Performance Indicators for Document Control

[tony s]

We usually establish performance indicators for the core processes such as production yield, acceptance rate, etc. We also tried to determine performance indicators for internal auditing. I would like to ask my fellow covers, what would you recommend if I have to determine performance indicators for document control?

 

[Steve Prevette]

Cycle time for processing document changes

Percent of in use documents that are correct version (random sample)

Usability of documents (observations of workers using the documents - could they actually be used as written)

If periodic reviews are required, percent done on time

Opinion surveys from those who have to use the documents

Events assigned documentation related causes (ie poor documentation contributed to causing the event).

No. of active procedures being maintained

No. of revisions/changes processed

 

[drgnrider]

Number of end-user who can actually access/obtain current version, (not just "Oh, it is somewhere on the network")?

 

[Ninja]

...monthly/weekly snapshot of documents written and pending approval.
...monthly/weekly snapshot of documents approved and pending distribution.

These are easy to get if you are using an XL or Dbase doc tracking system.

 

[hogheavenfarm]

"...monthly/weekly snapshot of documents written and pending approval..."

Be careful here, "People do what gets rewarded", if "progress" or "positive results" are keyed to this you may find yourself swimming in paperwork. It would not be a "bad" kpi if less were written than the previous month, would it? My goal here is to absolutely minimize what gets written, I spent the best part of two years undoing my predecessors spewing of documents that were not needed and never used...

 

[tony s]

Thanks for sharing. I'm hoping that other fellow covers will still provide additional samples.

 

[Ninja]

"...monthly/weekly snapshot of documents written and pending approval..."

Be careful here, "People do what gets rewarded", if "progress" or "positive results" are keyed to this you may find yourself swimming in paperwork.

Totally agree, thanks for pointing it out.

A snapshot of docs 'written and pending approval' (in my book) should be measured by how LOW it is.
These are docs that are written, but not approved yet because the approval system is running too slow.

'snapshot of documents approved and pending distribution.'
This also should be low.
This measures how many docs are ready to be distributed, but aren't yet because the distribution system is lagging.

Reward for writing as many documents as you can? May it never be...

 

[BoardGuy]

Don’t error in your thinking that you must develop a measurement for each clause of ISO 9001:2015. Your organization is required to define measurements for each process of your system (see 4.4). [FONT=&quot]We treat document control as process control because it exists within every process of the organization. Because it is not an organization defined process (4.4) it does not require a measurement.[/FONT]

It also appears that based on the ISO/IAF “9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on Processes” (published 13 January, 2016) that not all measurements need to be quantitative. This authoritative document clearly states: “that a process must have defined objectives (but they need not necessarily be quantitative measurable)”.

 

[QAMTY]

I defined only one and it works.
Number of error found max 4 per month,auditing 4 processes.
I use the list of documents,I print it and take the documents belonging to each peocess,then go with a member of the process and ask him to show me the title name of document as well the revision
Normally I find errors in version and the title of the document.
Hope this helps.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

what would you recommend if I have to determine performance indicators for document control?

Unless documentation has been (historically) a source of problems leading to product conformity and/or customer dissatisfaction, I would NOT attempt to devise performance indicators for document control, as this is not a core process and, in my opinion, it would amount to busy work and unnecessary bureaucracy.

On the other hand, if documentation HAS led to quality problems, we should use the actual failure modes in the document control monitoring process. I.e. If we've had nonconformities due to obsolete process specs being used, existence of obsolete documents should be a meaningful indicator to be tracked.
In other words, devising indicators that have no connection with your context makes not much sense.