14 replies to this topic

[Jacquie66]

Hi

 

I have been completing document change request forms, but just filing them  as hard copies approved , do I also need a log of them request forms ? 

 

it just means more reports that i think are unneceassary 

 

[FurFarmandFork]

Depends on your quality scheme. A record of some kind needs to exist of changes made to your documents,  but that can be as simple as a log with the document, date, revisions made, and why.

 

If you have another form on site that helps you out that's great, but you don't need to keep them. E.g. like leaving a post-it for a coworker, doesn't necessarily need to be a record of the request.

[Timwoodbag]

Depends on your quality scheme. A record of some kind needs to exist of changes made to your documents,  but that can be as simple as a log with the document, date, revisions made, and why.

 

If you have another form on site that helps you out that's great, but you don't need to keep them. E.g. like leaving a post-it for a coworker, doesn't necessarily need to be a record of the request.

 

I have never heard of justifying revisions, should I be adding a column to my Revision Record?

[mgourley]

You should briefly state why the document was changed (e.g., "updated sources for information about potential sources of food fraud") or "Changed frequency of sampling from quarterly to monthly".

 

Marshall

[arahman]

We have a document master list which only has the most recent version of all SOPs and Forms.

Each of the SOPs and form have their own history of revision where we list the changes and reason for change

and we also have a document change request form but we don't log the the request forms in a list format. Just keep the request forms as hard copy as you do.

We are only AIB though

[LostMyMind]

Most of my logs are in Excel.  For those, I use another tab to track the "why" of the change.  For Word, I create a little table in Word and track it there.  I just make that section non-printable.  This allows me to show overzealous auditors the why if they are so inclined to care without killing off an entire forest.  Electronic forms I haven't bothered with since changes in those are dynamic.  If someone whines about those, I'll worry about it then.

 

I consider this to be one of the stupider things to track.  If all you can find is that I didn't document when I changed the font on a form, I'm doing alright in the things that actually matter.  

 

#GotBetterThingsToDoSuchAsWasteTimeOnThisForum

 

 

 

 

 

 

[FurFarmandFork]

I have never heard of justifying revisions, should I be adding a column to my Revision Record?

It's not typically a requirement, but I find it invaluable from a  business standpoint. For example, have you ever had a procedure get changed back and forth over and over because different people saw it?

 

A great example is your sanitation stuff, you may have specifics in there that it's helpful to know the context of. E.g. I wonder why we do this every day *checks revision log* "increased sanitation to every day as mold formed in corners that operators did not notice".

[Timwoodbag]

It's not typically a requirement, but I find it invaluable from a  business standpoint. For example, have you ever had a procedure get changed back and forth over and over because different people saw it?

 

A great example is your sanitation stuff, you may have specifics in there that it's helpful to know the context of. E.g. I wonder why we do this every day *checks revision log* "increased sanitation to every day as mold formed in corners that operators did not notice".

 

Okay got it, that is useful.  But we are a small operation and all built this from the ground up together so we definitely all remember reasons for changes!  Will be useful as we continue to corporatize though.  

[Charles.C]

One (less common but occasionally met) alternative is to use Manuals in which all documents are numbered allowing only a (cumulative) Master "Register" of changes in each manual to be maintained.

 

The only major complication IMEX is where a document is changed/expanded so that the existing numbering system takes a hit.

[Jacquie66]

Thanks all for you advise, I am going for the simple approach and just keeping the forms as proof of the reason for the change, to many of us try to complicate the system by having a log for this and a log for that. 

I have a manual, procedures, policys, non conformance log for all to be logged on, from customer complaints to employee concerns, and a master document log with verison on it. 

 

for a SME i dont think we need to go over board 

 

[Hoosiersmoker]

We use a similar approach. We have a table at the end of each SOP that lists the revision number, date, changes, editor's initials and approval initials. We save previous revisions in an archive folder under the active containing folder. The footer has current revision and date, ownership, authorization, path and file and page number. Our document register then just lists: Department reference, Document name, Creation date, Last revision date and Document Location.

Revision table below:

 

Revision

Date

Description of Changes

Editor

Approved By

0

6/8/2015

New document

XYZ

ABC

1

  6/15/2016  

Validated

XYZ

ABC

1

  6/23/2017  

Validated

XYZ

ABC

1

  6/14/2018  

Reformatted Header, added File address and Page # of # to footer information, expanded this table. Validated

XYZ

ABC

1

  6/24/2019  

Validated

XYZ

ABC

   

 

       

 

       

 

       

 

       

 

       

 

   

[gemac]

Hi, 

I've took responsibility as a Quality Manager at current site a couple of years ago, with existing BRCGS Packaging Materials system in place. No issues during audits, while our system to indicate the document version is by release date only. I've identified below requirement,  in the mentioned BRCGS standard to record the reason for any changes. Have you been audited/asked about it particularly?

 

3.2.1 The company shall have a documented procedure to manage documents which form part of the product safety and quality management system. This shall include:

•• a list of all controlled documents indicating the latest version number

•• the method for the identification and authorisation of controlled documents

•• a record of the reason for any changes or amendments to the documents

•• the system for the replacement of existing documents when these are updated.

[Hoosiersmoker]

 

Hi, 

I've took responsibility as a Quality Manager at current site a couple of years ago, with existing BRCGS Packaging Materials system in place. No issues during audits, while our system to indicate the document version is by release date only. I've identified below requirement,  in the mentioned BRCGS standard to record the reason for any changes. Have you been audited/asked about it particularly?

 

3.2.1 The company shall have a documented procedure to manage documents which form part of the product safety and quality management system. This shall include:

•• a list of all controlled documents indicating the latest version number

•• the method for the identification and authorisation of controlled documents

•• a record of the reason for any changes or amendments to the documents

•• the system for the replacement of existing documents when these are updated.

 

About 4 years ago I added a table at the end of each document that lists the revision number, revision date, reason and specific changes to the document the person editing the doc and the person authorizing the revision. When changes are made they are recorded in the document's table, it's then saved as a new document, with new revision number, and the old one is archived.

[gemac]

About 4 years ago I added a table at the end of each document that lists the revision number, revision date, reason and specific changes to the document the person editing the doc and the person authorizing the revision. When changes are made they are recorded in the document's table, it's then saved as a new document, with new revision number, and the old one is archived.

I appreciate the system, although my question is regarding auditing this point by CB's during third party audits.

[Hoosiersmoker]

Yes, It has been audited and accepted for 4 years.