Preventive Action Effectiveness - How can any preventive action be 'proven'?

L

Laura - 2003

#31
Exactly

Eileen,

I agree wholeheartedly!

This is a wicked post, I am following this avidly!

Lau.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

CarolX

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
#32
toss in my nickels worth

Great thread going here. I was really interested in the question, can PA be measured for effectiveness. I would really have to say no. If the event you were trying to prevent does occur, do you toss out the PA?

An example.....

We do machine maintence on a VERY regular basis. We have daily, weekly, monthly and yearly item that we perform. We just completed our yearly maintenance on the turrets for our punch presses. All of this to reduce the possiblity of machine downtime for repairs. But even through all our good efforts, we will loose machine time because of failure of a component beyond our control (i.e. a relay inside the control box, a bearing in the brake siezes) and we could loose up to a week of machine time (sometimes more). Do we claim our PA was ineffective because we had downtime. No, we do not. Do we take corrective measures to reduce downtime? Yes we do (i.e. keeping a stock of relays on hand). Do we now call this CA?

When does CA become PA, and the other way around? The lines can begin to blurr.

CarolX
 

E Wall

Just Me!
Super Moderator
#33
Never TOSS records - Update or Cancel with comments!

Response to "If the event you were trying to prevent does occur, do you toss out the PA?"

Don't toss it out, but do update your records to reflect that the PA wasn't effective. Then reference that PA # in your CA to close the loop (and create not only a problem solving path but also an audit trail).

Carol you stated "loose machine time because of failure of a component beyond our control"

Does this mean that the component failings isn't an item covered under your PM system?

Example of failure of the equipment PM system (at my location) is when downtime indicates the frequency in which your are performing PM is not adequate (resulting in extra unplanned repair time).
This could also be when having a problem with component that isn't on the PM but is recurring.

Better explanation? Eileen
 
#34
CA? PA? PM? AM?

Okay Carol Let's try this. You replace the bearings because you know that they are towards the end of their useful life (predictive maintenance). Two weeks later, one of the new bearing seizes (defective part). Was your PM effective? Was your PM PA that AM? :confused:

One reason I started this thread is I too have trouble seeing the blurry line. The longer this thread lasts, the more confused I am (and I thought I reached my maximum confusion saturation point) :bonk:
 
D

D.Scott

#35
Curious-er and curious-er

Hmmm - It would seem to me that if your PA failed, it could no longer be classed as a PA - it would have to be a corrective action because of the failure. So the proof of an ineffective preventive action is actually a corrective action generator.

Would logic have it that in order to reduce corrective actions you should avoid preventive actions? After all the PA was a gamble in the first place trying to prevent the potential of something which has never happened from happening.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave ......."

Dave
 

SteelMaiden

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
#36
This is probably going to just confuse things more, but that's never stopped me before...:vfunny: :biglaugh: :eek:

I look at our entire preventive maintenance as preventive action (notice that singular, it will make sense as I ramble on). I think to look at each and every pm as a pa lends itself to the situations described above. If you pm and have a defective part (no way for you to know that) it doesn't really reflect on your system. Now if every one of those parts that you change in the year are defective, it may point to some deficiency in your purchasing and SQA. Does this make sense?
 
U

Unregistered

#37
I'd say if your PA failed it would no longer be a PA, it would be a 'waste of effort'.

Ineffective PA's dont generate CA's themselves, unless the PA actually caused the problem. In the case of the new bearing siezing it wasnt the PA of replacing the bearing that failed, it was the quality of the bearing itself. Your CA might be to purchase better bearings in future.

Hey if I say that I have taken a PA by painting the roof of my house white to avoid a direct meteorite hit is my PA so far successful ?

Yes it is ludicrous.
 

RoxaneB

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
#38
Greetings from one of the newest members to the Cove! Here's my 2 cents worth (that's 0.02 CDN, though)....

