the organization. He is there to write up and assess how well the organization assesses and responds (aka continual improvement)
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#17
Aha, but it's NOT that simple! What are you looking for them to show you it works? Are you saying that everyone who does management review knows what they are and how to do them? You never found anyone who missed how to join the dots up?
I am looking for managers reviewing analyzed date to make decisions to enhance customer satisfaction. I do not always expect that to happen in top levels; mid-level management reviews of operational data are relevant in my view, with output of that feeding to top management as long term trends.

Both tactical and strategic level decisions must be made; it is my job as auditor to verify the strategic management group includes tactical level factors. In order to see that happening, I welcome the chance to include lower level management reviews of operational data. This can happen in both quality systems, and in EHS systems among Core Teams etc.
:2cents:
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#18
I can't help but make a few comments.

Management review is mandatory.

The required topics to cover are mandatory.

There is no requirement that management review be a meeting unless the organization says so in their procedures.

Management review doesn't need to be all at once. It can be spread out. If it is, it helps greatly if there is something somewhere that tells the auditor that is how you do it.

Record keeping is attached to management review. If you have a novel way of handling it, such as parts of it in other meetings or some sort of continuous method as Randy mentioned, you had better make sure there are good records for all of it. Are minutes or notes taken for the weekly meetings? In most cases, they are not.

As a practical matter, if you are expecting the other meetings to cover portions of management review, it would be a great idea to reference that in the management review records.

I go along with Andy's comments about management review being a top level "view from 30,000 feet" activity, and you are not going to accomplish that if you leave anything out.

My personal view on how to have an effective management review is that it starts with determining the state of the quality management system by covering the topics in 5.6.1 and 5.6.2, and then moving on to now that we better understand where we are, where do we want to go from here which is addressed with the topics in 5.6.3.

That is, you bring the best and the brightest in the company together where each of them has insight that others don't have. The discussion of the topics in 5.6.1 and 5.6.2 raises the awareness of all participants to an overall higher level. At that point, and only then, you are ready to come up with some pertinent and effective action items that are stated as improvements to you system, improvements in product, and what resources are needed to carry them out (5.6.3).

If you are doing less than this, you are only going through the motions and not really accomplishing much of any value.
 

Chennaiite

Never-say-die
Trusted Information Resource
#19
Because the Standard has a separate set of sub-clauses for Management review, it is unfortunate that Top Management reviews are seen as an isolated activity by many. Why would an Auditor even plan a separate slot for Auditing Management review? Everyone I have faced so far had one, by the way.

Doesn't Top Management reviews happen across the spectrum? How many times we have seen an Auditor, during his Audit of Purchasing Function for instance, verify whether or not the Process Measurable of the function was reviewed by the Top Management? But the same Auditor, most likely, will get a sense of compliance when he sees the word 'Process Measurable' (worst, some look for 'Process Performance') in the agenda of the Management review that sometimes never happened.

As a Quality guy, suggesting my colleagues to carry out some activities, that do not add any value to the Organization, for the sake of spoon-feeding the Auditors doesn't help create any motivation.
 

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#20
Because the Standard has a separate set of sub-clauses for Management review, it is unfortunate that Top Management reviews are seen as an isolated activity by many. Why would an Auditor even plan a separate slot for Auditing Management review? Everyone I have faced so far had one, by the way.

Doesn't Top Management reviews happen across the spectrum? How many times we have seen an Auditor, during his Audit of Purchasing Function for instance, verify whether or not the Process Measurable of the function was reviewed by the Top Management? But the same Auditor, most likely, will get a sense of compliance when he sees the word 'Process Measurable' (worst, some look for 'Process Performance') in the agenda of the Management review that sometimes never happened.

