S
A recent QS9000 surveillance audit resulted in a corrective action for the following in regard to 4.16.
The finding was in our Contract Review section where our procedure requires that PO's be signed "for a record of review". The QS requirement quoted to support the write-up was in paragraph 2 of 4.16 (3rd Edition), "Quality Records shall be maintained to demonstrate conformance to specified requirements and the effective operation of the quality system." We review everything during our contract review process that includes final approval signatures from all participating personnel, but there is no signature on the PO itself after we receive it. A signed acknowledgement is sent to the customer, but...
It was part of demonstrating conformance (ensuring that the PO was reviewed & approved) and of having a quality system that operates effectively that resulted in the auditor also stating that supplier certifications such as raw material, plating, heat-treating, etc, which require certifications also require that there be a signature, initials, a stamp, or something that would provide objective evidence that the document had been reviewed and accepted (or approved). I understand that this would be important for accountability purposes, but I have a question mark as to the validity of the auditors claim.
After reading about electronic record systems in these posts I can see some possibilities to facilitate the "reviewed and approved" signoff but its going to be a bit dicey to pull together.
To sign or not to sign... I ask and thank all for your input.
Steve
[This message has been edited by Steven Truchon (edited 28 July 2000).]
The finding was in our Contract Review section where our procedure requires that PO's be signed "for a record of review". The QS requirement quoted to support the write-up was in paragraph 2 of 4.16 (3rd Edition), "Quality Records shall be maintained to demonstrate conformance to specified requirements and the effective operation of the quality system." We review everything during our contract review process that includes final approval signatures from all participating personnel, but there is no signature on the PO itself after we receive it. A signed acknowledgement is sent to the customer, but...
It was part of demonstrating conformance (ensuring that the PO was reviewed & approved) and of having a quality system that operates effectively that resulted in the auditor also stating that supplier certifications such as raw material, plating, heat-treating, etc, which require certifications also require that there be a signature, initials, a stamp, or something that would provide objective evidence that the document had been reviewed and accepted (or approved). I understand that this would be important for accountability purposes, but I have a question mark as to the validity of the auditors claim.
After reading about electronic record systems in these posts I can see some possibilities to facilitate the "reviewed and approved" signoff but its going to be a bit dicey to pull together.
To sign or not to sign... I ask and thank all for your input.
Steve
[This message has been edited by Steven Truchon (edited 28 July 2000).]