A |
Anthony Mack (VA-Cat3, Th Cat1) |
Ref Quality Event Q2509:
There have been multiple instances where an OCAM report has been finalized during the review process with a machine having its severity downgraded without discussion with the analyst. The downgraded equipment has then failed in service. CM.VA.003 Section 8.3 identifies the technician as the person responsible for issuing the report, not the reviewer. Without the reviewed report being seen by the analyst prior to its issue the opportunity to discuss the reviewer's comments is lost.
Activity Newest / Oldest
Dongchang Sun
Status changed to: Closed
Anthony Mack (VA-Cat3, Th Cat1)
Thanks for the feedback. Can you provide some numbers around machines (not reports) that have been:
- Finalized directly by reviewer with no-changes made to comments/recommendations, severity or priority
- Finalized directly by reviewer with changes made to comments/recommendations, severity or priority
- Finalized by analyst after review with no changes made to comments/recommendations, severity or priority
- Finalized by analyst after review with changes made to comments/recommendations, severity or priority
This will give an understanding of risk to incorrect diagnosis and review process. We can then look further into how to mitigate that risk (if necessary).
Thanks
Anthony
Dongchang Sun (VA Cat4)
Sydney Water team is often using this function to finish report quicker by reviewer, if there not much change suggestions from reviewers.
Ian Bowley (VA Cat3, Th Cat2, OA Cat2)
Being able to send out reports directly is very useful and saves considerable time. This is a people issue, not a software issue.