"On the job training" as a response to how someone was trained?

[RoxaneB]

For that have been grandfathered in to a position/function, using the results/outcomes of the processes can be an easy and already-in-place to help demonstrate competence. If I'm trained on Process X and there are no defects (or my defect rate is meeting the acceptable target), then it sounds like I'm pretty competent at my job. If, however, I do Process X and my defect rate or customer complaints attributed to my process are high, my competency may be called into question.

Building upon my earlier post from this thread...

I sometimes believe people become so focused on each individual clause that they miss the connections and correlations between them. It's a Business (or Quality) Management System.

A System can be defined as:

...a regularly interacting or interdependent group of items forming a unified whole.

As part of an organization's BMS or QMS (and hopefully already in place to some degree before the decision to go down the route of ISO 9001), there are likely processes and tools in place to determine process outputs related to product quality, customer complaints, logistics, and so on. At the end of the day, the whole point of training is to ensure that those outputs related to product quality, customer complaints, logistics, etc. are hitting target. If targets are being achieved, then it does seem reasonable to conclude that the people performing them are competent.

There is little value, in my opinion, in creating a whole new component to the system that focuses solely on competence when the data is already there, as high-level or as granular, as you would like it to be.

Now, if targets are NOT being achieved, that doesn't necessarily mean it's a lack of competence. This is why we have that whole thing related to root cause analysis.

It's a system...not a cluster of silos...take a huge step back and look at what already exists and consider how it can be used to fulfill other requirements within the standard...while still adding value to your organization.

 

[Jim Wynne]

No one has said that training alone is evidence of competence. You have me very confused re: your posts. Quite the opposite.

We're confusing "evidence" with "proof." Training is evidence of competence but not proof. In other words, there are multiple components in a definitive conclusion of competence. One component is training. Another might be observation and still another might be review of production records. The standard asks for evidence but doesn't specify how much or what kind.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

The endless confusion and debate of what constitutes evidence of competence will be put to rest, soon, with the imminent release of ISO/FDIS 10015 Quality management - Guidelines for competence management and people development

Oh, the

 

[Mikey324]

We just went through a 3rd party audit, just a few weeks ago. During the manufacturing portion of the audit, our auditor talked with a new hire. By new, i mean they had actually been working in the plant for 2 hours... The auditor was aware that they were so new, they likely had trouble finding the time clock. Still, he asked her what kind of training she had. Her response was "none". Then she said "sorry, i was just kidding". This made me feel better. She went on to explain what type of training she received during orientation and that she was currently receiving OJT based on the work instructions. To me, that is a great answer. The 3rd party auditor had no trouble with it, as she is being monitored by both trainer and supervisor for competency.

Employees are not all the same. Some freeze up, get tongue tied, and anxious. Its just their personality. They can answer the question to the best of their ability. They don't need to know the companies training procedure, its outside their scope, but they can put in their own words how they've been trained. The management can provide the details and records of competency.

 

[Rajasekar]

According to ISO 9001:2015 clause 7.2 competence.
This was an NC in Audit. We need to have the proper plan for training, Training material, Training to operator, Feedback from operator, Evaluation of training & rating the employee (performance evaluation). They have to maintain & retain record for every action carried on both On & Off job training.

 

[Allie305]

ok... The situation I WANT TO INQUIRE ABOUT IS. I'm NEW to THE COMPANY And I'm assigned to perform the 2nd Internal audit for this year. The QM is no longer with the company. With previous internal audits the Training forms were falsified. No legit training records are available. I have been lucky to find outdated skill matrix. If I have the supervisors update the matrix will I be in compliance with ISO 9001?

 

[tony s]

Training forms were falsified.

Do you mean training "records" were falsified? No legit training records? Documented evidence of training may not be "formally" present but are they able to produce the expected outputs? Can they demonstrate performance of the necessary competence pertinent to their assigned tasks?

 

[junior1505]

Dear ISO Man,
Well, this is the problem with Grandfathered Establishment which have been running for years together.
Ensure the following.
1. Map the Competency and skill. Define the gaps.
2. How the gaps were mitigated? by training or induction training?
3. Training needs to be identified, established and monitored, which means you need to document somewhere, where, he/she is lagging and what, when and how was the personnel trained. document evidence.
4. The documentation/reports of the process is how the effectiveness can be and/or measured to state.

 

[Randy]

Keep it simple, fess up about the falsification, and initiate a corrective action that has a good short term fix and move on. Don't let this be your whole life

 

[Allie305]

Do you mean training "records" were falsified? No legit training records? Documented evidence of training may not be "formally" present but are they able to produce the expected outputs? Can they demonstrate performance of the necessary competence pertinent to their assigned tasks?