{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

        
User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • Regulated Industries
    • Research & Tech
    • Quality Improvement Tools
    • People Management
    • Metrology
    • Manufacturing
    • Roadshow
    • QMS & Standards
    • Statistical Methods
    • Resource Management
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • Regulated Industries
    • Research & Tech
    • Quality Improvement Tools
    • People Management
    • Metrology
    • Manufacturing
    • Roadshow
    • QMS & Standards
    • Statistical Methods
    • Supply Chain
    • Resource Management
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Training

Expert: Cool Down on Hot CAPA

Don’t make mountains (of work) out of minor mistakes

Michael Causey
Bio
Wed, 05/08/2013 - 09:45
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
Body

It’s no secret that Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspectors hone in on a medical device company’s corrective and preventive action (CAPA) program during an inspection. But a leading CAPA consultant says many companies may have overreacted and made things unnecessarily difficult for themselves.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Audits we’ve worked on often come after the FDA has found CAPA deficiencies [at a company],” says John DiMaria, product market manager at BSI Group America Inc.

Irony No. 1. DiMaria says it’s usually not a problem of a company doing too little. “They take a ‘better safe than sorry’ approach,” where they label almost any anomaly as a problem that triggers their CAPA machinery,” he says. In other words, they are doing too much. “They launch into a 10-step procedure that requires management sign-off” and a whole lot of other time-consuming activities.

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password
You Might Like...
What's a 150-year Old Meat Chopper Have to do With America's Favorite Sports Car?
How Remote Sensing and Aerial Imagery Can Improve Audit Accuracy
How to Get Your Employees to Love Your Brand
How DIY AI Unlocks Productivity and Flexibility
Which KPIs Prove Your Maintenance Plan Is Working?

Comments

Submitted by umberto mario tunesi on Mon, 05/13/2013 - 19:44

A System is a System is a System

There's no such a thing as minor mistakes in any system: any mistake, any failure is a system failure. All too often we meet with CAPAs' root cause analyses that end up with a "human error" root cause. Is the "human" a part of the system, or not? When a system is robust enough, it does provide for the individuals who make up to it not to make mistakes - but it's the system that has to be made fail-safe, not the individuals. Read Nagarjuna, please, his "Elimination of Mistakes", there are lessons to be learned from him.

  • Reply

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.

© 2026 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us