M
mshell
This is an example of our record control procedure. It may give you a few ideas.
CONGRATS RACHAEL That is a long course and a tough test.
CONGRATS RACHAEL That is a long course and a tough test.
Claes Gefvenberg
Admin
Sorry about what? Congratulations... and yes, we fitRachel said:
RightRachel said:
. That's a common route, as well as a sensible one.If he can back his claim up with the necessary storage space and convince me that the storage is (reasonably) safe and retreavable: Yes, I would accept that. It may be a good idea to set minimum retention times though. That way you won't be required to scrap data when you pass the time limit.Rachel said:
/Claes
A
Aaron Lupo
Rachel said:Sorry folks - I'm really excited - I had to share - I just got my RAB Lead Auditor course results back and I got a 90!Man, I haven't gotten a top score since high school! (It's funny how I graduated university feeling dumber than when I got there...) Anyway, that's my excitement. Forgive me if it seems braggish - I just had to tell *someone*...and you guys seemed to fit!
Okay, back to documentation. I think a list is the way to go. We have a horribly inaccurate record retention list right now - maybe this can be fixed up to serve for both the IDs and the times. K.I.S.S., right?
One other question - I talked to our Purchasing manager and he said the bulk of their records are kept electronically. Retention time: "forever". I get what he means...but is this really a feasible answer? Would an auditor accept that?
90 that is pretty darn good!!! You going to apply for your Provisional Auditor Status?
I agree with what you have said KISS, the Master List is the way to go.
As far as your Purchasing Manager- yes that sounds feasible/reasonable, what I would wonder is why keep them forever? As an auditor to tell you the truth I am not sure if I would accept this or not, I guess it would depend on what they tell me as a rationale. Remember as long as the records are maintained they are auditable they may want to re-think keeping them forever.
R
Rachel
Thanks for the congrats, all. No big deal - but I can be pretty unsure of myself at times, and getting news like that helps me realize that I can't be *that* far off base...
Not sure about the Provisional Auditor status - it's pricey, considering that it won't actually get me anywhere. I don't have the work experience *or* the auditing experience to get to the "auditor" level, and I don't know how I could get there - seeing as I'm putting this QMS together and that disqualifies me from counting any of the company audits toward my experience (is that right??). Besides, I'm not sure that my company would fork out the cash for me, seeing as it's really of no benefit to them (I can audit for them with or without "Provisional Auditor" status). I'd like to, though - we'll have to see - being in this auditor role at work has opened up a lot of opportunities, that's for sure.
As for the records debate - I just don't like how "forever" sounds. We're not that old or big of a company, but "forever" seems so abstract. I like concrete stuff, set limits, so on. That's why I'm an enginerd.
His argument is that the network is backed up daily, and as long as we have those backups we have "forever-style" records. I don't know, though...still smells fishy to me. But whatever - we'll see. The "minimum" retention time sounds good, though...
Not sure about the Provisional Auditor status - it's pricey, considering that it won't actually get me anywhere. I don't have the work experience *or* the auditing experience to get to the "auditor" level, and I don't know how I could get there - seeing as I'm putting this QMS together and that disqualifies me from counting any of the company audits toward my experience (is that right??). Besides, I'm not sure that my company would fork out the cash for me, seeing as it's really of no benefit to them (I can audit for them with or without "Provisional Auditor" status). I'd like to, though - we'll have to see - being in this auditor role at work has opened up a lot of opportunities, that's for sure.
As for the records debate - I just don't like how "forever" sounds. We're not that old or big of a company, but "forever" seems so abstract. I like concrete stuff, set limits, so on. That's why I'm an enginerd.
His argument is that the network is backed up daily, and as long as we have those backups we have "forever-style" records. I don't know, though...still smells fishy to me. But whatever - we'll see. The "minimum" retention time sounds good, though...I agree with the minimum retention time. There are some records I may keep "forever" -- as long as I am here at least, but I don't want to be "officially" responsible for them or have an auditor pick something 5 years old that I have to go after for no other good reason. So, I simply state that records may be kept longer than the minimim retention time.
B
Bruce Hostetler
I too have had good luck using a master list, although, it is a bear to maintain. Our record updates usually occur either before or durring an internal audit.
The area that I am struggling with is legibility and protection of written records.
Any suggestions?
The area that I am struggling with is legibility and protection of written records.
Any suggestions?
Rachel said:
TS has a clause that includes "disposition" of the records. Depending on what your corporate headquarters (or financial Guru's) and customer requires, and State and Federal requirements are, you "should" look at archiving the records after an appropriate amount of time has elapsed. Of course, your IS group may want to keep buying bigger hard drives. . . CD's and tapes don't take up much space.
At some point, all records become useless or obsolete.
Suggest you 'coach" the Purchasing Manager that an auditor might not like that answer. If he means "forever", then, IMHO, I think he might have to show some justification for it. Besides. .. who will be there forever ???
R
Rachel
The Taz! said:
Yes and no. In terms of Purchasing, yes, I'd agree. However, I don't think management will ever budge on the R&D records. We have a complete library of all of our reserach efforts from the company's creation in the late seventies, to now. Everything is filed. It's all hard copies, unfortunately, but they're never going to toss that stuff. The intellectual property is too valuable - and, honestly, is referenced quite a bit. It's all of our product history!
We're making up our retention list only for paper copies - any other records are stored indefinitely on the network (backups, CDs, etc.). Is this fair enough?
Bruce, as for your dilemma ("The area that I am struggling with is legibility and protection of written records...Any suggestions?")...what exactly are you struggling with? What's the situation? I just don't know your business - what kind of volume of records are we talking? Are the bulk of your records in hard copy form? Are there measures in place to restore/protect records in case of fire/flood/etc.? Are your records stored in sealed cabinets? Are they legible - as in, can you read the writing? Are they legible - as in, can you read the language? I had a trainer tell me once that he audited a high-tech firm in Ottawa (my hometown! Go Sens!) where they had two sets of procedures - one in English and one in Mandarin - because there were so many Chinese employees that legibility became a problem. I know that's control of documents, but you get my point...
I don't know if that helps at all...hopefully it does.
Cheers,
-R.
Rachel said:
Sounds like the "records" have become a reference library. . . and not SHOWING VERITY of an action any more. I believe you have a company archive.
Rachel said:
Are they stored or archived?? Are they used to show evidence of an action being performed? . . or just "stored"?
C
cheimmie23
hello there..
Ma'am Carol.
Would youm ine giving a sample copy of your document control proceures for i will be revising some procedures here and i have difficulty to do this... if you can be of help... thank you.
my name is lea from philippines.
Ma'am Carol.
Would youm ine giving a sample copy of your document control proceures for i will be revising some procedures here and i have difficulty to do this... if you can be of help... thank you.
my name is lea from philippines.
Similar threads
