When I interpreted "planned intervals" and "management review" - my thesis was that a management "review" was exactly that - a REVIEW! This meant there had to be "something to review." Typically, a review could be as simple as "a walk around the premises" or as detailed and involved as a formal review by a Board of Directors taking up an entire day of reports and presentations by staff and outside consultants. The key to whether it was actually a "review" was if it was
- planned
- had an agenda
- had a record of taking place and the action (or non-action) decided
- a schedule for evaluating the action taken
"Planned intervals" always meant MINIMUM intervals. An organization is always free to add more on an ad hoc basis. I scheduled FORMAL reviews to coincide with the review of internal audit reports.
Thus, in a small organization, ALL the internal audits might be completed annually or semiannually over one or two weeks and the formal management review might consider all those reports at one time. Obviously, some reports may require no action, positive or negative, and thus be dispatched with a record they were reviewed, whereas other audit reports might trigger intense discussion, review, plans of action, evaluations, outside experts, etc.
Conversely, in a large, even multi-site, organization, internal audits might be in progress "somewhere" on a continual, regular basis, and preliminary management review may be delegated to "semi-top" management (individuals or committees) who may have limited authority
- to accept "no action" reports with merely making a record,
- to implement small actions with merely making a record,
- but required to elevate BIG actions to even higher management for further review and action.
The frequency of the various reviews in such a large organization may range from weekly to quarterly because of the complexity of the organization, NOT because of some slavish adherence to an ISO-suggested schedule.
Simply, the SCHEDULE is dictated by circumstances within the organization. How frequently the reviews take place depends on the number and frequency of areas being audited and reviewed. The complexity of the review is also dictated by circumstances - some may be only "rubber stamp" reviews to have a record there was a review, but no action required or taken beyond recording the review. Some reviews (again, dictated by circumstances) may be complicated and drawn out, even resulting in some "bloodletting" as careers rise and fall on the basis of decisions made in the review.
(Even Deming understood some individuals were not suited for a task and could not be "rehabilitated" and thus had to part ways with the organization!)
Added in edit:
In one organization, our management review of an entire Division resulted in a decision to divest the entire Division. The new buyer simply bought the business and relocated the operations to another state, taking ZERO employees and only some of the equipment. We "repurposed" the building to an expansion of another Division and hired back about 50% of the original employees - very tough decisions for EVERYONE involved.
