Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

Management Review - Is attendance by top management required?

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by Andy Nichols, Apr 8, 2019.

  1. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    A management review doesn't have to be a meeting with "attendance" by anyone. I'm wondering how you got this thought from. I'll start another thread since this one is about Internal Audits...
     
  2. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    clause 9.3.1 "Top Management shall review...QMS at planned intervals..." It really is quite clearly defined.
     
  3. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Clause 9.3.1 clearly states that 'Top Management shall review the QMS at planned intervals'. We hold what I call 'mini" MRs throughout the year. It doesn't matter what we cover at these meetings because unless Top Management (VP Operations) is in attendance there is a risk on NC to 9.3.1. Why risk it ???
     
  4. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    798
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    @Andy Nichols - New thread created. Hope this forum is okay.

    @Richard Billings - What I think Andy is asking is where does it say that Top Management needs to be in attendance for management review? A few of us like to challenge the status quo and, just because that's how we've always done it, doesn't make it the only right way...or even the most effective way nowadays.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  5. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    What's the "risk"?
     
  6. Golfman25

    Golfman25 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    42
    The risk is "that's how everyone has done it since the beginning of time." I have found auditors don't necessarily like change.

    I think there is a natural progression. 20 years ago, we started like many others and held a big fancy "Management Review" meeting. We where big time -- look at us, reviewing our QMS. Wait till the auditor sees us. :) A few years of that, and the drudgery took over. All we where doing was "reviewing" the same stuff we did daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly. And the pizza wasn't as good anymore and introducing beer probably was a bad idea. It got to the point where I would rather stick pins in my eyes. So we started asking ourselves, why are we doing this? Then we pitched the idea of the formal review and captured what we need from our constant mini reviews. Today, sometimes, it's just me, myself, and I (the top managers) reviewing this months numbers, or customer scorecards. Other times, we (me plus my managers/supervisors) address the issues in our weekly/monthly status meetings. Everything is coordinated on a checklist to make sure we get it all.

    So to answer the question. No Top Management doesn't have to attend any such meeting.
     
    tony s and Andy Nichols like this.
  7. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    The risk is that the CB could raise a NC and we would have to hold a Management Review with Top Management in attendance. I don't know why some of you think you. Can ignore. The requirement? Clause 9.3.1 clearly states that Top Management shall review ....
     
  8. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Only an auditor who doesn't understand the requirement would do that! As stated previously, what's to "attend". Reviews are held without meetings. An auditor who thinks a) it has to be a meeting and b) once a year is effective has no clue what they are doing.
     
    tony s likes this.
  9. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Our VP of Operations 'lives for quality' he has always attended the MR meetings and everyone knows it. His buy-in, complete buy-in, is the number one reason why we have been so successful. I wouldn't dream of holding an MR without inviting him. Clause 9.3.1 is pretty clear in that 'Top Management shall review the QMS at planned intervals...'. I suppose you could send meeting minutes to the VP and that might constitute a review but being there, in attendance, sends a much more powerful message to everyone. How many managers will miss the MR if they know the VP is there?
     
  10. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Attending one meeting a year? Who can't do that? Actually, leadership is far more than turning up for a single meeting. If the VP doesn't know why he's there, it doesn't matter what he says.
     
  11. Golfman25

    Golfman25 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    42
    The standard requires management REVIEW, not management meet. Said review need not take place in a formal meeting. It's kind of that simple.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  12. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    And, yet, oddly it doesn't state "in a meeting". If your auditor would write a non-conformity for that, I think I know who your auditor is! I know which CB he works for, where he lives and what his experience as an auditor is, too!
     
    Ellie and tony s like this.
  13. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    798
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    It sounds like this is a case of agree to disagree on how to approach the term "review." If a formal meeting is the process Richard's organization has opted for, and if it works for them, great. Let's be honest here, a formal meeting is the approach more than likely taken by most organizations. That said, just because that's how it's always been done doesn't mean that's the way it must always be. If humanity held true to that adage, we'd still be living in caves, painting on the walls, and contemplating where our next food source was going to come from.

    Management review doesn't not state that it must be done via a formal meeting. There are other ways to communicate the inputs and collect the outputs, especially with all of the technology options out there. What's important is that an organization finds an approach that works for them and adds value to their culture.
     
    tony s and Daniel Padilla T like this.
  14. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    If Top Management does not (shall) review the QMS as specified in clause 9.3.1 then it would be very difficult to defend his absence from the MR meeting to any CB. If the Top Manager were to appoint someone to be at the meeting on his behalf and if documented information were available to support it perhaps it would be defensible. That being said, I must restate my position in support of 9.3.1 - Top Management must be in attendance to avoid any real or potential issues with any CB auditor.
     
  15. hogheavenfarm

    hogheavenfarm Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    42
    In my 12 years here at this company, we have had only one "sit down" meeting where TM was in attendance. All other times all reporting and reviewing is done by email, a bit at a time. Everything required is covered, and there is documentation that it is done and reviewed. This way there is a continual and constant monitoring of any situations that may be changing, and immediate response and action. The documentation is just a happy side effect.
     
  16. Richard Billings

    Richard Billings Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2019
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Hogheaven,
    The Top Manager at your location should be in attendance at MR meetings he should also be involved in the objective setting exercise. The 2015 version of ISO 9001 is a radical change from previous versions as I'm sure you have noticed.

    The days when Top Management could delegate Quality related matters to more knowledgeable subordinates are over. Eventually it will catch up with those who think they can continue playing quality games the old way. I do suppose that we have been fortunate to have a Top Manager who believes in quality.

    Good luck my friend.
     
  17. Golfman25

    Golfman25 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    42
    You keep equating attendance at a meeting as review. It could be. Or it could be a time for Top Management to sleep, zone out, check his fantasy team stats, etc. Whether a manager was at a meeting or not is irrelevant. It is what he does with the information that matters.

    If people are still doing the single annual Management Review meeting, then sure his name should probably be on the attendance list so as not raise any questions with the auditor. But, many are doing away with a specific meeting and incorporating elements of management review in their daily activities. For example, many companies are using online dashboards to disseminate data. Managers who miss meetings can certainly review the data and information provided and be in compliance. A meeting, in and of itself is just not even required by the standard. Many companies find meetings work. Other do not.
     
    tony s and Andy Nichols like this.
  18. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    "The management review process should not be an exercise carried out solely to satisfy the requirements of the standard and the auditors; it should be an integral part of the organization’s business management process". (Quoted from Auditing Practices Group Guidance on Auditing Management Review)

    "The review could be carried out at a separate meeting but this is not a requirement of the standard. There are many ways in which Top Management can review the quality management system, such as receiving and reviewing a report generated by the management representative or other personnel, electronic communication, or as part of regular management meetings where issues such as budgets and targets are also discussed". (Again quoted from the same guidance document)

    "Some management review activities may be carried out by various levels of the organization, provided the results are made available to top management". (Quoted from clause 9.3.1 of ISO/TS 9002:2016)

    "The organization may conduct management reviews as a standalone activity or in a combination of related activities (e.g. meetings, reports)". (Again quoted from clause 9.3.1 of ISO/TS 9002:2016)
     
  19. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    1,306
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Since ISO 9001 was written to be applicable without the need for certification by a third party, it also makes zero sense to do something to avoid an audit finding (from wherever it started).
     
  20. Golfman25

    Golfman25 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I don't think anyone questiones whether your Management Review is compliant. The question is whether it's the most effective (one annual meeting) from a business point of view and whether a meeting is actually required.
     

Share This Page