ISO 9001:2015 Clause 10.2.2 - Evidence of all nonconformities and actions

embedded

Involved In Discussions
#1
Hi All,

We have a process hole in that we aren't documenting corrections(nonconformities deemed as minor not worthy of a root cause analysis). As a result we're working on creating a process where any one in the org can submit an issue which will go the quality and management team for disposition in a monthly meeting where we review all open quality issues. If the issue is a nonconformance(process or requirement violated) then we disposition as a CAR or correction and capture required info. If there was no nonconformance we disposition as N/A or OFI(we will track actions taken which I think is non-standard for OFIs).

We brought in another manager for feedback on the idea and the concerns were:
  • Are we really going to have to fill this out for every super minor nonconformance(e.g. if someone uses black ink instead of blue ink we have to fill this form out and have the management team review it)?
  • Others have tried similar approaches and it turned into a complain about your manager/coworker. How can we prevent this from happening again?
In regards to the first concern. I'm wondering if we are creating an inefficient process(it'll be a webpage to make it fast and easy to fill out) where we document every minor thing that goes wrong. Any suggestions or feedback? Please keep in mind we're a small business where we all wear multiple hats?

In regards to the second concern, historically most of the non-value add concerns came from the production floor. To prevent this from reoccurring (e.g."I don't like the person I sit next to at work, you should move me"), we are thinking to create an OFI group, where a rotating group of production workers and a process engineer meet one hour a week to discuss possible improvements. The idea is the group will serve as a filter to prevent non-value added issues being reported and also to have the side effect of improved morale(people feeling like they have a voice).

Thanks,
Eddie
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#4
...Are we really going to have to fill this out for every super minor nonconformance (e.g. if someone uses black ink instead of blue ink we have to fill this form out and have the management team review it)?...
Remember: a non-conformance is a requirement not being met.

Insofar as there is such thing as a "super minor nonconformance", and these are happening frequently, then I might suggest that you may have requirements that are not all that important (e.g. how important is the color of ink?). Perhaps such things could be relegated to "best practices guidelines", as opposed to stated QS requirements, and can be handled outside your NC process.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#5
In regards to the first concern. I'm wondering if we are creating an inefficient process(it'll be a webpage to make it fast and easy to fill out) where we document every minor thing that goes wrong. Any suggestions or feedback? Please keep in mind we're a small business where we all wear multiple hats?
The quickest way to deflate and self sabotage a maturing quality system is to create bureaucracy which is perceived by everyone (management, supervisors and doers) as non value added. I would strongly suggest you don't do this. On the other hand, you don't want to have a situation where, on a daily basis, the same minor problems recur, because, small problems that are frequent also detract significantly from your efficiency and bottom line. That's where supervisors need to keep their eyes and ears open to see if these small repeated problems escalate to a frequency where true corrective action will end saving the company money and aggravation. The discussion if something is recurring too often could be done in the weekly meeting you suggested

In regards to the second concern, historically most of the non-value add concerns came from the production floor. To prevent this from reoccurring (e.g."I don't like the person I sit next to at work, you should move me"), we are thinking to create an OFI group, where a rotating group of production workers and a process engineer meet one hour a week to discuss possible improvements. The idea is the group will serve as a filter to prevent non-value added issues being reported and also to have the side effect of improved morale(people feeling like they have a voice).
I think this suggestion is a winner, for the reasons you already mentioned. It engages, involves and empowers the workforce. I wholeheartedly support such idea and initiative and my only comment is: as you start conducting these meetings, chances are, there will be a lot to be discussed, so, the early 1-hour/week meeting might seem short. As things improve, there should be fewer topics to discuss and the hour a week should be sufficient.

Good luck.
 

AMIT BALLAL

Trusted Information Resource
#6
NC is raised if a requirement is not fulfilled. If it is a requirement and hasn't complied, root cause analysis and corrective actions have to be taken. If you find the NCs were small deviations, why raise NC in the first place?
 

