Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Management Review - How elaborate should Management Review be?

Tagin

Quite Involved in Discussions
#1
We recently had our 9001:2008 audit and the auditor commented that the management review document was "thin" - that it didn't have much content.

Our mgmt review form is based on the sub-clauses of 5.6.2 & 5.6.3. What we do is have a meeting of the leadership group and discuss each of the areas is sequence and then summarize the results of that discussion on the form in the appropriate section. This ends up being just a couple of sentences per sub-clause. So the auditor is seeing the final results of the discussion, but not the back-and-forth. I'm not quite sure what he expects, though.

I haven't found examples of completed mgmt review documents online, so I'm wondering how detailed or involved some of your mgmt review docs are, or how we could improve this, especially as we move to 9001:2015.

Also, keep in mind that we are a very small company, so its not like there is a vast management structure. :)
 
Paid Advertisement - Forum Supporter
Q

QAMTY

#2
First You have to consider all the inputs the standard require.
Second have a check list (a format) mentioning inputs to audience, into the inputs, include
what is needed.
e.g.
a) results of audits,here you have to show the results of past audits
b) customer feedback, to have the client perception
c) process performance and product conformity, having the KPis
d) status of preventive and corrective actions, a table showing CA status, by processes
e) follow-up actions from previous management reviews, showing compromises of last sessions. and so on, and the output/decisions of these, have to be included in the management review meeting, e.g., Suppose CA are not attended, well in the MRM, it is needed a compromise to attend such CA's, and this point will followed-up in the next session.

That is all what you have to do.

Hope this helps
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#3
As long as the minimum requirements are met you've fulfilled your obligations as has management. The management review has to suit your organization/management needs and not those of the auditor. In the end, you're the process owner, not the auditor.
 
#4
We recently had our 9001:2008 audit and the auditor commented that the management review document was "thin" - that it didn't have much content.

Our mgmt review form is based on the sub-clauses of 5.6.2 & 5.6.3. What we do is have a meeting of the leadership group and discuss each of the areas is sequence and then summarize the results of that discussion on the form in the appropriate section. This ends up being just a couple of sentences per sub-clause. So the auditor is seeing the final results of the discussion, but not the back-and-forth. I'm not quite sure what he expects, though.

I haven't found examples of completed mgmt review documents online, so I'm wondering how detailed or involved some of your mgmt review docs are, or how we could improve this, especially as we move to 9001:2015.

Also, keep in mind that we are a very small company, so its not like there is a vast management structure. :)
That's basically what we do and never really had an issue.
 

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
We recently had our 9001:2008 audit and the auditor commented that the management review document was "thin" - that it didn't have much content.

Our mgmt review form is based on the sub-clauses of 5.6.2 & 5.6.3. What we do is have a meeting of the leadership group and discuss each of the areas is sequence and then summarize the results of that discussion on the form in the appropriate section. This ends up being just a couple of sentences per sub-clause. So the auditor is seeing the final results of the discussion, but not the back-and-forth. I'm not quite sure what he expects, though.

I haven't found examples of completed mgmt review documents online, so I'm wondering how detailed or involved some of your mgmt review docs are, or how we could improve this, especially as we move to 9001:2015.

Also, keep in mind that we are a very small company, so its not like there is a vast management structure. :)
That auditor perhaps is unsure of his role and is driven by some past observations.
If the Management review records touched upon all the elements that the management needs to review., that the inputs and outputs of all specific reviews are in., that the decisions and actions to be taken are said and recorded., ... thin or volume of the review records is not what the auditor has to comment upon.
Look back again to see if any element was missing in the record, and if this was what the auditor meant.
PS: I have seen some rubbish 1 page management review report that just says that all aspects were reviewed and management is happy with the results. I am sure that is not your case.
 

Coury Ferguson

Moderator here to help
Staff member
Super Moderator
#6
We recently had our 9001:2008 audit and the auditor commented that the management review document was "thin" - that it didn't have much content.

Our mgmt review form is based on the sub-clauses of 5.6.2 & 5.6.3. What we do is have a meeting of the leadership group and discuss each of the areas is sequence and then summarize the results of that discussion on the form in the appropriate section. This ends up being just a couple of sentences per sub-clause. So the auditor is seeing the final results of the discussion, but not the back-and-forth. I'm not quite sure what he expects, though.

I haven't found examples of completed mgmt review documents online, so I'm wondering how detailed or involved some of your mgmt review docs are, or how we could improve this, especially as we move to 9001:2015.

Also, keep in mind that we are a very small company, so its not like there is a vast management structure. :)
The 3rd Party Auditor doesn't determine what is or is not an organization's management review. As said before, as long as the minimum is captured that is all that is required.

Our Organization just performed the Management Review for the second time (we have determined that twice annually would be our mark). This management review addressed the requirements of the 2015 Version, since we will be upgrading May 2018. It lasted about 4 hours. We addressed the requirements of 2015 Version and some other things that were applicable to our Management System. We also have daily meetings with other entities within the organization everyday. Mainly to determine where we are in regards to status on deliveries, production, and any other concerns. This however, is not officially documented other then the Daily Production report.

So as far as the depth of which your organization performs Management Reviews, as long as you meet the required minimum on reporting that is all you need regardless of what the 3rd Party Auditor may say.

Just my view on this.
 
#7
All of the above is good counsel - that said, since I specialize in dysfunctional environments, let me add a couple of points :bonk:

The MRM is a useful place to drag stuff on top of the table that people are avoiding, and get it on the record. Once it's there, it can be difficult to get off, so be aware that this will not add to your popularity index.

Also, commitments made in that meeting should be tracked and followed up on - well-intentioned statements will be made that will not be adequately supported by resources and actions later. More fun to follow up on.

Or you can do the check-the-boxes minimalist version that is often a starting point for many organizations.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#8
The MRM is a useful place to drag stuff on top of the table that people are avoiding, and get it on the record.
:applause:
So many organizations go through the motion of a management review, pretending there are no fundamental problems to be fixed, serious customer feedback to be addressed, repeated product returns, etc...

As an auditor, in my previous life, there have been cases where I agreed with the registrant organization that, instead of reviewing "thin" management review records, they would conduct an actual management review and I would observe it. That's an approach that very few auditors and organizations do.

that said, since I specialize in dysfunctional environments
Talk about job protection...:lol: there is no shortage of....
 

Tagin

Quite Involved in Discussions
#9
Thanks for all your responses.

Yes, we do fill out the inputs & outputs for each sub-clause, so we are meeting the requirements. And we did not receive an n/c for it, so in the end the auditor was OK with it.

Maybe he was hoping for more evidence of the discussion during the meeting. And it may not be a bad idea to include "who-said-what" kinds of comments into the reviews for any later follow-up.
 
Top Bottom