Claes Gefvenberg
Admin
Good first post Fred. Welcome to the Cove.
/Claes
/Claes
The owners found out about the CAR's not being addressed and saw to it that there were.
Hi Fred,Freddiem11 said:
It seems to be a waste of valuable resources to write a nonconformance finding on not having design review meetings, even though your procedure says to. Your system seems to be stuck in the say what we do, do what we say thinking. Question is, what value do the review meetings have on improvement of your organization? There is no ISO requirement to have meetings, the intent is to review design inputs and changes. Our engineers do this almost exclusively through e-mails and phone-cons. Your system may be bogging down these brilliant folks with meeting requirements.
Secondly, Corrective action timelines need to be flexible, if not, effective implementation is destined to fail. It is not uncommon for corrective actions to take months or sometimes years to implement,depending on their nature. Who sets the due date and why did they choose it? Consider extension requests.
Mike S. said:
Hi Fred,
Welcome to the Cove.
While I agree with a few points you made I have to disagree with a few as well.
If the procedure says you will hold DR meetings and you don't do it IMO it is quite proper to write the CAR. The corrective action might be that mgt. determines the meetings are not needed, so the procedure is changed so that the need for meetings is deleted, which is fair. But someone who was responsible for the process at some time decided meetings were the way to go, so they must either change the procedure or follow it, otherwise all procedures might start being ignored.
As for CAR timelines... A manager is supposed to be a responsible LEADER. If he/she truly needs more time to do an investigation, etc. he/she should have the minimal courtesy to respond to the QM as to what the situation is and what the new expected timeline is, but ignoring the QM or just saying "I'll get to it tomorrow" day after day is unprofessional and not a sign of an effective manager, IMO.
M Greenaway said:
I agree, many non-compliances found during internal audit are trivial, and arise due to the fact that the procedure is poorly written or unnecessarily detailed. Such findings do not warrant any attention what so ever, no wonder the CAR system is failing - the issues are trivial.
The answer ? Simple...
Adopt the ISO9001:2000 process approach, bin all your text based procedures, process map to sufficient depth to define the important cornerstones of your business processes, and audit for compliance to the standard itself.