Difficulty in determining who should be addressing NCRs

Dazzur

Involved In Discussions
Good Morning everyone,

Currently having a discussion within my Quality Department along with the director about who is involved in the NCR process and where?

The Directors view is that the Quality assurance Department should be leading and completing the RCA, Corrective action & Risk analysis of the NCR for manufacturing problems where as I, believe that our Quality Assurance Department should be 'managing' the NCR case, I.e requesting action to be taken as it's out standing etc. but I don't think the QA Department should be actively be taking examining, controlling & implementation actions etc for manufacturing NCRs. the QA Department should only be completing and closing NCRs that concern Quality Processes.

Maybe I'm completely wrong in my thinking here but I just want other's opinions on this, (I tried to search but I couldn't find exactly what i'm looking for)

Thank you for any replies.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Leader
Super Moderator
By NCR do you mean a corrective action (requiring determination of root cause and action to prevent recurrence) or do you mean simple non-conformance’s that can be cleared up through ’correction‘ of the affected parts only (scrap, rework, use-as-is…)

In general I have found that the most effective approach is a (small, 3-5 people) team effort with QA, engineering and operations personnel. It depends of course on where the problem solving experts and subject matter experts are in your organization…
 

Dazzur

Involved In Discussions
In general I have found that the most effective approach is a (small, 3-5 people) team effort with QA, engineering and operations personnel. It depends of course on where the problem solving experts and subject matter experts are in your organization…

Hi Bev, by NCR I mean corrective action! I also very much agree with your above statement but it seems that Top Management are pushing QA to be the sole responsible parties for corrective action.
 

Zero_yield

"You can observe a lot by just watching."
Hello Dazzur,

I've worked in both scenarios, and I agree with Bev D. The best situation is a collaborative one.

When QA owns all nonconformance investigations and CAPAs, you tend to get good investigations but potentially ineffective CAPAs. Why? Because almost all CAPAs require effort by the part of the organization where the nonconformance occurred to implement and maintain the correction.

When the people who own the process do the investigation and own the CAPAs, maybe the nonconformance reports need a little punching up on the wording, but the people who make the correction understand and are invested in the process they're fixing.
 
"When QA owns all nonconformance investigations and CAPAs, you tend to get good investigations but potentially ineffective CAPAs. Why? Because almost all CAPAs require effort by the part of the organization where the nonconformance occurred to implement and maintain the correction."

In many cases, this is intentional. Some management does not like to take responsibility for "problems", it is easier to just assign that responsibility to QA, certainly many low level managers and departments see this as "extra work" so they avoid it also.
 

gpainter

Quite Involved in Discussions
Years back when I was involved in QMS our department managers were for the most part issued the CAR. If Quality Assurance is sent them all, then we have really moved several steps back. Which it seems a lot of companies are. Quality has really changed over the past 10 years
 

Zero_yield

"You can observe a lot by just watching."
"When QA owns all nonconformance investigations and CAPAs, you tend to get good investigations but potentially ineffective CAPAs. Why? Because almost all CAPAs require effort by the part of the organization where the nonconformance occurred to implement and maintain the correction."

In many cases, this is intentional. Some management does not like to take responsibility for "problems", it is easier to just assign that responsibility to QA, certainly many low level managers and departments see this as "extra work" so they avoid it also.

Absolutely agreed. At the place I work, we're at the point right now where most groups own their own investigations and CAPAs, but there are some obstinate holdouts that want QA to "do the quality", so they can do the "real work" (in their minds). I think some people see QA as gremlin tricksters that skulk around throwing extra work on hapless victims who break their arcane rules. There's definitely a need to push back and educate that quality is everyone's job, all the time.
 

Dazzur

Involved In Discussions
Thanks for the replies everyone, the comments made in this thread confirmed my feelings about this process as a whole, I had a meeting with the director who oversees Quality along with my own Manager and reiterated many of the points that were made in this thread and the Director agreed!

However, I've now got to stipulate who interacts with the CAPA Process and where and then put this forward, it's fairly obvious in my opinion but it's a step in the right direction for my Department & Organisation.

Thank you all greatly again for giving me the courage to speak up about this!
 

Orca1

Involved In Discussions
Good Morning everyone,

Currently having a discussion within my Quality Department along with the director about who is involved in the NCR process and where?

The Directors view is that the Quality assurance Department should be leading and completing the RCA, Corrective action & Risk analysis of the NCR for manufacturing problems where as I, believe that our Quality Assurance Department should be 'managing' the NCR case, I.e requesting action to be taken as it's out standing etc. but I don't think the QA Department should be actively be taking examining, controlling & implementation actions etc for manufacturing NCRs. the QA Department should only be completing and closing NCRs that concern Quality Processes.

Maybe I'm completely wrong in my thinking here but I just want other's opinions on this, (I tried to search but I couldn't find exactly what i'm looking for)

Thank you for any replies.

In the context of Nonconformance Reports (NCRs) related to manufacturing problems, the Quality Assurance (QA) Department should not be solely responsible for conducting the Root Cause Analysis (RCA), corrective action, and risk analysis. Instead, the QA Department should manage the NCR process, ensuring that appropriate actions are taken and that outstanding issues are addressed. The responsibility for addressing manufacturing-related NCRs should involve relevant departments, such as engineering, risk management, and production teams, who have direct knowledge and expertise in the specific manufacturing processes.

