Document Change Request Flowchart - Please critique

J

JaneB

#21
Aproval Authority - for example...

1)Level I (Top level manaul) & Quality policy:CEO / DM
2.Level II - QMS procedures: MR
3)Level III - SOP/WI :Dept Head (Process owner)
4)Level IV - Format & Records:Dept Head /Activity Owner/Concerned person
Yes, this is one way to do do it. And yes, it is a good idea to reduce 'non value add' wherever possible.
But this format you've suggested is of course reliant upon & based upon certain assumptions about the documentation and the QMS being structured in a certain way, including:
1. Documents structured into certain levels (not required of course, but some people like it that way)
2. That only one single role has or should have approval authority.
3. That there is zero requirement for more than one person to approve any given document.

There can well be complexities of organisation, context, structure and/or processes that won't fit, and will involve multiple people reviewing & approving.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
C

Chance

#22
Thanks for the input everyone. I really like the idea of taking out the non-value add approvers. In my case though, it won't fit since some of the process owners use the QMS as an excuse. They will not produce more because the QMS did not say so. Process improvement wise, we need to revise our process if needed for improvement purposes. On another note, they want to change something that will only benefit themselves, they want to lower the bar just to meet their need which could affect the overall performance of the company. That is why, cross-functional approval is needed. So that they (process owners) can't changed things by themselves. I hope that this make sense to all. Any other ideas will be appreciated.
 
J

JaneB

#23
Would it work to designate as few actual APPROVERs as possible (eg, department manager/process owner initiating change) and put in the other roles as REVIEWERS?

The more approvers, in general, the slower and more cumbersome the process. Fully appreciate that a change 'might' affect another department, but to also give those an approval role also presumably allows them to hamper the process if they wish, eg, by taking their time. Some people can abuse this deliberately or by default/bad time management, by pushing it down their list of priorities, etc.

Whereas if you gave only 1 main person the approval (ie, process owner) BUT others possibly affected only a review role, with a specified timeframe, this should streamline things.

Suggest you'd need a couple of policy/business rules in place, including:
'no response by designated date = no objection" and
approver must not approve in the face of strong and reasonable negative feedback/objections until resolved.
 
S

sridharafep

#24
In my view....

Process owner should own his process.....(Advanced management style - no need a police to catch...)

Organization should set Objectives for for each cross function and monitor them.....

If the process owner is not owning the process better to replace with a "Right person for Right Job"
 
C

Chance

#25
Would it work to designate as few actual APPROVERs as possible (eg, department manager/process owner initiating change) and put in the other roles as REVIEWERS?

The more approvers, in general, the slower and more cumbersome the process. Fully appreciate that a change 'might' affect another department, but to also give those an approval role also presumably allows them to hamper the process if they wish, eg, by taking their time. Some people can abuse this deliberately or by default/bad time management, by pushing it down their list of priorities, etc.

Whereas if you gave only 1 main person the approval (ie, process owner) BUT others possibly affected only a review role, with a specified timeframe, this should streamline things.

Suggest you'd need a couple of policy/business rules in place, including:
'no response by designated date = no objection" and
approver must not approve in the face of strong and reasonable negative feedback/objections until resolved.
I would agree with you Jane and I already encounter the same situation where they push it to the bottom of their list of priorities. There should be some business rules to be established/agreed by everybody involved. Thanks again for your help.
 
C

Chance

#26
In my view....

Process owner should own his process.....(Advanced management style - no need a police to catch...)

Organization should set Objectives for for each cross function and monitor them.....

If the process owner is not owning the process better to replace with a "Right person for Right Job"
Yes thanks a lot for your input.
Right now the final approver is top management. I will create a business rule to use him/her (top management) as reviewer instead of an approver. Will use the process owner to be the approver. Now it is a lot simpler. Thanks.
 
J

JaneB

#28
Right now the final approver is top management. I will create a business rule to use him/her (top management) as reviewer instead of an approver. Will use the process owner to be the approver. Now it is a lot simpler. Thanks.
I usually only ask very 'top' management to approve a 'very top' document such as a high level company policy - quality policy for example and high level objectives. All the other stuff (eg, process documents, more detailed objectives/KPIs) flow on from that, and are essentially aimed at achieving the desired aims.
I see absolutely no reason to take up their time (and also hold up a process) by getting them to approve these things, since they presumably have already delegated authority to others to manage for them, ie, process owners (managers) who should be accountable for what they approve.
 
S

sridharafep

#29
If you refer the ISO 9001 standard

version 1987

version 1994

version 2000

and

version 2008

if we refer the versions a lot of flexibility / userfriendly (only 6 mandatory document need to be estabilished) to the organization and the standard organization is moving towards lot of changes.

Input-Process-Output = so the process owner is key for success!
 
C

Chance

#30
I usually only ask very 'top' management to approve a 'very top' document such as a high level company policy - quality policy for example and high level objectives. All the other stuff (eg, process documents, more detailed objectives/KPIs) flow on from that, and are essentially aimed at achieving the desired aims.
I see absolutely no reason to take up their time (and also hold up a process) by getting them to approve these things, since they presumably have already delegated authority to others to manage for them, ie, process owners (managers) who should be accountable for what they approve.
Once again, thanks Jane for your help.

I would like to propose these ideas to my boss. But one concern I have is how to explain to the top management about excluding him/her in the approval process.

My justification would be:
1. The process is delegated to the process owner so then he/she is responsible monitoring the processes. Therefore giving him/her the approval role is sufficient, reliant enough.
2. That this would give the top management extra time to focus on something else and not worrying about the procedures that's been delegated to somebody.
3. Managers are accountable for what they approve.

Any other justification to add? Your help is highly appreciated.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
E Document Change Request forms (or no forms)? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
L Procedure Change Request Form - "ISO Procedures" Document Changes Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
J Is DCR (Document Change Request) Needed for Initial QMS Procedures? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 16
H Product Non-Conformity and Document Change Request Forms - Corrective Action needed? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 16
H Example of DCR (document change request) form needed Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 14
M Engineering Change Request/Order (ECR/ECO) or Document Change Request/Order (DCR/DCO) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 30
H Formats for Master List of Quality Records (MQR) & Document Change Request Form (DCR) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
A Document Change Notice vs complete System re-write Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
I Is highlighting on a printed document considered a change? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
D Are medical device companies required to document every change made to their website? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
S Is the document author required to be identified as part of Document Change Notice? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
XRAY_3121 Informational MDSAP Audit Findings - Document change orders Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 12
Ajit Basrur FDA News FDA Guidance Document: Manufacturing Site Change Supplement US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 0
T How to Document Risk Effects on Design Change(s) ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
S Change Control Form vs. Document Change Notification ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Q How do we document a department name change? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
Q Change revision number in document when only codification was changed Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
C Change Order necessary to document FMEA Updates? FMEA and Control Plans 1
E Challenges in document control, revisional control, and change control Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
M Document Change Control for a Very Small Business Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 12
E FDA Significant Change Interpretation - Guidance Document EU Medical Device Regulations 2
J Change in our SharePoint Document Control Process - Is this ok? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
E Help with ECR/DCR Document Change Control Software Validation Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 6
S Change and Revision Status Identification for a Document ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
A Document Control Procedure Change 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
Q Document Control ECO (Engineering Change Order) or QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
J Function of a Change Number in our ECN / document vault program as a tie-in Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 3
J What should be included in the Design Change Document 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
A Implementing a change for a particular Process - Document & Change Control ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
2 Minor Document Change Control - Minor text changes to work procedures Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 9
K Form 42-2 for Document Initiation and Change Record - Template wanted Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
J Document Change Notice Content Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 24
J Engineering/Document Change Notice Procedure required? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
D Specifications - All the same type of document? Change Management part of our QMS Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
M Examples of DCR (Document Change Record) Log and Document Controlled Log Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
M Definition Engineering Change and Document Change - Definitions Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 2
P Document Change Notice (DCN) vs. Document Release Notice (DRN) - Differences Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 7
V What Constitutes a Document Change? Company Logo Revision Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 12
B Document Change Notice - looking for examples Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
Q Global change software where changing one document changes all documents Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 1
C Document Change Order - DCO templete which complies with FDA QSR requirements? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 0
K Change the way we need to document our work - Copies of requirements? QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
J Document Control Metrics Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
A Document Review and Document Approval --- 2 Signatures needed acc. §820.40? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
I Document Control Software Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
K 25-year lifetime of medical device - document storage period EU Medical Device Regulations 1
J UDI - Where to document it? EU Medical Device Regulations 8
T Controlling Expandable Forms in Paper-Based Document Control System Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 10
S Changing revision status of a reviewed document Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
shimonv Document Control Procedure Header Content Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom