Review of the effectiveness of corrective actions

An interesting case happened 2 weeks ago. I evaluated the final readiness for the certification audit of the quality management system according to ISO 9001, analyzed the compliance with the requirements of the standard for corrective actions.
The customer demonstrated a table with monitoring the implementation of corrective actions, the column “effectiveness” was not filled.

To my question about the reasons, I got the question from quality responsible person back: “And how can I evaluate the effectiveness from developing a job description?”

It was not immediately clear what was the reason for misunderstanding. When we figured out, several errors “surfaced”:

  • an action has been assigned to eliminate the non-compliance, not a corrective action. Nonconformity was “no responsibility for function XXX” , then the action came “to define responsibility in the job description”.
  • the need to develop a corrective action was not evaluated. That is, the approach and reporting form , in principle, does not make possible not to define the corrective action. It means, for each nonconformity must be one or more corrective action.

    Of course, in this case it is not possible to choose a method for conducting an adequate and understandable review of the effectiveness. True, this trial did not solve the problem for all interested sites. The customer has its own customers who, in their audits, require the appointment of corrective actions for each non-compliance🤔. For them, they decided to put in the column “action effectively.”


Other news


What is the task?

The audit target:

How many people are in the audit area?

What is the training topic?

How many days the training should last as per your opinion?

Form of the training?

The level of participants’ knowledge?

Leave your contact information and get 15 % discount offer

Discount 15%