Definition Process Performance interpretation - Management Review Input 5.6.2 (c)

[db]

Ok, so it's another one of those "unless you've been doing this for at least 15 years, you wouldn't know what they were talking about by reading it" things.

That's something we already do. We were recently burned on missing a couple of review inputs on our 14001 side. They wanted to make sure they were covered on TS.

Thanks
Rick

Not totally. Each process really needs to have some sort of metrics so the process operators and owners know if the process is effective. That is why both clause 4 and clause 8 refers to monitoring processes. It also ties into Analysis of Data and Continual Improvement. We need to make sure that process monitoring, and where applicable measurement, is reflected in management review. One of the things management review asks is if your QMS is working. Process metrics is just one of many indicators.

 

[insect warfare]

The periodic monitoring of a process gives the measure of that process performance. That is what exactly periodic internal audits outcome gives.
Measure also means appraise, assess, evaluate, valuate. By measure I am coming to this and not to a measurement that has an unit attached to it.

I don't believe that periodic process monitoring gives a "measure" of process performance, but rather generates "evidence" of process performance which can be used to make informed decisions. And although I see where you are coming from, Somashekar, I prefer to use the definitions given to us by ISO/TC 176/SC 2, which are:

Monitor (verb) - observe and check over a period of time; maintain regular close observation over.

Measure (verb) - ascertain the size, amount or degree of (something) by comparison with a standard unit or with an object of known size.

Brian