According to the FDA Quality System Regulation (21 CFR 820.100), manufacturers must establish and maintain procedures for implementing corrective and preventive actions. These procedures should include analyzing processes, work operations, quality records, and other sources of quality data to identify existing and potential causes of nonconforming products or other quality problems. The procedures should also involve investigating the cause of nonconformities, identifying necessary actions to correct and prevent recurrence, and ensuring that information related to quality problems is disseminated to those directly responsible for assuring the quality of the product or the prevention of such problems.

In summary, the QA Department should manage the NCR process, but the responsibility for addressing manufacturing-related NCRs should be shared among relevant departments with direct knowledge and expertise in the specific manufacturing processes. This collaborative approach ensures that the most appropriate and effective corrective and preventive actions are taken to address nonconformities and prevent their recurrence.
 

Matt Swartwood

Starting to get Involved
"When QA owns all nonconformance investigations and CAPAs, you tend to get good investigations but potentially ineffective CAPAs. Why? Because almost all CAPAs require effort by the part of the organization where the nonconformance occurred to implement and maintain the correction."

In many cases, this is intentional. Some management does not like to take responsibility for "problems", it is easier to just assign that responsibility to QA, certainly many low level managers and departments see this as "extra work" so they avoid it also.
Completely agree! It's easy. No involvement in the corrective action. No backing to make it happen and no responsibility or accountability. Sounds like the perfect position to be in. Unfortunately it happens. We're really fortunate to have not only involvement and ownership but also support from upper management to help remove roadblocks as necessary.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Q Is that any difficulty to do software DFMEA and PFMEA in ISO 13485? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
S Difficulty Finding A Notified Body for CE Marking - No Capacity Registrars and Notified Bodies 5
I Difficulty with calculated t-value for Linearity Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
A IMDS DIFFICULTY: Our customer requires the Wildcard portion MUST be < 0.1 % RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 5
P Difficulty in Detecting Within Lot Variation when using Zbar W (Normalize) Chart Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 14
M Difficulty in demonstrating Compliance to Many EMC Standards specified! Other Medical Device Related Standards 9
I Difficulty in creating a Quality Manual Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 4
C 5S - Difficulty in Standardization Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 11
Wes Bucey "In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity." - Einstein Career and Occupation Discussions 2
Antonio Vieira Difficulty ?passing? Quality audits - Number of Major / Minor Nonconformances Allowed General Auditing Discussions 12
S Training Evaluation Form - Evaluator feel difficulty to fill this form Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 12
J CQE Study Guide Indicative of Test Difficulty? Professional Certifications and Degrees 1
J Difficulty with cell phone reception in House with Aluminum Siding Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 23
D Organisational Structure - Difficulty with a business stream approach Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 4
B Oil/water separators - Difficulty meeting state wastewater standards Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 4
S QOS for Tooling and Equipment - Having difficulty selecting a measurable QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
L Counting contractors for determining AS9100 audit days AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
L Determining effectiveness and efficiency Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 6
C Determining an as received OOT condition during calibration does not affect measurements taken prior to calibration. General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 16
C Need help in determining applicable clause for an audit finding (based on AS9120B) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
Q Kap.4.3 Determining the scope ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
U Determining population defect rate from sample defect rate Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
T Determining FIPS 140-2 compliance in a medical device Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 2
W Strategy for determining which components from a system should be "ME EQUIPMENT" -- home healthcare environment IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 6
J Process Capability - Determining the process capability of certain equipment Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 6
S Determining Sample Size and Method Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 12
S Determining a device category according to the MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 3
S Determining the requirements for the products and services ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
Q Determining Adverse Effects of Corrective/Preventive Actions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S Determining sample sizes for PQ Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
M Determining if an Insulin Pen Testing Machine is a Medical Device? EU Medical Device Regulations 4
M Determining a tolerance value for Measuring devices in-house inspection General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 12
D Determining the the maximum number of reprocessing cycles of attachments CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
R Determining Uncertainty from Gage R&R Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
A IATF 16949 4.3.1 - Determining the scope of the quality management system - supplemental IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
D ISO 9001:2015 4.3 Determining the Scope of the QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
J Determining SPC tolerance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 21
B Determining SAT Offsets vs TUS Offsets per SAE AMS 2750E AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
B Determining sample size for device sterility Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
D Determining of sample size for 'Operational Qualification' AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 5
R Question on determining defective units - I am not recording fixture to part rejected Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 5
S Clause 8.2.2 Determining the requirements for products and services ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Determining Calibration Frequency schedule for items used in production Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
C Determining if Maintenance Contractor is an External Service subject to ISO 9001 Clause 8.4 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 44
S AS9100D PEAR - Examples for organization's method for determining process results? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
I Determining Calibration Tolerance of a Measurement Device General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
J ISO 17025 Documented Procedure for 6.2.5 - Determining competency ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
V Determining FDA 820 (registration) vs ISO 13485 - Supplier gives us the kit ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
J ISO 9001 8.4.1 - Determining controls applied to externally provided processes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
E Determining what is good and what is bad can be subjective - when is it a quality issue? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9

Similar threads

Top Bottom