Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Criteria to raise a Nonconformance based on KPI values

#1
Bellos everybody

Could someone share a criteria to raise a CA, based on KPI (Key Performance Indicator) values?

It is supposed that we define KPIs to measure performance of processes. However, when defining goals, and such goals can't be in compliance, we need to do something to realign the performance of the process.

E.g. If I define maximum % of rejects = 28%, and result is 28.3, in this case, really I'm not going to do something because the difference is only 0.3. but if the result is 40, for sure I have to apply a CA immediately, or if result= 10, I'll do nothing.

Or , other KPI , maximum complaints allowed monthly = 4, if I got 1, am I going to apply a CA?
I'm confused about when to apply CA, correction, a preventative action or do nothing. I think the best, would be that when in uncompliment of kpis, and if people were responsible, an immediate response would come up, and no need to define criteria to follow.

My idea is to make this decision easy for the process responsibles, a criteria of ranges of values in kpis would be useful, so that when falling in each range, that is the decision that have to be taken.
E.g. defined goal = >90, if value ranges below 80, and red, a CA is applied, if it is between 82 and 89, is yellow and only Monitoring is needed, if greater than 90 is ok and green and no action needed

Hope is well explained.
Please feed me back regarding criteria to use
Thanks
 

psp1234

Involved In Discussions
#2
Hi Qualprod,
Your plan is reasonable. As long as you document it in a procedure and follow it, it should be acceptable.

Of course, your objectives need to be reasonable (e.g. if your NCR rate is averaging 2%, don't place a goal for 3% max - auditors won't like it...).

For my company, we decided that is we don't reach an objective for 3 consecutive months, we will open a CA. We documented that criteria in a procedure (the procedure was called "Quality Objectives"), and we did open a CA when one objective was not met for 3 months in a row - an auditor found the practice acceptable.

For objectives not being met, I don't see that a "PA" could be used, since the "problem" (objective was not reached) - occurred.

Good luck,
Sue
 

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
Working around an objective and targeting to meet a KPI in itself is a corrective action project. If you notice over a period of time that the KPI is moving away from your target value and no actions are being taken to address this and make course correction, (including making changes in KPI itself or deciding to close out the objective with specific reason) then you have a situation to rise NC.
A requirement that you have defined and non-fulfillment of the same and inaction about the situation.

NC on your corrective action system, with your specific KPI issue as the evidence
 
#4
Hi Qualprod,
Your plan is reasonable. As long as you document it in a procedure and follow it, it should be acceptable.
Of course, your objectives need to be reasonable....
Thanks pep1234
It sounds good criteria with some kpis, but found not good for others.
E.g. goal, rejects maximum= 5 monthly, rising CA in three uncompliments.
1st month 8, next, 10, next 15, at this point you plan to do something to fix the problem, I say , why to wait three months to have a reaction?
You may expect serious problems, that's the reason I defined ranges, please tell me your experiences.
Thanks
 

psp1234

Involved In Discussions
#5
Thanks pep1234
It sounds good criteria with some kpis........
I see your point. First - you should set attainable goals, otherwise you are setting yourself to failure.
Second, you may create a CA at will, anytime you see a serious trend. The point to be audited is if you are following your own rules. If your rule is "3 consecutive months not hitting the target" or "negative trend over 3 months". In your procedure, you should give yourself an option to open a CA at your discretion.

The advantage of having objectives is that you think and plan what is a good indicator to your business, and data will give you the reflection if your activities (quality) are effective. As with SPC, you usually don't reactive to every situation out-of-average, but when things go awry (negative). Come to think of it, you can set a "reaction plan" to be different to each objective.
 

tony s

Information Seeker
Trusted
#6
Why do you need a corrective action for non-achievement of quality objectives? Corrective action is defined as "action to eliminate the cause of a nonconformity and to prevent recurrence". Is there a nonconformity in the first place? What is the requirement? Do you think you can't prevent the recurrence?

Since one of the inputs during a management review is the extent of meeting the quality objectives, the decisions and actions on unmet objectives resulting from the management review can already serve as the organization's evidence in addressing unmet quality objectives.
 
#7
Why do you need a corrective action for non-achievement of quality objectives? Corrective action is defined as "action to eliminate the cause of a nonconformity and to prevent recurrence". Is there a nonconformity in the first place? What is the requirement? Do you think you can't prevent the recurrence?

Since one of the inputs during a management review is the extent of meeting the quality objectives, the decisions and actions on unmet objectives resulting from the management review can already serve as the organization's evidence in addressing unmet quality objectives.
The CA is because goals in KPIs, were not met.

In revising monthly results of KPIs Im looking to implement a criteria.

when result was not met, so that people have a reference as to when do nothing, do a contention or to do a corrective action.

For that Im trying to establish ranges in values.

E.g. if goal is >90, if get 86 to 89 is yellow, do a preventative or contention, if get 70 and less is red, ac is needed, if is 90 and up, is green.

My decision for CA , don't want to use the MR (management review), because I do that twice a year.

Please share a criteria to follow monthly to rise CAs according to values if KPI.

Other point, I think this criteria could work for certain KPIs, e g. Production rate, e g. 2500 pounds (values) where little criteria quantities are managed, while in other KPI, will be difficult.

For example, monthly rejects = 8, in this point when the corrective action is needed?

I hope is well explained

Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#8
Please share a criteria to follow monthly to rise ACs according to values if KPI.
No one here can provide any criteria for you that will be meaningful in your situation because we can't see all of what you see.

If an objective is defined and the objective isn't reached, you should try to find out why it wasn't reached and make corrections if necessary. The correction in any given case might be to change the objective if it's found to be unreasonable. You might want to withhold actions if you're not sure if you're seeing a trend in the wrong direction.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tony s

Information Seeker
Trusted
#9
The CA is because goals in KPIs, were not met.
If you will go back to the statement of the standard where it require CA i.e. 10.2.1 says "When a nonconformity occurs... evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity". There must be a nonconformity first. Nonconformity cannot exist without a requirement (i.e. nonconformity is defined as non-fulfillment of a requirement). KPIs/objectives are not requirements. These are something that your organization wants to achieve and there could be so many factors that could prevent an organization to achieve its KPIs/objectives. Review of the objectives can be performed on a more frequent basis and doesn't have to be in the usual "management review" meeting. If objectives are monitored in a more frequent basis, actions can be implemented in a timely basis. Actions don't have to be CAs.
 
#10
If you will go back to the statement of the standard where it require CA i.e. 10.2.1 says "When a nonconformity occurs... evaluate the need for action to eliminate the cause(s) of the nonconformity". There must be a nonconformity first. Nonconformity cannot exist without a requirement (i.e. nonconformity is defined as non-fulfillment of a requirement). KPIs/objectives are not requirements. These are something that your organization wants to achieve and there could be so many factors that could prevent an organization to achieve its KPIs/objectives. Review of the objectives can be performed on a more frequent basis and doesn't have to be in the usual "management review" meeting. If objectives are monitored in a more frequent basis, actions can be implemented in a timely basis. Actions don't have to be CAs.
Thanks Tonys
Ok, is not a requirement, unless is stated in our internal procedures ?
If I state , when kpis are not in compliance at every month, a CA is applied. In this case indeed it is a requirement, it is not so?

My problem is most of people are not fully compromised whit the system, they get the kpis
, those kpis are sent to top management, and they don´t do anything, according the values,
unless they are red, that´s the reason I implemented the ranges by colors.
When red CA is needed, yellow, a range value between green and red ( a contention maybe monitoring), and green, kpi is in compliance.
it works for me but only in some kpis, e.g. production values,
It sounds ok, what you suggested, to apply a close monitoring to kpis and take actions according the values.
maybe having scheduled meetings focused to analyze results and propose actions.
 
Top Bottom