Engineering Change Order...Modification Order

#1
A new drafter, along with my boss, have suggested an "ECO Modification Form" that would allow us to circulate a review and approval form and then attach whatever change was warranted to the most recent ECO, modifying the electronic bill of material without adding a new revision and ECO number.
For example, the drafter found a 10 year old BOM that is missing the drawing number for the assembly. We would just circulate the modification form, and after review and approval, add the drawing to the BOM electronically and put the most recent change in with the most recent ECO (5 years ago).

Pros (theirs):
Fewer change revisions on electronic BOMs
Less data entry

Cons (mine):
Developing additional documentation and training for a system with definitions of what kind of changes could be made via this method; when:
We already have an robust ECO system, and who cares if a BOM goes to rev AZ over 25 years?
Loss of electronically visible data on when and why changes were made to an electronic BOM.
It just violates my sense of how to control documents. I don't believe adding changes to a five year old ECO is good document control.

Anyway, I am having a hard time defending my position or seeing why theirs is an improvement. Thoughts, pro or con, from the experts, please.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#2
Who sees the rev numbers? Totally internal, or do customers/vendors also see them?

Point being, even for totally internal with an auditor, ... if I saw two drawings with the same rev, and there were differences between them...it would go a long way toward making me not trust a single other thing you said or did. Even if the only difference was the font you used.
An approved rev locks out changes...period...end of story. If it doesn't lock out changes, what else did you change...and why should I trust that you didn't change something else?

What is the point of tracking revisions? If it is a valid point, track revisions.
IMO, if the revision isn't worth tracking, it isn't worth doing. If it's worth doing, it's worth tracking.
I'm a little surprised you're having a tough time getting that through...makes me wonder who you're talking to and what level of understanding they have.

If they want to save time and paperwork, revise your ECO system, don't bypass it.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
A system that is owned by its users may be good enough to replace yours.

I would listen well and encourage further user participation.

Normally though an ECR (request) is made, reviewed and approved before the ECO is issued for implementation.
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#4
I agree with Ninja, I don't see how their proposed change maintains control.

If they are trying to streamline the process, maybe streamline the current process if possible (i.e. maybe allow electronic review and signatures if it is a manual paper system now, etc.) but making doc changes without changing the rev level just doesn't make sense to me.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#5
You should be able to correct errors/omissions on the BOM that don't affect the assembly without a concurrent drawing revision. If your system doesn't allow this, there's a flaw in the system.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#6
You should be able to correct errors/omissions on the BOM that don't affect the assembly without a concurrent drawing revision. If your system doesn't allow this, there's a flaw in the system.
I'm always torn on that one...let's use a reference dimension for example (could be anything, including just being the company logo on the BOM...)

1. It seems like a waste to find a reference dimension omission the day after revC is distributed, and have to go through the whole process again to put it in...and end up with rev D.

but...

2. If you don't, you can now have two revC drawings that are not alike...one has the ref dimension, the other does not.

From what I said above...if I was your customer, and I saw these two different things...both revC...with no other way for me to know which was "current"...it would put a huge ding in my confidence in you.

Many solutions here, including:
- going to revD
- having a robust recall process to destroy all "wrong revC" and ensure only "current revC" is possible
- Having something like a 'sub-rev' just for those 'non-material corrections'...a faster, simpler process to make revC-1
- I'm sure there are other ways

Either way, any way, one of the points of rev control is to ensure that the most current information is being used, and outdated info is not.
"Correction", "fixing", "tweaking", whatever it is called...how is it being ensured that only the most current info is in use?
How can you show objective evidence that you have this under control?
Everywhere I've been, which includes systems that I put in place, it was done by moving to revD.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#7
I'm always torn on that one...let's use a reference dimension for example (could be anything, including just being the company logo on the BOM...)
I said nothing about drawing changes. I said that if the BOM needs to be changed to correct errors or omissions that don't affect the part, you should be able to make those changes without a concurrent drawing revision.
 

JimS

Starting to get Involved
#9
We allow that clerical corrections can be made - change logo, misspellings, etc - without a rev change if they have no impact on the actual design. What saves this is that it still has to be recorded in the rev table. A line is added to the rev block with the same revision, but in parenthesis, and the change, date, etc are filled in. This means that you don't have two Rev B drawings that look even a little bit different with no explanation. The rev table shows it and our SOP allows it. The released drawing is replaced with the new one so the one location for released docs has the current, updated drawing. The ultimate decision on when to allow this lies with Doc Control - me - and I'm pretty conservative on when to allow this.
 
#10
Who sees the rev numbers? Totally internal, or do customers/vendors also see them?
Auditors and production people.
Point being, even for totally internal with an auditor, ... if I saw two drawings with the same rev, and there were differences between them...it would go a long way toward making me not trust a single other thing you said or did. Even if the only difference was the font you used.
This is my point.
I'm a little surprised you're having a tough time getting that through...makes me wonder who you're talking to and what level of understanding they have.
VP Ops and a draftsperson...zero quality training, never read ISO9001.
I agree with Ninja, I don't see how their proposed change maintains control.

If they are trying to streamline the process, maybe streamline the current process if possible (i.e. maybe allow electronic review and signatures if it is a manual paper system now, etc.) but making doc changes without changing the rev level just doesn't make sense to me.
This is my take as well.
You should be able to correct errors/omissions on the BOM that don't affect the assembly without a concurrent drawing revision. If your system doesn't allow this, there's a flaw in the system.
I don't have to change the drawing. However, I maintain that the electronic BOM (that currently doesn't contain a reference to the drawing), needs its own ECO number and rev change if I "correct the omission".
I'm always torn on that one...let's use a reference dimension for example (could be anything, including just being the company logo on the BOM...)

2. If you don't, you can now have two revC drawings that are not alike...one has the ref dimension, the other does not.

From what I said above...if I was your customer, and I saw these two different things...both revC...with no other way for me to know which was "current"...it would put a huge ding in my confidence in you.
Exactly. This is also the sort of thing that puts auditors into a finding frenzy.
Many solutions here, including:
- going to revD
- having a robust recall process to destroy all "wrong revC" and ensure only "current revC" is possible
Possible, yes. But why create this improbable solution when you already have one that works?
Either way, any way, one of the points of rev control is to ensure that the most current information is being used, and outdated info is not.
"Correction", "fixing", "tweaking", whatever it is called...how is it being ensured that only the most current info is in use?
How can you show objective evidence that you have this under control?
Everywhere I've been, which includes systems that I put in place, it was done by moving to revD.
That is my experience, as well.
We allow that clerical corrections can be made - change logo, misspellings, etc - without a rev change if they have no impact on the actual design. What saves this is that it still has to be recorded in the rev table. A line is added to the rev block with the same revision, but in parenthesis, and the change, date, etc are filled in. This means that you don't have two Rev B drawings that look even a little bit different with no explanation. The rev table shows it and our SOP allows it. The released drawing is replaced with the new one so the one location for released docs has the current, updated drawing. The ultimate decision on when to allow this lies with Doc Control - me - and I'm pretty conservative on when to allow this.
These are corrections to an Electronic BOM. The "rev table" is contained in the electronic BOM.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Revision36 Engineering Change Order Industry Standards Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 4
D ECO (Engineering Change Order) process questions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
D Engineering Change Order (ECO) metrics to track ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
S Engineering change order versus a design change request ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
M ECO (Engineering Change Order) Record Filing Question Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 1
T Need help developing an ECO (Engineering Change order) procedure Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
C Documents not controlled by the ECO (Engineering Change Order) process ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
J ECO (Engineering Change Order) Control for Unreleased Products Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
Q How to close the circle QMS and ECO (Engineering Change Order)? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q Document Control ECO (Engineering Change Order) or QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
D ECO (Engineering Change Order) Risk Management Criteria and QA Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 19
M ECO (Engineering Change Order) Tracking and Status Report Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
T ECO (Engineering Change Order) Implementation checklist/work instruction Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 6
V How to measure ECO (Engineering Change Order) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
M Engineering Change Request/Order (ECR/ECO) or Document Change Request/Order (DCR/DCO) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 30
R ECO (Engineering Change Order) presentation Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
R ECO (Engineering Change Order) Question for all experts (fill the blanks) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
K ECO (Engineering Change Order) Revision - Letter change or part number change? Manufacturing and Related Processes 13
M Using M-1 Software for Quality - Manual Engineering Change Order Entry Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 1
CarolX Preventive Action (PA) - Employee Suggestion Box, Engineering Change Order? Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 12
Raffy ECN (Engineering Change Notice) / ECO (Engineering Change Order) System Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
R Do we need issue ECN (Engineering Change Notice) towards updated Material Specification? Design and Development of Products and Processes 2
C E signatures on Engineering Change Notes AS9100 / AS9116 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
J Class 1 Medical Device ECR (Engineering Change Request) Changes 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
A Software Suggestions for Engineering Change/QMS Design and Development of Products and Processes 2
Q Change of fields - Quality Engineering Electronics Vs medical Devices Career and Occupation Discussions 20
T Engineering Change Management Systems Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
M Engineering Change Management Generic Procedure Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
S Ford Motor Engineering Change Level definition Customer and Company Specific Requirements 6
D How to process Customer ECO's (Engineering Change Orders) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q ECR (Engineering Change Request) or NCR (Nonconformance Report) in Fabrication? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
L Engineering Change Control Software Systems - Recommendations? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
L The Perfect Engineering Change and Concessions Management System Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
M Formula for Prioritizing Engineering Change Requests (ECR)? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
D Management of Change - MOC Procedure and Forms - Engineering, Project, Safety Systems Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
Q ECR?s (Engineering Change Requests) in Engineering? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
M Is ECN (Engineering Change Notice) Necessary for Part Number Change IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
Q How to monitor Engineering Change Requests? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 7
D Launch Change Request Form vs. Engineering Change Form Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
J Engineering/Document Change Notice Procedure required? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
P How to specify criteria for TECN (Temporary Engineering Change Notice) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
T From ECR (Engineering Change Request) to ECN (Engineering Change Note) - double work! Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
M Definition Engineering Change and Document Change - Definitions Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 2
9 ECR (Engineering Change Request) process - Please critique / review Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 10
pammesue Managing ECN (Engineering Change Notice) Blueprints Database..any solutions? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
Q How to implement an External Engineering Change ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
W Engineering ECR (Engineering Change Request) and ECN (Eng Change Notice) Procedures Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
K When to use an Engineering Change Request (ECR) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
J Automated Engineering Specification Change Notifications? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
J Reducing Engineering Change Orders Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 16

Similar threads

Top Bottom