Start a new topic and get direct answers from the Expert Advice Community.
CREATE NEW TOPIC +Guest
I'm assuming that by ITU you mean "International Telecommunication Union".
Considering that, ISO 27017 was developed in collaboration with ITU-T and there is a text-based on this standard published as ITU-T. X.1631 (07/2015), so controls from this standard are covered by ITU. Regarding ISO 27018, it only references ITU-T Y.3500, so probably some additional documents may be required (we are not experts on ITU, so we cannot provide a more precise answer).
Psychology within risk treatment is out of our field of expertise, but in a general way, for every risk where the human factor is involved, you should consider means, motivation, and opportunity when analyzing a situation. By elimination of these elements from the situation, you can decrease the risk, and for controls, you should consider:
These articles will provide you a further explanation:
Before sending your finished product to customers/clients want kind of control should be done to ensure that specifications are met? What to control? How to control? With what frequency? What should be the sample size? Who will control? Where to record the results?
The following material will provide you more information about inspection:
I think that the two most common questions during an ISO 9001 audit are.
What is your organization’s quality policy?
What is your work? What are you doing? How do you know what to do or how to do?
The following material will provide you more information:
ISO 14001:2015 in itself has no mandatory requirement about soil testing. Soil testing is mandatory if national legislation requires it, or if internal procedures require it.
You can find more information below:
Clause 0.5 is to avoid the situation where you start with a quality audit and finish with a nonconformity about taxes, or you start with an environmental audit and finish with labor relations or social accoutability nonconformity
Any auditor, internal or external, should stick to the scope and criteria provided before preparing the audit.
Without knowing in detail your documentation I can think that more focus and attention from auditors and audit program manager about objective, scope and criteria can be enough.
This basically depends on the type of the medical device that you have and regulations that you need/want to be in compliance with.
In general, in ISO 9001:2015 validation is defined as "confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence, that the requirements for a specific intended use or application have been fulfilled". As for medical devices, validation involves an "assessment by objective means of whether the specified users are enabled to achieve the specified goals (intended purpose) within the specified context of use".
Computer System Validation (CSV) is a documented process of assuring that a computerized system does exactly what it is designed to do. Requirements for validation of computer systems can be found in:
For more information on validation, please see following articles:
You can start by determining environmental aspects, determining how an organization interacts with the environment. For example:
Determining risks and opportunities of an organization, according to ISO 14001:2015, is based on its environmental aspects, compliance obligations, and context and interested parties.
For example, concerning environmental aspects we can have:
Since organizations have to consider the lifecycle of its products and services, do not forget to consider risks and opportunities around your products and services during use or final disposal.
For example, consumers may not follow your instructions about disposal.
Please check risk definition (3.2.10) on ISO 14001:2015 (effect of uncertainty). With environmental aspects and impacts we are considering normal, expected situations, like startup and closing down operations, but also abnormal and emergency situations. Whenever there is uncertainty there is risk or opportunities, there is a potential deviation from the expected.
About determining risks based on environmental aspects and compliance obligations I see that different organizations follow different approaches:
1. There are organizations that determine their environmental aspects and use a risk and opportunities assessment to determine its significant environmental aspects. (Please see the end of the second paragraph of Annex A.6.1.1 of ISO 14001:2015)
2. There are organizations that determine their environmental aspects evaluate them and determine the significant ones and use a risk and opportunities assessment to determine which ones need an action plan, and which ones need only to be monitored.
3. There are organizations that only apply the risk-based approach to the context part. In a certain way they are following the same approach as 1 without explicitly mentioning it.
Please check this information below with more detailed answers: