A preventive action is a process
for detecting potential problems or non conformance’s and eliminating them. The
process includes:
• Identify the potential problem or
non conformance
• Find the cause of the potential
problem
• Develop a plan to prevent the
occurrence.
• Implement the plan.
The
inputs to the Preventive Action request process may include:
1. Reports from internal and
external audits
2. Corrective Actions Requests
3. Production scrap reports
4. Nonconforming materials reports
5. Additions to equipment lists
6. New processes / product
requirements
7. Employee suggestions / input on
PAR forms
Preventive action inputs are analyzed
and evaluated to detect performance trends or potential problems that may
affect product quality, production costs, customer satisfaction and employee
safety. Where such potential problems are found, an action plan is
devised and implemented. The results of the actions taken are verified to
ensure effective elimination of the potential problem and controls are
initiated to prevent occurrence.
The
outputs of the Preventive Action Request process may include:
1. FMEAs
2. Control Plans
3. Calibration schedules
4. Safety training
5. Internal audit schedules
6. Design and QMS document review
7. Equipment maintenance
instructions and schedules, etc.
Preventive Action in ISO
The International Standards require
the organisation to have a documented procedure for preventive action. However,
it is worth noting that the combination of corrective action and preventive
action documented procedures into a single QMS document is acceptable, but is
not recommended. If these are combined, then it is important for the auditor to
verify that the organisation understands clearly the difference between the
intent of corrective and preventive actions.The standard requires this
documented procedure to include various important points:
1.
How
the organisation determines potential nonconformity's and their causes. Typical
examples might include:
• trend analysis for process and
product characteristics (output from the data analysis process)
• alarms to provide early warning
of approaching ‘out-of-control’ operating conditions
• monitoring of customer
perception, by both formal or informal feedback systems
• ongoing failure mode and effect
analysis for processes and products (this is a requirement of TS 16949, for the
automotive industry, for example)
• evaluation of nonconformity's
that have occurred in similar circumstances, but for other products, processes,
or other parts of the organisation, or even in other organisation; through
planning activities for both predictable situations (e.g. due to expansion,
maintenance, or personnel changes – see also ISO 9001 (Quality Management
Systems), Clause 5.4.2b)) and for unpredictable situations (e.g. naturally
occurring problems such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods etc.)
1. An evaluation of the need for
preventive action. Methods used in the evaluation could include risk analysis
approaches or failure mode and effect analysis (neither of these specific
approaches or methodologies are requirements of ISO 9001 (Quality Management
Systems).)
2. How the organisation determines
what action is required, and how it is implemented. An auditor should look for
evidence that: the organisation has analysed the causes of potential
nonconformity's (use of cause and effect diagrams and other quality tools may
be appropriate for this). The required
actions are deployed in all relevant parts of the organisation, and in a timely
manner. There are clear definitions of the responsibilities for the
identification, evaluation, implementation and review of preventive actions
4. Records of the results of the
actions taken; define what records are to be retained?. Are they appropriate,
and are they a true reflection of the results?. Are they being controlled in
accordance with ISO 9001 (Quality Management Systems) clause 4.2.4?
5. A review of the preventive
actions taken. Were the actions
effective (i.e. nonconformity prevented from occurring and were there any
additional benefits)?. Is there a need to continue with the preventive actions
the way they are?. Should they be changed, or is it necessary to plan new
actions?
There is often significant
‘philosophical’ discussion between the auditor and the organisation about where
corrective action ends, and where preventive action begins. For example, if
nonconformity is detected in process A, are actions taken to avoid future
nonconformity's in processes B, C and D preventive actions, or simply within
the scope of the corrective actions taken for process A? The auditor should
avoid being side-tracked by these discussions, and concentrate on whether or not
the actions were effective and from a professional viewpoint, such actions
would inevitably be read-across other processes. The labelling of the actions
taken is of secondary importance.
No comments:
Post a Comment