Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative)

x-files

Involved In Discussions
#1
Hi,

I have some questions about understanding meanings of “Established, implemented, maintained”:
5.5.2 Management representative
Top management shall appoint a member of the organization's management who, irrespective of other responsibilities, shall have responsibility and authority that includes
a) ensuring that processes needed for the quality management system are established, implemented and maintained,
[…]
I want to make a matrix with these columns on top, for which I hope, I've classified and expanded correctly, to fit our needs:
* ESTABLISHING (1) – Who has the authority to Add new or Delete existing document
* IMPLEMENTING
Preparing (2) – Who signs “Prepared by” field on the front page
Approving (3) – Who signs “Approved by” field on the front page
* MAINTAINING
Using (4) – Who is responsible to use the document
Requesting changes (5) – Who has the authority to request the document change
Technical maintaining (6) – Who generates .pdf, uploads, archives originals…
… as an extra field I could also add the “Way to control”:
Controlling (7) – Do we, or how we control the document

On the left side can be “Document type“, or better “Document name” because of fine tuning attributes per document.


So I’d have, for example:
“Document control”, (1) MR, (2) IMS Director, (3) MR, (4) Every employee, (5) Every employee, (6) IMS Administrator, (7) DCF.


My questions are:
* Have I understood the proper meanings of “Established, implemented, maintained”, which I further expanded to fit our needs?
* Is there some other valuable attribute to be added to matrix header?
* Does this matrix has sense at all? I think it could be useful for some purposes, mainly to get clear about approval path for example, or just quick changing rules by editing entered parameters.



Best Regards,
Vladimir Stefanovic
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

insect warfare

QA=Question Authority
Trusted Information Resource
#2
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

You seem to be equating "documents" with "processes" in your post. Remember, not all processes have to be documented (in most cases), and the writers of paragraph 5.5.2 probably did not envision the interpretation of it to mean "create a matrix" (because now you've just added one more document for your organization to maintain). Not really necessary in my opinion, as your documentation system should be as lean as possible without creating unwanted burden....

A good way to interpret 5.5.2 is to have the MR ensure that processes needed for the QMS are established (are they set up?), implemented (have they been put into effect?) and maintained (are they enabled to continue as planned?). It is more of an oversight requirement for the MR than anything, and one that any good auditor would be able to assess just fine, with or without a matrix document, through simple investigation techniques.

Brian :rolleyes:
 

harry

Super Moderator
#3
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

. .................... * Have I understood the proper meanings of ?Established, implemented, maintained?, ...............
Would you agree that an internal audit should reveal whether your system is established, implemented and maintained?

This is one of those area where you demonstrate compliance rather than have a procedure or matrix. The procedure or matrix can only indicate that you have the items but cannot show that it is 'working' for you.
 

Jim G

Involved In Discussions
#4
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

I don't believe this matrix would add any value to your organisation, in fact it would be another auditable document for you to keep up to date.
Assuming you have the processes required by the QMS in place, they are being implemented across your organisation and they continue to be an up to date reflection of your business, then any auditor would be able to establish compliance without a matrix.
 

x-files

Involved In Discussions
#5
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

I think I understood all your observations. Better to think about compliance, rather than have yet another document to control and think of.


When looking into other “Document control procedures" (DCP), they always easily define approval authorities in a brief list. In „Document control form“ (DCF), near the approval signature line, it’s simpy said something like this:
Approval for Revision (either per the document's stated approval authority of the Document Control Procedure, XYZ)
Approval for Addition (either per the document's stated approval authority of the Document Control Procedure, XYZ)
Approval for Deletion (either per the document's stated approval authority of the Document Control Procedure, XYZ)
The idea for creating a matrix for our particular case is because we already have 120 procedures, and huge and brached organizatational structure (3500 employees) on displaced locations. In practice, we cannot easily define the approval authorities for the procedure, although is sounds easy. Process owners and working positions cannot be connected/linked by simple words: director, manager, leader, etc. Sometimes, two or three process owners, on different locations, are sharing the same procedure, and they all have differently named working positions. We think, every of them has the approval authority to the document. How and where to say that? Furthermore, there are three or even more “Prepared by” persons. Who are they, how to define them?

When creating/editing a procedure, we in advance know:
- How the procedure is to be titled (it’s said in Manual, for example, or in DCF request for new document)
- How we index/number documents [procedures, wi, forms, templates, …] (it’s said in DCP, for example)
- How we format revisions (it’s said in DCP, for example)
- What’s the next revision (it’s in previous DCF record, for example)
- What sections (TOC) the procedure must have (it’s said in DCP, for example)
- What names to add above job titles and signautre line (it’s said organizational structure)
- Possibly, how we format even dates: m/d/yyyy or d/m/yyyy
- etc, …

Observing so, I can see that a procedure, as an integral document prepared to be self-contained as much as possible - pretty much is assembled from other “older” documents. The exception is of course the pure essence of a procedure - “Defined activities”.

So, can/how we in advance know who are the approval authorities for the procedure, or the procedure text is the first time when that’s mentioned? Sometimes, I saw that’s said in the Manual, but not in our case so far.

Other columns I stated in initial post are just extension.



