A VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS | Call or text now for a FREE consultation: +1 (770) 765-3692 | 
Corrective Action Program – Condition Report Prioritization
Central to the proper functioning of a corrective action program is the appropriate prioritization of reported issues. Assigned significance levels reveal the impact of the occurrence and drive the urgency of resolution, including the type of causal analysis to be performed. Furthermore, significance levels support problem reporting, performance trending, and common/recurring issue identification.
Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.
| Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library
Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually). Not sure? Click here to learn more. |
Buy the Article
Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Corrective Action Program – Condition Report Prioritization for just $2! |
About the Author
Nathan Ives is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.
All too often, duplicate effort is unknowingly expended by an organization’s various workgroups. Lack of organizational defined positional roles and responsibilities and/or work handoffs commonly result in employees unnecessarily performing highly similar if not the exact same activities. In some cases, workgroups may generate differing and conflicting outputs; in others, they may inappropriately change underlying application data such that hinders overall progress and propagates errors. Organizations clearly defining positional roles and responsibilities in standalone responsibilities matrices are better able to avoid these conflicts; releasing precious resources for the performance of value adding work and eliminating redundancy based errors.
Admit it; you perform differently when your supervisor is watching you. Suddenly, all of the performance rules become clear and important. You feel a sudden urgency and compulsion to recall them.
Business performance assessment findings drive organizational actions. Consequently, a great deal of care must be taken when deciding what to include within a self assessment report. Findings based on logically derived conclusions founded on observable, quantifiable facts provide leaders with insightful information on how to improve performance. Findings built on opinion-based conclusions or founded primarily on individual experience frequently lack the vigorous underpinnings necessary to ensure a performance improvement opportunity. Thus, these suggestion-type findings should be excluded from formal self assessment reports.
Rigorous business performance assessments rely not only on observable, quantifiable facts but also on the experience of those conducting and participating in the assessments. When properly applied, experience accelerates issue identification and deepens contributed insights. Experience, however, should not be represented as fact nor should it be used as the primary mechanism to combine otherwise unrelated facts when making the case for a performance strength or improvement opportunity.
Business Programs