Management Review in TS 16949



Management Review


I'm having some trouble understanding a "shall" in the ISO TS; In the management review, it spell's: "these reviews shall include all elements of the quality system..."; what are that "elements"?

Best to all and a great 2002:smokin:

Laura M

The requirements....the "shalls"

In the 1994 standard there were 20 "elements." ISO9000:2000 changes that somewhat. If you are working to the currently released TS(1999) - then the "elements" are the 20 requirements.

Al Dyer

Just to add to Laura's comment,

Don't forget the customer (usually automotive) specific requirements.:bigwave:



Al and Laura, I agree in part, but would like to add the following.
In order to maximize the effectiveness of the QMS, I would suggest that the term “elements” should include all aspects of the QMS. If we look at the intent of management review, then all elements, by necessity, will be those things that either impede, or enhance the goals of the QMS. Less obvious things like “attitude” should also be included. This may be a hard thing for management, especially when it might be their attitude that impedes the progress. Make “elements” inclusionary, rather than exclusionary.



In a way I see where you are going Dave but you have to be careful there. It is one thing to consider the contributors you mention but you shouldn't write anything into your system that would back you into a corner.

I would hate to get a nonconformance for bad attitude. I will probably get jumped for this but IMHO you should keep the system as simple as possible rather than trying to include everything. There is plenty of room in the actual administration of the system for personal touches but whatever you write into the system is subject to audit.

This is not to say the system shouldn't be robust/dynamic and inovative. All I am saying is the system should address the requirements (in this case the 20 elements) and leave the rest to management skills.



Attitude a major nonconformance?

Dave, I can’t argue with you because some auditor somewhere will write a major nonconformance because you didn’t send management a survey to gauge their attitude. And even though I use “Where is the ‘Shall’?”, I am a firm believer in having a system that works for you. You are absolutely right in your assertion that “the system should address the requirements (in this case the 20 elements) and leave the rest to management skills.” The things I mentioned should be considered, but I too, would not necessarily publicize the list. Steer clear of writing work instructions for management decisions. :agree:

BTW, I believe that TS16949:2002 does require work instructions for all processes.

One last thing….Does anyone know if the TS be dropped? I have heard both ways, and seen it both ways. The final draft keeps it. Any one know?



Hot from the oven:

"the relevant ISO standard is under updating procedure and has reached the enquiry stage of development. An existing draft (CD) has the status of an internal working document and as a such is not available to the public. It may be expected that the final draft of the revised versions of ISO/TS 16949 will become available in the 2nd quarter and the standard itself in the 3rd quarter of 2002 "

Words from the guys at ISO.

Top Bottom