My organization has four possible reactions to a situation. The "index" for these four options is detailed in our Nonconformance and OFI Guidelines Matrix, which details the parameters for each of the options. When a situation occurs, we refer to the Matrix which will provide guidance on how much action is required. If there is more than one possible option to take (things aren't always black and white in the land of ISO, are they?), we take the "higher" route.

1) A "Nonconformance" is a simple discrepancy with the system, requires some form of corrective action, and life goes on. A quick-and-dirty fix to an issue easily addressed.

EXAMPLE: A small windstorm blows through your trailer park and results in a few garbage cans impaling themselves upon your mobile abode. Action? Tape some Spam Cans on your home - scientific studies have shown this to be an effective deterent against strong winds.

2) "Corrective Action" is required when there is a break down within the system or when the item is rather extensive and will require the use of various problem-solving techniques. We document the Root Cause, Action Plan (and Results), and the Verification Plan (and Results) to demonstrate that the discrepancy has been addressed appropriately.

EXAMPLE: A tornado rips through your trailer park and, for reasons unknown to us, Mother Nature decides that your palatial residence should be a riverboat instead, and places you in the middle of the nearby lake. You buy a new and improved trailer (this one already has the pink flamingos on the front "lawn"), and tape Spam Cans all over it, and even duct tape the perimeter of your "property". As we all know, nothing beats duct tape. Your verification plan is that no tornado will touch your home for a period of three months.

3) "Preventive Action" is implemented when there is an adverse trend. Our Key (Performance) Indicators are monitored on the stop-light system (red, yellow, green). Two consecutive yellows, followed by a red means that a PAR is required. This system was implemented before I arrived, and while I don't find it's the greatest, it's not an item I'm will to change at the moment. (bigger fish to fry within our QMS :) ) Root Cause and Action Plan is usually easy in this area. For the Verification Plan, as this based upon an adverse trend, we designate x-number of months as the time to monitor the issue and verify that our actions have reversed the negative trend.

EXAMPLE: The number of tornados that have ripped the walls off of your home and resulted in your fellow trailer park residents seeing you decked out in a mud mask and pink curlers has increased over the past several years. You decide to tape Spam Cans to your trailer, and will monitor if this adverse trend reverses.

4) And finally, we come to an "Opportunity for Improvement." This is for items where the system is working beautifully, but there may be another way to make it more effective and/or efficient. Root Cause is not possible here, neither is a Verification Plan. Action Plan and Results, though, are possible. The recipient of an OFI is to analyze it and determine if it is feasible/practical/appropriate and has some form of ROI. Depending upon the analysis, the OFI is either accepted or rejected. If accepted, an Action Plan is developed and the results documented. This is how we're addressing the Continual Improvement aspect of ISO 9001:2000.

EXAMPLE: You've survived countless tornados and ridicule from your neighbours (they just can't forget the sight of you in pink curlers)..but, hey, you're still alive. OFI here...move. And the local real estate agent has heard about some lovely condominium buildings being built in the Everglades.

Rather simplistic examples, I realize, but it's Sunday, the sun is shining, and there's plenty of snow to play in. Life doesn't get much better than this!
 
J
#39
Boy I am glad were not all Lawyers.

Just got around to reading this thread, and keep getting hit by fractured cliches.
"How many ways can you split a hair." or
"How many PA's fit on the end of a pin.

IMHO:
PA's are mostly undertaken as a part of some sort of advanced planning. This is where we undertake to determine potential problems, and risks and to put in place tools to monitor output to prevent problems.

CA's follow only when the output of a process becomes non-conforming.

For example. My control plan calls for monitoring a process output. This is a prevenative action. But at some point during the run we produce bad parts. The failure is caught because we are monitoring. (good thing) However our origional assumption about the process was incorrect and we took readings too infrequently. (Bad thing) Now we institute a CA. We isolate the bad parts and increase the frequency of readings. At the new levels we find that we are able to detect when the process is trending off and are able to correct before non-conformance occurs.

