Question about 4.18

[monkey]

I believe that most companies utilize an Excel spreadsheet to create a training matrix for satisfying the 4.18 requirement. What would you think of having written job descriptions for each job, and having a signoff from each individuals supervisor (periodically) stating that they have demonstrated adequate skill in the specific job requirements. Could this replace utilizing a matrix? I don't see why not, but am looking for opinions from others. Thanks!

 

[Al Dyer]

I don't think it would be a problem per se, but having a matrix is easy to keep up, very handy to use as a reference, and can help streamline the audit process.

Most companies I know use the job descriptions and also keep a matrix.

 

[monkey]

Thanks for the reply. Not using a matrix would be much easier, but we wouldn't have a verification of training dates, etc. that a matrix typically contains. As long as we have a periodic review of training effectiveness (4.18.1), we should be covered, correct? I guess it would depend on one's interpretation of "appropriate records of training." We currently have a matrix that was started by the previous Quality Manager, but it is very cumbersome. I think it takes too much time to maintain and too many possibilities for error that an auditor might catch. Any other opinions?

 

[Greg Maggard]

One of the items that I have been working on here at my plant involves training records. We have developed some different types : 1. matrix and agreeded upon 1 style. 2. Work Instruction (WI) or SOP's will be issued and the originals will be signed on the back.
This will show who is trained in specific jobs. Now every time we update or revise a WI we know who needs to be trained as well as which Team members are eligable to work at that process. This builds in accountability and responsibility for the Mgt. and Team Members. The Third party Auditor loved this Idea. No new paper work created. All we had to do was match the training matrix to the WI to verify training (SAY it! Do it! Prove it!) then check the actual process.