Management Team "Actions" vs. CAPA (Corrective Actions)

[kgott]

What was the source of the finding? If "action items" are just stuff people need to do as a result of the meeting discussion, there shouldn't be any need to classify them as corrective or preventive actions. There might be a preventive action nugget here or there that's worth recording, but in general plain ol' meeting minutes should necessarily trigger CA or PA.

I agree with Jim here. we need to ensure these things don't grow into something they were never intended to be.

A major international mining company who is a client of ours now requires their suppliers to raise an NC where an objective is not achieved.

As I said to the their auditor, all we will do now is scale back our objectives and have objectives of convinience to reduce non vlaue adding work.

 

[kgott]

Thanks for the reply!

Anything that is related to a line shutdown would drive CAPA which would require RCA. Risk / impact assessment drives inclusion in the CAPA system. Highest risk classification requires 8D.

Most of the items are a little more serious than tables for the company picnic, but they quite often look like "Sam talk to Ted to assure planning for changeover", "Bill to report on project status in two weeks" or "Assure everyone has completed health and safety training". I'm struggling with adding any extra overhead to these sorts of things. I really like the fact they are tracked in the action list and that seems more than sufficient.

I agree, the action list in your meeting minutes is the CPA when its noted in the minutes that the action is complete and closed. Is this in your CAPA procedure?

 

[Golfman25]

Thanks for the reply!

Anything that is related to a line shutdown would drive CAPA which would require RCA. Risk / impact assessment drives inclusion in the CAPA system. Highest risk classification requires 8D.

Most of the items are a little more serious than tables for the company picnic, but they quite often look like "Sam talk to Ted to assure planning for changeover", "Bill to report on project status in two weeks" or "Assure everyone has completed health and safety training". I'm struggling with adding any extra overhead to these sorts of things. I really like the fact they are tracked in the action list and that seems more than sufficient.

Sounds to me like your auditor is clueless. He can't distinguish between action items and corrective actions. Action items are the "to do" list resulting from the meeting. They have no applicability to corrective actions. Corrective actions are a process, i.e.; 8D. In fact, a corrective action could have several "actions." Good luck with this guy.

 

[Ninja]

Thanks for the reply!

Anything that is related to a line shutdown would drive CAPA which would require RCA. Risk / impact assessment drives inclusion in the CAPA system. Highest risk classification requires 8D.

Most of the items are a little more serious than tables for the company picnic, but they quite often look like "Sam talk to Ted to assure planning for changeover", "Bill to report on project status in two weeks" or "Assure everyone has completed health and safety training". I'm struggling with adding any extra overhead to these sorts of things. I really like the fact they are tracked in the action list and that seems more than sufficient.

Every single day, take a step back and look at things from a big picture point of view.

- "Sam talk to Ted to assure planning for changeover"
This does not belong in the CAPA system...no way.
The plan for the changeover, if it is not followed, might belong there but even that is a stretch. It belongs in Mgmt or in Design Control.
Not meeting the customer need because of failure in changeover...THAT belongs in CAPA.

- "Bill to report on project status in two weeks"
Under no circumstances does this belong in CAPA.
The project not meeting its goals might, but I would WAY rather handle that through design control than CAPA.

- "Assure everyone has completed health and safety training"
Only belongs in CAPA if not met...I assume there is a time target attached to this. Typical entry of this into CAPA is failure to meet time target.

If you don't want to increase overhead, don't use your CAPA system as Maslow's Hammer.

Just saw Golfman's post...I totally agree.

 

[Chris_Anderson]

CAPA is about taking action to eliminate the causes of nonconformities in order to prevent recurrence. Therefore, what nonconformances is the auditor using as objective evidence for the actions that are being taken, but not entered as a CAR?

As was pointed out earlier, if each action is in response to a known nonconformance, then it is a finding. If the actions are part of daily management than there would be no objective evidence to cite in an audit finding.