Search for:
Action groups with unjustified improvement
Explanation:
Action groups will be searched for in which an improved O and/or D rating has been entered, even though the corresponding action is missing.
Example:
Abbreviations:
- The sample structure to demonstrate how this quality rule (QR) works looks as shown above. As the QR searches for action groups in which an improved O and/or D rating has been entered, although a corresponding action is missing, the structure element BSE is of particular importance, because different action groups with different actions and action ratings are anchored at the failures BF1, BF2 and BF3, with the help of which we can demonstrate how the QR works.
- When executing the QR, the comparison is always performed between two directly successive action groups belonging to the same failure, even if the two action groups are assigned to different revision states. The rating figures of a similar action category are included in the comparison, both at the prevention and detection action levels. The same criteria are applied at both levels.
- These criteria state that an action group should always be marked as a hit by the QR if the rating figure has improved compared to the directly preceding one and at the same time no new (or even previously used) action has been defined to which this improvement could be attributed.
- When you apply the described QR to the shown structure, the search result is as follows:
Search result: 
The first marked action group (see BF1) is included in the search result because the improvement of the occurrence O from 8 to 4 in the marked action group is not substantiated with any prevention measure.
The same reasoning applies to the second marked action group.
Finally, the third marked action group is included in the search result because the detection rating D=10 in the marked action group results from an undetermined value (“no rating”) and that rating, which is to be understood as an improvement, is also not justified with any detection action.
The third action group placed at BF1 is not included in the search result because the given O rating has deteriorated compared to the previous O rating. That is not changed by the missing prevention action.
The fourth marked action group (see BF2) shows that the search criteria applied to the occurrence also apply to the detection.
That is also the case for the fifth marked action group, where it becomes additionally clear that the QR criteria are effective across revision states.
Finally, the sixth marked action group (see BF3) again points out that the improvement of a D rating must be supported by a detection action begin specified. The specification of only prevention actions is insufficient.