Severity Rating CORRECTIVE ACTIONS - Opinions Wanted Please

W

Wullie23

#1
Team,

Really interested to know how industries/organisations prioritise their Corrective Actions in terms of Critical / Major / Minor e.t.c or a 1, 2 or 3 system and then define specific timelines to prioritise the implementation of these actions to prevent recurrence.

Thoughts encouraged and apprieciated.

Thanks
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mikishots

Trusted Information Resource
#2
Team,

Really interested to know how industries/organisations prioritise their Corrective Actions in terms of Critical / Major / Minor e.t.c or a 1, 2 or 3 system and then define specific timelines to prioritise the implementation of these actions to prevent recurrence.

Thoughts encouraged and apprieciated.

Thanks
Where I work, there is no distinction. While this info may be of use for our external auditors (AS9100C, using PEARs and OEIs) for their audits, if the finding is written clearly enough there is no need for ranking.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#3
Team,

Really interested to know how industries/organisations prioritise their Corrective Actions in terms of Critical / Major / Minor e.t.c or a 1, 2 or 3 system and then define specific timelines to prioritise the implementation of these actions to prevent recurrence.

Thoughts encouraged and apprieciated.

Thanks
Without knowing more about the size of your company or its business, I would say that if you have so many corrective actions to do that categorization or rating is required, you have too many corrective actions. This might be because you have too many nonconformities or because you're invoking CA inappropriately. Also, if you have a continually high number of CAs to do, it means that CA probably isn't effective.

Take a step back and try to see what the cause of all the CAs is and what you can do to reduce the number.
 
C

CATERAF

#4
I agree with Jim Wynne - I'd say you have too many CA requests if you need to be prioritising them.

However, if you are in a pressured environment and MUST categorise some infront of others, then I would try to make as few a distinctions as possible. Putting things with a low category just gives the impression that they aren't very important and can be put on the backburner. As the nature of the QMS is to continually improve you don't really want a CA item on the backburner. Perhaps just deal with critical and everything else. Critical should be rare and hence there should still be minimal categorising. Again though, it's not adviseable. Everything in CA is important because it means you have nonconformances that are reoccuring/likely to reoccur. You don't want to dilly dally about dealing with them because the quality of your product/service is affected.
 

sagai

Quite Involved in Discussions
#5
I cannot agree better than the replies already posted herein.

The distinction I have seen is slightly different.
It is not about severities, but the way it tend to be solved and as such there are CAs likely to be solved by a one time correction, some others requires comprehensive handling and root cause analysis to identify the corrective actions themselves, other "set of" CAs likely requires also to initiate based on their content preventative actions.
Could be another subset of corrective actions, those are considered as non CAs, due to human error.
Cheers!
 
P

phloQS

#6
In our company we have a small difference between CAs which just belong to one departement and CAs which affect more than one departement. These are actions where the actions have to follow a different workflow. Surveillance has to be tighter. But the way is always the same:
1. identify the nonconformance/ the influence of nonconformance
2. Root-cause analysis
3. Immediate action necessary or not?
4. Proposal for action/ approval for action
5. Implement action
6. Check adequacy of action

Priorisation is time, when CA occurs. FIFO principle.

regards

phloQS
 
P

phloQS

#8
This depends on the nonconformance. Auditing the process where nonconformance occurs is the normal way we check the effectivness. When result of the audit is that there are no more nonconformities the action was effective. If you have a CA for example "Training action is poorly documented in different departements" I would first check the influence on the processes with poor training documentation, than improve the training procedure, train the persons on the new procedure, and after a while check the result: Are there any undocumented trainings yet?- If there are any: the CA was ineffective; If there are not any: CA was effective or there were no training anymore:D.

regards

phloQS
 
C

CATERAF

#9
Well ideally the nonconformance shouldn't occur again... thus, some CAs can take a while to be deemed as effective because you have to wait to determine if the nonconformance resurfaces. Say, for example, that you felt that the nonconformance is likely to occur everytime you do X procedure. If you thought you might do X procedure 20 times in 2 months, that is sufficient to determine if the nonconformance occurs again. Then you'd just be checking the outcomes from those 20 procedures. If it passes all, you know the CA was effective.

Other nonconformances are less clear cut and may just be reduced, and as long as you can find a way to show/measure that, then that counts as checking if it's effective.

Audits are another way to check too because you're measuring how well something is working. Thus, your audit should tell you there are zero nonconformities and you know it was effective.

"Insect Warface" posted the following methods for looking at Non-conforming product control.

N/C Product Control:
  • Scrap & Defect rates/cost
  • Physical inventory accuracy (useful if misplaced parts are becoming problematic)
  • Cost of Poor Quality (this can be anything related to detrimental performance which affects your product quality)
These two websites have a little bit of information too if that helps:
http://www.iqps.net/iqps/pdf/CorrectiveActionArticle.pdf
http://www.qualitydigest.com/inside...rifying-effectiveness-corrective-action.html#
 

sagai

Quite Involved in Discussions
#10
My apology for hanging on this subject.

