Some questions on Management Review

[rogerpenna]

What are requirements in terms of "records" of management review? What must I show an auditor and what are common auditors requests that you have gone through but argued against?

The Management Review Agenda... it's basically always the same? Meaning, the inputs?

For example, the agenda would have the item "Results of audits, including; Internal, supplier, third party", but not necessarily the results right? I mean, the results might be checked online on our Internal Audit system and discussed, so writing down the results in the Agenda seem extra bureaucracy not needed, correct?

Therefore, the Management Review Agenda, considering it always must have several fixed topics, it's almost like a template, as the agenda will repeat. Do you have the same opinion?


Ok, so what is left as requirement to SHOW the auditor? Just showing that the Management Review TOOK PLACE? (agenda plus date, meeting number, atendees)

Should it contain a full meeting minute telling what was argued about every agenda item, even if just "Ok. Management aknowledged and agreed with his item"?

Or just action items and things that need to change?




Aside from that, management has meetings with different departments all the time. It always seemed a bit overkill to have a meeting with all departments to discuss Management Review items. So it hasn´t happened AFAIK in the last 10 years at least. It's usually only Quality Department + Management. Results of the meeting might result in smaller more specific meetings with heads of different departments.

 

[John Predmore]

The details of what ISO 9001 requires of a Management Review is cited in section 9.3. There is a list of topics (the "inputs") to be covered (9.3.2) and a list of deliverables (the so-called outputs, that is, decisions and actions related to the list in 9.3.3). The last sentence in 9.3.3 says to retain documented information of the results. That would be the outputs. The auditor will be looking for evidence that the organization's major challenges and problems (which he becomes aware of) did receive suitable review and appropriate action at the management review. It would be wise to retain a record of what was discussed even when no action was taken, otherwise how would you demonstrate all the required inputs were covered?

At my company, after the M.R. meeting concluded, we retained a PDF copy of the Powerpoint slide deck prepared for the meeting, to include the addition of commentary, notes and decisions which were typed in real time on blank Powerpoint slides during the meeting. Other than correcting trivial errors which were uncovered, and inserting additional detail which was requested to be added to the report, there was minimal effort to complete the meeting record. It could usually be finalized the day of or the day after the meeting completed.

The problem with claiming you met the requirement with separate department meetings throughout the year is the documentation is fragmented and difficult to review and comprehend within the time constraints of a certification audit. The third-party auditor will likely ask that all required elements in scope of a thorough management review be consolidated into one annual document package, for auditing purposes.

 

[Randy]

Clearly defined in the standard, nothing more, nothing less. Look at everything in 9.3 as a checklist and just do it, don't make it harder than it is.

 

[Randy]

The third-party auditor will likely ask that all required elements in scope of a thorough management review be consolidated into one annual document package, for auditing purposes.

And you can tell that 3rd party auditor to show you where it's required to do so. Let the sucker work for his lunch.

 

[Golfman25]

The details of what ISO 9001 requires of a Management Review is cited in section 9.3. There is a list of topics (the "inputs") to be covered (9.3.2) and a list of deliverables (the so-called outputs, that is, decisions and actions related to the list in 9.3.3). The last sentence in 9.3.3 says to retain documented information of the results. That would be the outputs. The auditor will be looking for evidence that the organization's major challenges and problems (which he becomes aware of) did receive suitable review and appropriate action at the management review. It would be wise to retain a record of what was discussed even when no action was taken, otherwise how would you demonstrate all the required inputs were covered?

At my company, after the M.R. meeting concluded, we retained a PDF copy of the Powerpoint slide deck prepared for the meeting, to include the addition of commentary, notes and decisions which were typed in real time on blank Powerpoint slides during the meeting. Other than correcting trivial errors which were uncovered, and inserting additional detail which was requested to be added to the report, there was minimal effort to complete the meeting record. It could usually be finalized the day of or the day after the meeting completed.

The problem with claiming you met the requirement with separate department meetings throughout the year is the documentation is fragmented and difficult to review and comprehend within the time constraints of a certification audit. The third-party auditor will likely ask that all required elements in scope of a thorough management review be consolidated into one annual document package, for auditing purposes.

We use a checklist that we fill out if something is discussed during one of our meetings. So for example, if we are dealing with supplier issues, we’ll document that with a description in the checklist. That way our results are consolidated and easily retrieved.

 

[Ed Panek]

We include all the requirements of 9001 of course. Something to consider is you have all top management in a room at the same time. Thats not to be wasted. A question normally takes weeks or months to get on leadership scope could be answered in minutes.

 

[rogerpenna]

It would be difficult to put all top management in the room at the same time. If I did, I would have to make the presentation even more concise than it already is.

Although our Agenda covers all the topics, sincerely, we dont cover stuff that is right, just to say ok. If I did, top management would just say they have better stuff to do. I pre filter problems and things that require management decisions or guidance.

Which means that realistically, we may skip entire topics required by the ISO.

I just mention them like "Interested Parties, everything ok... Past Audits... so, we had a few nonconformities already being treated, but this one requires your attention"....



I never go through a Powerpoint. I access the data directly on our computer systems... Risks, NonConformities, etc.

I am thinking of "automating" even the Management Review template itself, so I will have links already filtering and ordering risks by rating, non conformities by this and that parameter, indicators by process or interested parties, etc, etc.

 

[Chrisx]

Typically, you would define a minimum quorum required. You don't have to have all top management attend, but you need to define in the QMS what is the minimum attendance required. Try to build in some flexibility, so you don't trap yourself into a nonconformity.

 

[Ed Panek]

"The adoption of a quality management system is a strategic decision for an organization..."

Strategy is discussed, organized, and planned by executive leadership

Other strategic decisions companies make are:

Who is our customer?
Why should you use our product?
Whats the value of our product? Price, performance, safety?


Curious, what parts of the standard do they find uninteresting? Setting quality objectives? Customer feedback? External provider performance? Non conformity? Whats more top of the mind then what your customers think about you?

 

[rogerpenna]

"The adoption of a quality management system is a strategic decision for an organization..."

Strategy is discussed, organized, and planned by executive leadership

Other strategic decisions companies make are:

Who is our customer?
Why should you use our product?
Whats the value of our product? Price, performance, safety?

some of these are decisions discussed at Strategic Planning meetings, not on Management Review
others are discussed on weekly meetings between management and the engineers, about costs, pricing and other worksites discussions

we don´t lack meetings in the company. Which is exactly why the Management Review ends up being superfluous.

But to directly answer your question, the Operations Director (which is also a minor partner) only participates in meetings directly related to Operations and won´t care to spend his time in meetings where I will list every single time the Interested Parties (which everybody already knows) and if their interests are being met.
He already gets most of this info through other reports.

Curious, what parts of the standard do they find uninteresting? Setting quality objectives? Customer feedback? External provider performance? Non conformity? Whats more top of the mind then what your customers think about you?

What our customers think about us is not on the top of the mind. 95% of our customers are government contracts at municipal and state level.

By LAW, what customers think about us doesn´t influence our past or future contracts.

We can make the best ever job, have the best ever customer service, have zero profit just to satisfy our customer.

Next bidding process, SAME customer, another company gives a 1% smaller budget, they win the contract.