Non Conformance And Corrective Action

Hello Everyone,

A Non conformance is raised for not updating the approved supplier list during Internal Audit. hence, it is found that system is there / procedure developed and mentioned about to update when there is a new addition. But the ppl who responsible for updation might fail to update during a new supplier added into the system.

this shows the negligence of the ppl

what could be the root cause and corrective action for this NC?

suggestions are welcome...

 

Questions:

1. Is there a required time frame on when the ASL must be updated after approving a new supplier?
2. Did the audit date happen within that time frame?
3. What can happen if the ASL was not updated within the required time frame?

 

Don't have a separate list. Any supplier in your AP/Ordering system should be "approved."

 

Good day @Lafir Ali Rinos ;
@Golfman25 provides some wise council. Often the best way to "correct" a problem is to simply eliminate it. Every "item" you build within the management system will likely require some level of maintenance and update, so be careful not to build "too much". (Conversely, be sure to "build enough" to ensure it benefits the organization, particularly in regards to sustainability to provide enough information and direction to the next generation).

In other words,... build wisely.

Hope this helps.

Be well.

 

I've had to issue a similar internal audit NC... Facilitated the 5 Whys root cause with the HOD and we came up with "lack of familiarity" as the root cause...

 

Good day @Suraiya Ramkissoon ;
I would respectfully (at risk of drifting from the original topic of the OP), argue that, using the 5 whys (or any other sound root cause analysis discipline), your organization has not gone "far enough". In other words, WHY is there lack of familiarity? Far too often we "let everyone know" and assume we have corrected the problem. Instead, I would urge you to dig deeper and identify a systemic gap that allowed this to happen. Once that is Identified and addressed, (countermeasured) then you will have implemented a sustainable fix that will last beyond the current workforce. (.... as @Golfman25 suggested in this example, just build "approval" into the integration process instead of maintaining a separate list).

Hope this helps.

Be well.

 

Some sound advice in the previous posts. I would just caution about using this kind of language. Like Andy Nichols alludes to, the process is often the problem.

 

@yodon 's council has a firm foundation....

“…most troubles and most possibilities for improvement add up to proportions something like this:
- 94% belong to the system (the responsibility of management)
- 6% are attributable to special causes."
W. Edwards Deming

People don't fail, systems do.

Be well.

 

Yes and no. That's simpleton thinking by Deming. At some point, people are the system. You have to expect that they follow the rules of the system --- i.e.; follow instructions, do what they are supposed to, etc. You can only go so far to make things people proof.

 

Respectfully strongly disagree @Jennifer Kirley ;
The system may be the vetting of the people we hire, the assignment of the people we hire, the training we do (or don't ) provide, but the "people" are not and never will be the system. My many years in manufacturing have shown me countless examples of this. If we believe the people that WE hire and train are the problem, then we are short sided and destined to fail. We will continue to fire, punish, and disempower the "people" that WE hired and trained in an effort to make them the "system" that we (leadership) should provide.

I'll now step down from my soapbox.

Be well.

 

Words like obedience, responsibility, accountability and commitment that emanate from the people will all be thrown to the trash can, if we will always blame the system that the same people have created.