3 replies to this topic

[ral491994]

Hi all, corrective action investigation documents are constantly being filled out. Sometime for the smallest things. For example- management wasn't reviewing past month follow ups. So I completed a corrective action document for the miss. I guess what I am trying to get at is these need to be completed but can become cumbersome at time. Any comments or ideas? 

 

[jdpaul]

Your corrective action process should flow in some type of manner

 

Identification ---> Screening ---> Analysis/Actions --> Closure

 

 

1. During the identification you're going to describe what it is that was observed
2. In the screening phase you would determine whether something is an opportunity for improvement, a non-conformance, or just a simple correction
3. Analysis/Action is where you would assign the actions to the person responsible for fixing
4. in closure you would review the actions completed and assess the effectiveness

 

It sounds like you need a better screening step to determine what it is that you will do corrective actions against. Not everything will go through a formal corrective action process with root cause analysis and corrective or preventive actions

Edited by jdpaul, 24 March 2021 - 02:15 PM.

[TimG]

I agree with jd, and this is something that I think all of us have struggled with from time to time. As jd mentioned, there should be a screening process, in our plant this screening helps determine if it's a simple 'correction' (example-trash in warehouse b near north overhead door overflowing-assigned sani team to empty) as opposed to having overflowing trash 3 audits in a row, which would trigger a CA with root cause (do frequencies need to be increased on emptying, extra trash receptacles, etc.).

I'm in that phase now, and the current hurdle is getting buy in and completion at the 'correction' level (shift leads/ast plant manager) before issues start recurring and flipping over to needing full corrective actions (plant manager/global quality escalation).

[queenb]

We have the same issue at our facility. We have numerous small "non-conformances" in the area of our plant that is not considered food contact label high-risk area. Have never had one in our food-contact label section. I am writing up, at times, one a week for the low-risk area but they are not part of our SQF food-contact high-risk area. Management wants to see these as they show a pattern of staff "just not paying attention" to their jobs. None are putting our high-risk products at risk. It's a  lot of paperwork for employees who never work high-risk areas and I don't even bother with them come Audit time.