As a Quality guy, suggesting my colleagues to carry out some activities, that do not add any value to the Organization, for the sake of spoon-feeding the Auditors doesn't help create any motivation.
This attached document must clear some of the questions ... see highlighted in page 5
 

Attachments

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
6 Management Review does not highlight Internal Audit Finding - Root Cause Analysis General Auditing Discussions 11
G External Audit Finding - Audits of System Management vs. Process Review ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q ISO 9001-2015 Internal audit finding Internal Auditing 12
A Define timeline for Major and Miner Audit finding General Auditing Discussions 4
F Closing a finding before closing meeting General Auditing Discussions 14
J Audit Finding For Not Retaining Test Results ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
A OHSAS 18001 external auditor finding personal interpretation? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 5
E Received a Major finding during IATF Surveillance audit for loss of BIQS Level 3 (more than 6 SPPS in 6 months)...how should we address SYSTEMIC CA? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
Marco Bernardi Finding a flat or not modeling distribution: how to manage it? Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 24
H Looking for Tips on finding an IATF consultant Consultants and Consulting 6
D Customer Audit Finding ISO13485:2016 7.6 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
B PED 2014/68/EU - Is this Traceability audit finding correct? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 4
XRAY_3121 Design and Development Requirement - MDSAP Audit Finding Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 5
R Major nonformance finding was given during a closing meeting of a ISO9001 certification audit General Auditing Discussions 76
G Audit finding - Components being transferred inter-plant Internal Auditing 3
S Difficulty Finding A Notified Body for CE Marking - No Capacity Registrars and Notified Bodies 5
D AEA (Aerospace Experience Auditor) Challenges - Finding availability of AEA for witness AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
B IATF 16949 7.1.5.3.2 FAQ #7 Audit Finding - External Calibration Laboratory IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
P Major Finding Elevation - Do I elevate this minor finding to a major one? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 14
S GM/VP softgrading internal audit finding - need feedback from an audit guru! General Auditing Discussions 11
Q Customer Requirements - AS9120B Audit Finding AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 24
J IATF 16949 registration - Major Nonconformance Finding IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
J Hardness inspection Audit Finding Employee error Nonconformance and Corrective Action 6
J How long should I have to correct an audit finding? VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 7
AlienraverX How to appeal a major audit finding ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 26
T Non-addressed Minor Finding elevated to Major Finding Internal Auditing 37
S Definition Would a wrong definition constitute an Audit Finding? Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 3
L Audit Finding Flowchart for Feedback General Auditing Discussions 6
B Finding a Fixture Design Course to meet Customer Requirements General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
A Audit Finding - CAPA, Improvement Initiatives not filed in CAR System ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
O CFDA (China Food and Drugs Administration) Audit Finding Classifications China Medical Device Regulations 1
B Expired Materials (threadlocker) Audit Finding Classification? Internal Auditing 1
S Is not training to ISO 9001 procedures a finding? General Auditing Discussions 16
S Could I issue major finding for Inadequate Procedures Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 17
S Finding a substantial Equivalent Medical Device Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
H Cause analysis for an Audit Finding - Purchasing Procedure Content ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
R Finding specific 510k guidance for Keratoprosthesis (MLP) Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
S Is it a Finding if all Internal Auditors are from the Quality Department? Internal Auditing 18
A Writing an Internal Audit Report Finding for Employee Awareness of QMS Documents ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
I Finding optimum transformation equation for two sets of data Using Minitab Software 15
S Audit finding for JPAL ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
R Can a external auditor raise a finding that is already identified in Internal Audit ? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
J Validating a stopped test due to never finding any defects Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
G Supplier Significant Environmental Aspects - Audit Finding ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 21
C Notification to Customers regarding Major Audit Finding IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 25
J Questionable Audit Finding about Revision Levels of Product Manual CD's ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
J 8.3.2.1 Monitoring/Measurement Audit Finding IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
M Finding parts to meet ISO 15001 (Anaesthetic and respiratory equipment) EU Medical Device Regulations 8
J Follow up on Major Audit Finding General Auditing Discussions 15
C ISO 9001:2008 Audit Major Finding - Dial Calipers not set to zero ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16

Similar threads

Top Bottom