At my last job where I worked for a company that designed and built jet engine test systems, we would have 3 design reviews with the Customer to make sure the final product was on track to meeting their needs and expectations. A preliminary, mid and final design review. We would document what was discussed and agreed upon in the reviews, who attended the review, date of review, then engineering design drawings and parts lists would be updated to reflect those changes. Of course, appropriate engineering approval was documented for making the updates to the design documents. I don't know if this is a helpful example, but it's an example.
I'm curious about 8.5.6 which is for production changes.
"The organization shall review and control changes for production or service provision, to the extent necessary to ensure continuing conformity with requirements.
Persons authorized to approve production or service provision changes shall be identified.
NOTE: Production or service provision changes can include the changes affecting processes, production equipment, tools, or software programs.
The organization shall retain documented information describing the results of the review of changes, the person(s) authorizing the change, and any necessary actions arising from the review."
The title of 8.5.6 is Control of Changes, it falls under 8.5 which is Control of Production and Service Provision. So, when I skim over the multitude of clauses and subjects within 8.5, I see the following (this is a slimmed-down list):
- The availability of documented information that defines...
- The availability of suitable monitoring and measuring resources
- suitable infrastructure
- appointing competent persons
- validation, periodic revalidation of ability to achieve planned results
- Control of Equipment
- Validation of control of special processes
- Production process validation
- ID & Traceability
- Property of external providers
- Post deliver activities
An example of a change that would most likely require extensive planning and review could be a change in facility location. I would guess there would be plenty of evidence that this change was reviewed, approved, managed, even had outsourced help. If a change seemed minor to a company, then the evidence of the change being reviewed would be less formal in nature.
An example of this could be the move from a paper traveler system to a paperless system.
An example of another change that would apply could be a change in how talent is recruited, was there a list of requirements that were standard, that is being changed to accommodate a worldwide shortage of employees?
One more that could be considered a major change and even risky, is a change in shipping providers (Logistics)
Hopefully this helps.
The way I approach Change control - be it process of document related, I established a Change Control Form that must be filled out and submitted for approval. It consisted of Requesting the details of the proposed change, justification for the change and a series (4) of questions about alternatives considered, impact to other processes and/or documents and training needs. This way it forces the originator to not make arbitrary changes. Further I follow up the questions with approval signatures with Quality Required, and those affected by the change - Production Manager, Engineering, top management and any others as needed.