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#7
...If it is a requirement and hasn't complied, root cause analysis and corrective actions have to be taken. ...
I don't think this is correct. The idea is that non-conformities are evaluated to determine the need for further investigation & corrective action. Not all non-conformities warrant investigation & corrective action.

...If you find the NCs were small deviations, why raise NC in the first place?
To document them, so you can identify trends and have data to drive improvement. If NCs are not documented, they cannot be evaluated, nor do you get a sense of occurrence rates or trends. An individual NC might be evaluated as minor and an isolated incident, not warranting any action. But if there's subsequently more of the same being documented, then the issue might be escalated to something requiring an investigation and corrective action.
 

AMIT BALLAL

Trusted Information Resource
#8
Thanks for your reply Mark Meer. Agree that need for corrective action can be evaluated. I didn't come across a Nonconformity which won't require corrective action. Can you give an example of a NC which didn't require a corrective action?
 
Last edited:

Kronos147

Trusted Information Resource
#9
Hi All,

We have a process hole in that we aren't documenting corrections(nonconformities deemed as minor not worthy of a root cause analysis). As a result we're working on creating a process where any one in the org can submit an issue which will go the quality and management team for disposition in a monthly meeting where we review all open quality issues....

We brought in another manager for feedback on the idea and the concerns were:
  • Are we really going to have to fill this out for every super minor nonconformance(e.g. if someone uses black ink instead of blue ink we have to fill this form out and have the management team review it)?
  • Others have tried similar approaches and it turned into a complain about your manager/coworker. How can we prevent this from happening again?
Insofar as there is such thing as a "super minor nonconformance", and these are happening frequently, then I might suggest that you may have requirements that are not all that important (e.g. how important is the color of ink?).
I believe a log is a good thing to have. Without a log, organizations are not truly aware of how often the event actually occurs. The log would be useful to address the 'not documenting NC' issue and additionally useful for Management Review Meetings. Two birds (10.2 & 9.3.2), one stone (log).

And Mark Meer has a great point. The log will let you review if you actually keep harping over the ink color, or other meaningless nonsense.

I believe that because of Evidence-based Decision Making organizations should accumulate data in order to transform it into (useful guiding) information.

I believe that because of Risk Based Thinking and the availability of resources, that opting to categorize events on the log as "log only" and no need to do a complete corrective action is reasonable.

To satisfy your co-worker, explain that this is one of the methods the organization uses to determine where to commit resources to a continual improvement projects in a responsible manner, and to create the document information required to demonstrate conformance to the standard.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#10
We brought in another manager for feedback on the idea and the concerns were:
  • Are we really going to have to fill this out for every super minor nonconformance(e.g. if someone uses black ink instead of blue ink we have to fill this form out and have the management team review it)?
  • Others have tried similar approaches and it turned into a complain about your manager/coworker. How can we prevent this from happening again?
Perhaps a different point of view (not all that "different").

Are we really going to have to fill this out? Yes, something required was not done.
The Correction/Corrective action is to edit that silly document and remove the requirement for blue ink.
It is either important to use blue ink, or it isn't.
If it isn't important, stop requiring it.
If it is important, then using black ink is not a super-minor thing, it's something important that has gone wrong.

Every system I've seen has someone's silliness in it...sometimes a great deal of silliness.
Each time it turns to a complaint about a person, turn it instead to an opportunity to rid yourself and your system of the silliness.
Over time, people will look for that silliness on the initial document and remove it before it even comes into force.
Also over time, you may learn what authors to pay special attention to...some people can't help but write ridiculous things into documents.

If your system has so much silliness in it that it is burdensome...start by removing the obvious junk through PA or just rewrite the silly things (have your operators give you a list...you may be surprised at how long the list is), then get the rest through the CA system.
Your business has required certain things of itself. If it has required nonsense of itself, start removing those nonsensical requirements...then you wont have to fill this form out so much, and you'll have a better system.

