One Word document for the whole management review: an agenda organized around the inputs ISO 9001 asks top management to consider, a minutes section for the discussion, a decisions and outputs table, and an action log carried into the next review.
Quality managers and management representatives who run the review, and the plant manager, general manager or owner who chairs it. It suits small and mid-sized manufacturers that need a clear record without a dedicated QMS software module.
At every planned management review, typically at least once a year, and more often when performance, customers or risks change quickly. Also use it before a certification or surveillance audit, because the minutes are the evidence an auditor asks for first.
Tip: Keep the agenda rows in the same order every time. Auditors and attendees then compare reviews side by side, and a missing input stands out.
Meeting details
Date, period covered, chair, minute-taker, location and the previous review date
Attendees
Name, role and attendance for each participant
Agenda and inputs
One row per required input with the presenter, period data and summary
Previous actions
Action log from the last review with status and evidence
Decisions and outputs
Improvement opportunities, QMS changes and resource needs, each with an owner and due date
Approval
Chair signature, date and next review date
Example Minutes for Example Precision Co., a fictional 60-person machine shop, reviewing January to June 2026. All names and figures are invented for illustration.
| Date | 2026-07-14 |
|---|---|
| Period covered | 2026-01-01 to 2026-06-30 |
| Chair | General Manager |
| Minute-taker | Quality Manager |
| Previous review | 2026-01-13 |
| Input | Presenter | Period data | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Status of actions from last review | Quality Manager | 5 of 6 actions complete | One action (gauge software upgrade) slipped to August. |
| Customer satisfaction and feedback | Sales Lead | 6 complaints logged | Four relate to packaging damage on one route. |
| Quality objectives: on-time delivery | Operations Manager | 456 of 480 shipments on time; target 96% | Below target; two late shipments traced to one CNC cell. |
| Internal audit results | Quality Manager | 9 findings raised, 7 closed | Two open findings on document control. |
| External provider performance | Purchasing | 1,164 of 1,200 PO lines on time | One bar-stock supplier caused most late lines. |
| Effectiveness of actions on risks | Quality Manager | 3 risk actions due, 3 done | Second-source supplier qualified. |
| Output type | Decision | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|---|
| Improvement | Redesign packaging for the damaged-route customer | Sales Lead | 2026-09-30 |
| Resource need | Approve cross-training a second operator on CNC cell 3 | Operations Manager | 2026-08-31 |
| QMS change | Add monthly document-control spot checks to the audit schedule | Quality Manager | 2026-08-15 |
| Field | What to enter | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Period covered | The exact start and end dates the data describes. Keep periods back-to-back so nothing falls between reviews. | 2026-01-01 to 2026-06-30 |
| Attendees | Top management plus each input owner. Record absences so a missing owner is visible. | General Manager (chair), Quality, Operations, Sales, Purchasing |
| Input | One row per input the standard lists, in a fixed order. Do not merge inputs to save space. | Internal audit results |
| Period data | The number behind the summary, with numerator and denominator, not just a percentage. | 9 findings raised, 7 closed |
| Summary | One or two sentences on what the data means and whether it is on target. | Two open findings on document control. |
| Decision | A specific action or conclusion. "Noted" is not a decision; say what will change, or record that no change is needed and why. | Approve cross-training a second CNC operator |
| Output type | Classify each decision as improvement, QMS change or resource need so all three output types are covered. | Resource need |
| Owner / Due | A named role and a calendar date for every decision. These rows become the action log for the next review. | Operations Manager, 2026-08-31 |
| Approval | Chair signature and date, plus the date of the next review. | Signed 2026-07-14; next review 2027-01-12 |
ISO 9001 asks for planned intervals and leaves the frequency to you. Annual is the common minimum; many plants review quarterly or semi-annually. IATF 16949 adds an annual minimum and asks for more frequent reviews when risks rise.
No. An internal audit checks whether processes conform. The management review is where top management looks at audit results with all the other inputs and decides what to change.
No. This template combines them: the agenda rows become the minutes once the discussion and decisions are filled in, which keeps the inputs and outputs together for an auditor.
Signed minutes that show each required input was considered, the decisions taken, and follow-up of actions from the previous review. Supporting data such as KPI reports should be traceable from the minutes.
Yes, as long as all inputs are covered in the period and the records show it. Note in each set of minutes which inputs were covered.
COPLAIN AI PLATFORM
Before your next review, run your QMS procedures through Coplain’s Auditor Review to see where they fall short of ISO 9001, so the gaps come to the meeting as inputs instead of audit findings.
Generate yours automatically with Coplain →Related Tools & Templates