1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
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.

Clause 9.2 internal audit (correction vs corrective)

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by sunrize, Feb 25, 2020.

  1. sunrize

    sunrize Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2019
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Dear in Clause 9.2 internal audit

    9.2.2 The organization shall:
    e. Take appropriate correction and corrective actions without undue delay;

    here the standard said correction and corrective, is this mean that for audit finding we should take the both action correction followed by corrective.

    because i know that (and) mean you should to do the both

    please advice
     
    sunrize, Feb 25, 2020
    #1
  2. John C. Abnet

    John C. Abnet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2017
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Upper Midwest- USA

    Good day @sunrize ;
    The difference the authors are referring to is as follows...

    ISO 9000 section 3.12.3 defines correction as ...
    "action to eliminate a detected nonconformity"

    In other words: Make a wrong situation right.


    ISO 9000 section 3.12.2 defines corrective action as...
    "action to eliminate the cause of a nonconformity"

    In other words: Use of methodology to identify root cause and prevent recurrence.

    Hope this helps.
    Be well.
     
    John C. Abnet, Feb 25, 2020
    #2
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  3. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,350
    Likes Received:
    1,059
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    No. The standard is just saying that both actions must be done without undue delay. If the proper course of action is just correction, then this must be done timely. Same is true, if further action is necessary (i.e. corrective action) to prevent recurrence.
     
    tony s, Feb 25, 2020
    #3
    Daniel Padilla T likes this.
  4. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,203
    Likes Received:
    2,598
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Sunrise: If you find, during an audit of manufacturing, that 1 form was not a controlled document yet every other document, including procedures, instructions, set up aids etc were all controlled correctly, would you expect root cause corrective action, or to simply correct the 1 form and make it a controlled document? Which is most appropriate?
     
    Andy Nichols, Feb 26, 2020
    #4
    Daniel Padilla T and John C. Abnet like this.
  5. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    926
    Likes Received:
    1,081
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    In some instances, such as the one @Andy Nichols used, a correction is likely sufficient.

    However, in other instances with greater impact/risk/severity/etc., you will likely do corrective action. That said, it is unlikely that you would eliminate the cause of the nonconformity (per the definition provided by @John C. Abnet ) without also eliminating the nonconformity itself.

    In other words, you may have a correction without a corrective action, but you probably will not have a corrective action without a correction.
     
    RoxaneB, Feb 26, 2020
    #5
    Daniel Padilla T and Andy Nichols like this.