:2cents:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M ISO 9001:2015 and AS6081:2012 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
C Implementation ISO 9001: 2015 ? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
eule del ayre Documented Information - Periodic Review of Documents? IATF 16949:2016 / ISO 9001:2015 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 34
J ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001 & OHSAS18000 (IMS) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
L How to understand the clause 6 Planning of ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
A Does ISO 9001:2015 cover all the requirements of ISO 10012:2003? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
T ISO 9001:2015 - Small Shop ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
M ISO 9001:2015 case study sample ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
M Sample of Nonconformity report for ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
M Case study help as per ISO 9001: 2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
M Case study solution help required as per ISO 9001 : 2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
F Logistics and IT clauses in ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
V Quality Objectives - ISO 9001 2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 26
Gun46 ISO 9001 : 2015 Lead Auditor Exam General Auditing Discussions 16
Q ISO 9001:2015 man days for surveillance audit ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
D ISO 9001:2015 4.3 Determining the Scope of the QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
I ISO 9001:2015 Section 9.3.2 C1 "customer satisfaction and feedback from relevant interested parties" ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
I ISO-9001:2015 and "Relevant Parties" Management Review Meetings and related Processes 2
I Master Document Access - ISO 9001:2015 clause 7.5.3 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
qualprod Why new clause (7.1.6) in ISO 9001:2015? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
I Where can I beg, steal (just kidding of course) or borrow good training material on the ISO 9001:2015 standard? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Robert Stanley Which Registrar Should I Choose for ISO 9001:2015 registration? Registrars and Notified Bodies 10
M ISO 9001:2015 8.2.1 Contingency Plan required for small Business? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
A Help with Drawing Review - ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
V ISO 9001:2015 7.2 Competence ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 35
B ISO 9001:2015 Transition: Much Easier Than You Think! Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 0
A Process Documentation for ISO 9001:2015 Internal Auditing 2
C Migrate ISO 9001:2015 Certificate Registrars and Notified Bodies 4
J ISO 9001:2015 Small Operation Management Review General Auditing Discussions 6
E Three basic questions about ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
C ISO 9001:2015 Monitoring and measuring resources. Application a service industry ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
W ISO 9001:2015 Management Review Input Template wanted ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
G Is ISO 9001:2015 certification worth it for a company that does only contract manufacturing? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 14
N ISO 9001:2015 Customer Complaints Requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
O Performance Measurement ISO 9001: 2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
C Does ISO 9001-2015 have a requirement for manufacturing equipment to be numbered? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
V ISO 9001: 2015 Production drawing Control ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
KCalaba21 ISO 9001:2015 6.2.2 E - "e) how the results will be evaluated." ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
S ISO 9001:2015 & ISO 14001 Re-Certification Audit Preparation ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 8
S ISO 9001:2015 & ISO 14001:2015 - I need a format for Design & Development planning ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 2
N ISO 9001:2015 - 5.3 - The roles and responsibilities matrix rears it's head ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
J ISO 9001:2015 Excel Gap Analysis wanted ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
D ISO 9001:2015 Internal Audit Training Advice Internal Auditing 10
M IATF 16949:2016 clause 8.4.2.3 - We don't have ISO 9001:2015 certificate IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 26
GreatNate Document Control info - What is required on a controlled form/document for ISO 9001: 2015? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
E ISO 9001:2015 - Record requirements for out of calibration tool ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 28
GreatNate ISO 9001:2015 Lead Auditor Course? (who to take with) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
S ISO 9001:2015 Clause 9.3.2 - MR (Management Review) - Adequacy of resources ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
S ISO 9001:2015 Clause 8.7 Control of Nonconforming Outputs ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 19
qualprod ISO 9001:2015 8.2.3.2 and 8.5.5 - Guidance for Reviews ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8

Similar threads

Top Bottom