So preventive action has different meanings depending on context.
You are correct the for a Corrective action, the action taken to prevent recurrence is part of Corrective action.
BUT - and this is critical - per the ORIGINAL definitions for COQ actions taken to Prevent recurrence do go into prevention costs. They do not go into the cost of failure. Only things like scrap, rework, screening, logistic costs of recall etc go into failure costs. Timing is irrelevant in COQ
ISO buggered the definitions AFTER COQ was ‘introduced’.
Putting the cost of actions to prevent recurrence into the failure
Cost is counterproductive. Not just wrong. They are things you should have done in the beginning and then the failure and its associated costs wouldn’t happen. I have heard too many people cry that the cost prevent recurrence is too high - higher than the failure costs themselves. In my 40+ years of doing this the only time I have ever seen this is 1) when the causal mechanism was not known and someone guessed at an expensive solution that didn’t work because they guessed and 2) when a truly single isolated thing went wrong and its severity and cost were trivial. Rare in my experience.
ISO eliminated the term Preventative Action for several reasons. Let’s not drag it back from the oblivion it deserves.