Best regards,
Vladimir Stefanovic
 

insect warfare

QA=Question Authority
Trusted Information Resource
#6
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

So, can/how we in advance know who are the approval authorities for the procedure, or the procedure text is the first time when that?s mentioned? Sometimes, I saw that?s said in the Manual, but not in our case so far.
Just as an example, we define the approval authorities for each document on our master list, so the document controller can quickly prepare the necessary approval records for completion. How do we know who those approval authorities should be?....we just read the documents. It should be evident in the procedural documents who those entities are - if not, we consider such documents inadequate and we instruct the authors to consider additional markups.

For us, approval authorities mainly consist of the process owners, because we understand they should have ultimate responsibility for the processes defined within (including any associated documentation). Our documentation structure is broken down by process and not by department, so most of the time the approval authorities will consist of one, maybe two process owners. We know it is in our best interests to keep it simple that way.

Obviously there are many other ways to achieve the same thing, but your organization should not have to end up complicating this aspect of the documentation.

Brian :rolleyes:
 

x-files

Involved In Discussions
#7
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

Just as an example, we define the approval authorities for each document on our master list [...]
If you are referring to "Master document list", that could be the answer on my question. Our MDL does not have Approval column, just titles, revisions, dates... If I add Approval column, I got the functionality I want.



Best Regards,
Vladimir Stefanovic
 

somashekar

Staff member
Super Moderator
#8
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

Just let the MR Establish, Implement and Maintain the QMS, directly or through his associates under his direct authority.
There is no need to write about it, which makes it all the more confusing and non value added.
 

insect warfare

QA=Question Authority
Trusted Information Resource
#9
Re: Matrix for: Established, implemented, maintained (5.5.2 Management Representative

If you are referring to "Master document list", that could be the answer on my question. Our MDL does not have Approval column, just titles, revisions, dates... If I add Approval column, I got the functionality I want.



Best Regards,
Vladimir Stefanovic
Never hurts to try something out, I always say - this method may or may not be suited to your taste. Be sure to let us all know how it works out for you....we always appreciate updates from experiments undertaken.

Brian :rolleyes:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Q Process Matrix_Audit Matrix Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 4
Q Process matrix examples of ISO 9001 & 14001 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
M PSA Suppliers - CSR matrix and need the quality manual of PSA APQP and PPAP 6
Dazza 9001, 14001 and 45001 mandatory documents and records cross reference matrix Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 2
C Risk Matrix vs FMEAs ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 12
S ISO 9001:2015 vs 21 CFR Part 211 matrix Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 0
T ISO 13485:2016 Clauses related to process matrix ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
B Document Approval Matrix Benchmarking Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
D Signature Matrix questions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
O ISO 13485 vs. GMP - Comparison matrix wanted EU Medical Device Regulations 4
A 5 x 5 Risk Matrix - Looking for a good example Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
Q Forms Master List versus Record Matrix ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
W Updated EU MDR regulatory matrix wanted ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 43
F AS9100D Process Matrix for a small cnc machine shop AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
D ROW Approval Matrix Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2
R AS9100 REV D gap analysis matrix AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
Ron Rompen 2D matrix issue - Parts (machined steel) returned from the customer Design and Development of Products and Processes 0
R Training Matrix for Document revisions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
J Criteria Matrix To Initiate An A3 or 8D ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 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
C Internal Audit - Process Clause Matrix / Audit Checklist ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
Z Training Qualification Matrix for ISO 9001:2015 Audit General Auditing Discussions 8
L Comparison matrix between IATF 16949:2016 to ISO 12207, ISO 9001 and Automotive SPICE IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
N Comprehensive Compliance Matrix for Internal Audit Checklist Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
S How to maintain a design traceability matrix ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
N Looking for input on the attached Process / IATF 16949 Clause Matrix IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
Q Simple and effective way to maintain Training Matrix ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 16
M TGA comparable overseas regulators requirements matrix? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
V Process and Internal Audit Criteria matrix wanted Internal Auditing 8
D Risk Matrix used by my company ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
D Rationale for Risk Acceptability Matrix - ISO 14971 ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 9
C Data Matrix and DPM (direct part marking) UDI Standards - ISO/IEC TR 29158 Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
M Medical Device Traceability Matrix - Examples EU Medical Device Regulations 8
S Response Surface Method to create design matrix in Minitab Using Minitab Software 5
R Training Matrix Need to Be Proceduralized? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
T Process Matrix for ISO 9001 - SRI requests R.20 44KO Sample/Example ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
S Employee Training Matrix - Keeping track of employee training on various SOPs ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
A ISO9001:2015 Process Matrix with clauses General Auditing Discussions 13
D VDA Trigger Matrix in the VDA 6.2 Manual - Interpretation and Use VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 3
P Internal Audit Matrix Process Query ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 38
M AS9101F Clause. 3.7 Planned Activities - Process Evaluation matrix AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
Colin Transition Matrix for ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 37
Q Looking for Cross Functional Matrix of Medical Device Regulations around the World Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 5
J Machinery Directive vs. MDD Comparison Matrix wanted EU Medical Device Regulations 6
B Looking for a Y-Shaped / 3-way Matrix Template (Excel or Visio) Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 7
C Document Numbering Matrix showing how to number all documents by type Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
L ISO 9001:2015 Correlation Matrix & Change Summary ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
M Correlation matrix of ISO 13485 and other country regulations Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 3
M QAM (Quality Assurance Matrix) for a sterilization process Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 1
S Quality Management Systems Matrix ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7

Similar threads

Top Bottom