Now, 6 months later I prepare a different job which must pass through the same process. Because of my new understanding of the process, monitoring is at the new, more frequent level. This prevents any non-conformances in this NEW PRODUCT. This is again a preventive action.

The difference between the two is that the first time, the PA was not effective. However, because of the CA taken at that time, the PA on this new job is effective.

It may not be the book definition, but it lets me sleep at night:cool:


James
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Q Evaluating Effectiveness of a Preventive Action after Closure Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 7
M Measuring Corrective and Preventive Action System Effectiveness Nonconformance and Corrective Action 32
T Documenting Effectiveness of Corrective/Preventive Action Nonconformance and Corrective Action 8
J CAPA (corrective action preventive action) Effectiveness - Medical Device Industry Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
E Audit Program and CAPA (Corrective Action - Preventive Action) Effectiveness ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
L Separate Corrective Action and Preventive Action Procedures ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 13
R Non conformance (NC) or Corrective & Preventive action (CAPA) CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 7
C If it doesn't prevent a non-conformance, is it a preventive action? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
R Evaluating the need for preventive action Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
B Stakeholder Initiated Corrective and Preventive Action Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 5
B Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) A Key Process of the Quality Management System Dec 17... Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 0
M Training in 8D Problem Solving as a Preventive Action? Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 9
J If Corrective and Preventive Action were truly Effective IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
R Preventive Action - confusing ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
Q Preventive Action - How to call the prevention when there is not a clause ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
somashekar The Preventive Action Demystified ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
A Preventive Action and Risk Assessment Audit Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 5
K CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) - ISO 13485 Nonconformance and Corrective Action 1
J Software and Methods for Tracking CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) items US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
A Preventive Action or Corrective Action - Paper cuts Nonconformance and Corrective Action 14
M Corrective and Preventive Action - Prevent Recurrence is not Preventive Action? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 24
K Definition Correction, Corrective Action and Preventive Action - Definition of terms Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 28
F Software recommendations for corrective and preventive action Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 2
K Corrective and preventive action for Non Conformance on PFMEA FMEA and Control Plans 30
B Struggling With Writing PA (Preventive Action) Procedure Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 11
E Can anyone share a Preventive Action Form or Template ? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
W Compliance to 8.5.2 Corrective action 8.5.3 Preventive action ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
P Customer Complaint Preventive Action Assistance Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
T Corrective Action and Preventive Action in a Holding Company Nonconformance and Corrective Action 6
M What is Preventive Action taken as part of a Corrective Action? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
MarilynJ6354 Definition Improvement Suggestion vs. Preventive Action - Clear Definitions and Differences Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 6
C The prudence of combining non-conformance reports with corrective/preventive action Nonconformance and Corrective Action 10
N Corrective and Preventive Action in 8D Problem Solving Nonconformance and Corrective Action 21
B Near Miss = Preventive Action Request (PAR)? Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 1
M Boosting a Preventive Action System Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 2
D CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) Flow Chart example wanted Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
J Can Corrective Action be the same as Preventive Action? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 33
sagai Preventive Action vs. Corrective Action as defined by 21CFR820 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 10
R Does FDA require monitoring competitor device failures for preventive action? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
C Nonconformance, Corrective and Preventive Action Procedure(s)? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
Q Recommendations for criteria on creating a CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
L How to deal with too many CARs (Corrective Action Requests), PARs (Preventive Action) Nonconformance and Corrective Action 25
B Certification Body insist on evidence of Preventive Action during Stage 2 audit ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
P Lessons Learned Identification - Potential Preventive Action Responsibilities Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 4
N Combining both Corrective Action and Preventive action procedures into one SOP Nonconformance and Corrective Action 4
T Action plan: How to manage actions, preventive actions and opportunities of improv? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
sagai Should Corrective Action be segregated from Preventive Action? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
B Electronic Corrective/Preventive Action Report for our Customer Service Department Nonconformance and Corrective Action 9
B Corrective and Preventive Action Procedure for Customer Service Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
Q Recover a Damaged CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action) Project Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom