Nonconformances

A failed inspection decision needs a durable issue record. Quality Reviewer links a Nonconformance to the rejected Inspections case, records when it was detected, writes the description and chooses the severity. Minor, Major and Critical are the available values. That link lets the team return to the original checks and evidence while it decides containment and disposition.

The issue moves through Open, Containment, Investigation and Disposition before Closed. These states help the team separate immediate handling from the cause analysis and final close. A critical label is a severity decision; the status says where the follow-up stands. Both matter in the working queue.

• Source first. A nonconformance names its inspection so a reviewer can revisit the exact check results.
• Severity with context. The description explains the affected scope and the selected severity, rather than asking another person to infer it from the label.
• Action link. Corrective actions point back to the nonconformance, keeping cause and effectiveness review with the original issue.

Agree what the team means by Minor, Major and Critical for its product and customer work. Choose who can make the containment decision after an inspection is rejected and how that decision is described in the record. Have the Quality Reviewer hand the issue to a named Corrective Action Owner and keep that responsibility visible on the linked action.

Define when the team advances from Containment to Investigation and Disposition. These status changes should reflect an actual decision or retained evidence. The issue should not be closed simply because an action was entered. Effectiveness review must assess the action before both records close.

Start with a reviewed incoming inspection that has a failed check and attachment. Quality Reviewer rejects it, opens a nonconformance and chooses Major for a known affected scope. Confirm the source inspection is linked and the description makes the scope clear. Move the issue into Containment and ask Corrective Action Owner to open an action linked to it. The owner records a cause and the intended action.

Now review the issue from the nonconformance page. The original inspection and its failed requirement should be reachable. The corrective action should point to the same issue. After the action is implemented, a separate Quality Reviewer checks effectiveness before the issue closes. If the reviewer finds the correction ineffective, keep the issue active for another cycle rather than treating the closed label as the evidence.

• Open nonconformances — Issues in active states with detection date and severity.
• Critical severity — The highest severity cases across their current states.
• Due for effectiveness review — Linked actions waiting for a separate reviewer.

Follow inspection to disposition for failure intake and corrective action for cause and effectiveness review.