Can I include the review of documents along with management review wherein every department has to review their document and put forward the required changes.
As already advised by others, that would be a terrible idea. Try this novel approach: As you should be following the process approach to implement and improve the system, make sure the process owners understand they are responsible for ensuring the supporting documents as current and adequate. Documents exist simply to define, describe and (when necessary) record activities and processes. The process owners should be the ones responsible for ensuring the document integrity aspect for their respective areas.
If the audit program is managed the way most are, I’d totally agree. But then very few actually know how to manage an audit programe beyong keeping a CB auditor happy.
@Tagin I see your point. What made me ask this here is that I've had auditors questioned why procedures that have been last updated 6 years back was still not reviewed or revised. Although that would have been from a customer standpoint rather than a CB.
@RoxaneB This is one of the approaches that I feel to be practical and useful. The problem we face is with the distance between the document and process owners. The employees see QMS and what they they d company does as completely different entities and to close this gap is what i have to work on.
Part of the reason for doing internal audits is to verify the documents are still current. Additional checks are a redundancy. What is your internal audit program checking?
@Tagin I see your point. What made me ask this here is that I've had auditors questioned why procedures that have been last updated 6 years back was still not reviewed or revised. Although that would have been from a customer standpoint rather than a CB.
How often has the procedure for boiling an egg been reviewed or revised?
Why subject something to review when and if there's no problem to begin with? If there is then of course check things out, but if not the process becomes nothing more than "Let's fix it until it breaks"
Let’s not overlook that ISO 9001 has a number of change controls in place - documented info, design, process and so on. 9.2 uses changes to trigger internal audits. You should be linking them as a mechanism to evaluate documentation being up dated.
Let’s not overlook that ISO 9001 has a number of change controls in place - documented info, design, process and so on. 9.2 uses changes to trigger internal audits. You should be linking them as a mechanism to evaluate documentation being up dated.
Yes indeed. When changes occur in processes, product designs, customer requirements, documented information, the QMS, these should be considered as inputs to the internal audit program. Too many audit programs are set in stone and immune to such changes. Because, people think a calendar of audits is required or similar (CB auditors with weird opinions of what the standard actually requires comes to mind) the audits often miss the impact of changes and report them too long after the event and didn’t catch the undesired effects of an ineffectively implemented change.
We do not have a period review for our documents (SOPs and formats). Can I include the review of documents along with management review wherein every department has to review their document and put forward the required changes.
I implemented the reviewing of documents when auditing the processes.
The idea is that process owner take a look to documents which are rev 0 , that means that most of the times area”forgotten” nobody knows about them,
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to the use of cookies.