When result of the audit is that there are no more nonconformities the action was effective.
It raises one question in my mind that how is it possible to ensure that the audit is comprehensive enough and it blindly checks the origin of all the earlier non conformities without knowing exactly the nature of those ...
Moreover if there is a non conformity as part of the upcoming audit, how do you evaluate its relation the the effectiveness of the earlier CAs without considering all the CAs raised in history for that area before ...
I have my doubts about this approach.


"Training action is poorly documented in different departements"
I am wondering if it is a non conformity to raise?

Many thanks, Cheers
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Chennaiite FMEA Severity Rating for Potential Manufacturing Effect mentioned in the FMEA manual FMEA and Control Plans 9
J DFMEA SOD Rating Scale - Severity, Occurance, and Detection FMEA and Control Plans 1
S FMEA Severity Rating - Will a Process Design Change also Change the Severity Rating? FMEA and Control Plans 21
E FMEA Severity, Occurrence, and Detection Rating - I am in need of some examples FMEA and Control Plans 19
T Process FMEA (Failure Modes Effects Analysis) Severity Rating and RPN IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 17
R DFMEA/PFMEA mitigation of high severity (9-10) in low volume products IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
silentmonkey How to measure severity if my product is designed for emergency use and failure would result in death? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 9
J On PFMEA for danger labels - Label always should be assigned severity 10 ? FMEA and Control Plans 3
S The Severity of a Medical Device Hazard - Risk Analysis Clarification ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 6
MrTetris Informational Risk Register - Same hazardous situation, different severity of harms ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 7
A PFMEA severity score different applications FMEA and Control Plans 11
X Customer Service FMEA - Specifically Customer Care / Severity Rankings Service Industry Specific Topics 3
D How to fill a Process FMEA - Three columns - Severity, occurrence and Detection FMEA and Control Plans 16
R DFMEA Severity 9-10 with Occurrence 3 and Detection 3 - Actions FMEA and Control Plans 3
S What should the FMEA Severity for SC & CC Characteristics be? FMEA and Control Plans 4
N AIAG 4th ed. FMEA Manual "Fit" Changed to "Appearance" - Fit severity? FMEA and Control Plans 2
G Severity in Process FMEA for Rework Process FMEA and Control Plans 1
O PFMEA - Reducing Severity (S) Ranking - Manufacturing Process Design Changes FMEA and Control Plans 4
S FMEA's - Severity and Classification of Print Characteristics FMEA and Control Plans 1
N Risk Severity Estimation for Medical Devices as per ISO 14971 ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 12
C Determining PFMEA Severity for Armored Parts FMEA and Control Plans 5
C FMEA DOGMA about Severity - Am I right or Wrong? FMEA and Control Plans 2
K 4th Edition AIAG FMEA Occurrence, Severity and Detection Criteria for Plastics FMEA and Control Plans 1
F Risk = Likelihood * Severity - Can we mitigate the Severity? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 41
M Severity Reduction in a Design FMEA (DFMEA) FMEA and Control Plans 25
E Risk Management selection Probability of Occurrence and Severity ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 17
S Severity of 9 or 10 should be identified as Special characteristic? FMEA and Control Plans 10
G Internal vs. External PFMEA Severity Rankings FMEA and Control Plans 12
R Risks which must be Distinctly Identified - Harm, Hazard, Severity ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 7
C Severity of Effect on Process (Manufacturing/Assembly Effect) Scrap or Reworking FMEA and Control Plans 3
H DFMEA Severity Ranking of Non-Compliance to EMC Standards FMEA and Control Plans 2
P Chemical Purity Testing - FMEA Severity Scale FMEA and Control Plans 2
T FMEA Severity 9 &10 - Example of "with warning?" FMEA and Control Plans 6
E Harms Severity Scoring - Combination of Hazards ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 4
B The Distribution that represents the Severity of Nonconformances Nonconformance and Corrective Action 2
A AIAG Design FMEA Severity Rankings - Noncompliance Government Regulation? FMEA and Control Plans 9
D Severity or Occurrence? Performing an FMEA on Motorcycle Operation FMEA and Control Plans 9
L FMEA Occurrence, Severity and Detection Criteria FMEA and Control Plans 3
I Ford FMEA requirements for Severity and Occurrence Rankings Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
G FMEA Severity Ranking for an Automotive Audio System FMEA and Control Plans 9
kedarg6500 FMEA Severity Scale - Higher for Failure at Customer's or End-Customer's place? FMEA and Control Plans 19
M FMEA Severity Ratings for Health Care Information System FMEA and Control Plans 10
C Does the PFMEA Severity have to match the DFMEA Severity? FMEA and Control Plans 3
P Measuring Severity of Construction Nonconformance Report Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
L Standard for process control level depending on gravity (severity)? FMEA and Control Plans 7
I Defining a Severity Level of a non-conformance Nonconformance and Corrective Action 13
Y Severity, Occurrence and Detection FMEA Ranking Tables - Guidelines? FMEA and Control Plans 8
L FMEA - Should a severity of 9 or 10 be always followed by recommended actions? FMEA and Control Plans 2
J Severity of Finding for "Past Due Gage" found on the shop floor General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 40
S FMEA Severity of 9 or 10 - Shower does not operate FMEA and Control Plans 13

Similar threads

Top Bottom