Change, effectively managing system defining

Representing the processes defined or implied in the creation and implementation of management systems, decisions, plans, policies, and proposals for change would not only allow their analysis for safety and other risks in advance, but also allow management to assess the mechanisms and effects of their implementation. It would indicate where improvement is necessary and offer guidance to auditors on where to concentrate their efforts most effectively. 

Taylor et al. [20] have paid considerable attention to the changing role of management, particularly with regard to the introduction of robotic systems. Management has the responsibihty to define the best areas for automation in terms of cost-effectiveness and probabihty of success. Without adequate resources, a project will fail. Laboratory managers must act as the interface between senior management and analysts to ensure that the appropriate incentives, resources and education are made available. 

The objectives of this test pattern is to analytically resolve these problems into three manageable segments. The first task will be to define the viscoelastic kinetic properties of a material as a function of various reaction temperatures. These properties (viscosity, viscous modulus, elastic modulus, tan delta) define the rate of change in the polymers overall reaction "character" as it will relate to article flow consolidation, phase separation particle distribution, bond line thickness and gas-liquid transport mechanics. These are the properties primarily responsible for consistent production behavior and structural properties. This test is also utilized as a quality assurance technique for incoming materials. The reaction rates are an excellent screening criteria to ensure the polymer system is "behaviorally" identical to its predecessor. The second objective is to allow modeling for effects of process variables. This will allow the material to undergo environmental... 

Has the system for holding managers, supervisors, and employees accountable changed since the last onsite evaluation If so, how Is this as effective as it was at the last onsite evaluation Are authority and responsibility for safety and health still clearly defined in the written program Has this been adequately implemented ... 

---