Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discussion

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Helmut Jilling said:

If you prevent a potential problem from happening again (preventive action), that is even better.

Click to expand...

The word again is out of place. Isn't it? Again implies it already happened, at least once. That being the case, it is no longer a potential problem, but an existing one and, thus, it is corrective action.

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Sidney Vianna said:

The word again is out of place. Isn't it? Again implies it already happened, at least once. That being the case, it is no longer a potential problem, but an existing one and, thus, it is corrective action.

Click to expand...

Sidney, you are absolutely correct, of course. I wrote that on a plane, and obviously made an error. I meant to say:

If you prevent a potential problem from happening in the first place (preventive action), that is even better.

Thanks for pointing out the error, we wouldn't want to bring even more confusion to this oft-discussed clause . (I edited and corrected my post. Thanks).

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Don Winton said:

Kevin,

You have covered the aspects very well. I generally use this when describing the difference between CA and PA.

Corrective Action: Putting out a house fire after it has started.

Preventive Action: Observing conditions that may start a house fire and removing them from the system.

Regards,
Don

Click to expand...

Don,

Beautifully stated, thank you.

Preventive Action should come before Corrective Action.

The term CAPA has caused untold confusion and wasted time.

It should be PACA so everyone seeks drivers of preventive action other than things that have already gone wrong.

If the airline industry had stuck with CAPA they would still be trying to improve air safety by digging black boxes out of the ground. Thankfully their preventive action is largely driven by data analysis and near-miss reports.

John

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

John Broomfield said:

If the airline industry had stuck with CAPA they would still be trying to improve air safety by digging black boxes out of the ground. Thankfully their preventive action is largely driven by data analysis and near-miss reports.

John

Click to expand...

Is a near-miss a nonconforming condition?

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Jim Wynne said:

Is a near-miss a nonconforming condition?

Click to expand...

Jim,

Technically "yes", after all it is evidence of a system nonconformity, practically "no" to encourage fast reporting (IMO).

John

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

John Broomfield said:

Jim,

Technically "yes", after all it is evidence of a system nonconformity, practically "no" to encourage fast reporting (IMO).

John

Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but the fact is that you are a learned and experienced person and (using the ISO definitions) you used a case of corrective action as an example of preventive action. More evidence that the ISO definitions cause more trouble than they prevent.

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Jim Wynne said:

I don't disagree, but the fact is that you are a learned and experienced person and (using the ISO definitions) you used a case of corrective action as an example of preventive action. More evidence that the ISO definitions cause more trouble than they prevent.

Click to expand...

Jim,

Right, ISO 9001 itself is mostly about preventive action. This may be why TC176, I understand, is considering removing preventive action from our next edition of ISO 9001. Any additional preventive actions should solely be a result of data analysis (8.4) predictions.

Near-hit reporting (not sure why it is called near-miss) should also be a process required by the management rep, in the system if not by the system standard, to help drive system improvements.

PA should definitely not come after CA in the system's procedures or the system standard.

John

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

Hi all,

Understood what you guys have mentioned earlier.However, based on our environment in a IT helpdesk, we have detected a high potential for us to breached our (SLA)Service Level Agreement in answering call for this month due to resource issues and high influx of call volume due to few issues.

The preventive action plan is obviously to recruit more people but this could not be done in a week or 2.Nothing much could be done in order to eliminate this issues instantly.

So, my question is should we still issue a NC and CA since we have already describe in the PA earlier that we are expecting to fail the SLA for the upcoming month until we have our resource issue resolved?

Appreciate your help... :truce:

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

John Broomfield said:

Jim,

Right, ISO 9001 itself is mostly about preventive action. This may be why TC176, I understand, is considering removing preventive action from our next edition of ISO 9001. Any additional preventive actions should solely be a result of data analysis (8.4) predictions.

Near-hit reporting (not sure why it is called near-miss) should also be a process required by the management rep, in the system if not by the system standard, to help drive system improvements.

PA should definitely not come after CA in the system's procedures or the system standard.

John

Click to expand...

I think it would be a shame if they took Preventive Action out of the next revision. The issue isn't that PA is non-value, the issue is that they do not explain it well. PA is a powerful tool to proactively prevent potential failures. Why wait for the failure to occur? I agree it is the source of confusion and debate. But, I think the cause is it is not well explained. Maybe the TC176 is not sure , either?

Re: Corrective Action vs. Preventive (Predictive) Action (CAPA) - A Definitive Discus

xjsanit said:

Hi all,

Understood what you guys have mentioned earlier.However, based on our environment in a IT helpdesk, we have detected a high potential for us to breached our (SLA)Service Level Agreement in answering call for this month due to resource issues and high influx of call volume due to few issues.

The preventive action plan is obviously to recruit more people but this could not be done in a week or 2.Nothing much could be done in order to eliminate this issues instantly.

So, my question is should we still issue a NC and CA since we have already describe in the PA earlier that we are expecting to fail the SLA for the upcoming month until we have our resource issue resolved?

Appreciate your help... :truce:

Click to expand...

I would say that the purpose of a CA or PA form is to help you analyze a failure or problem, to help find the causes and solutions. It is also a useful tool to help document significant issues. If your situation fits one of those, perhaps it is useful to document it.