Quality defects and nonconformances are a familiar challenge for manufacturers in just about every industry. When it comes down to it, no matter how many quality control measures a business puts in place, it’s nearly impossible to eliminate 100% of quality-related issues that arise as part of their production process.
These issues – whether material or process-oriented – lead to the production or accumulation of nonconforming parts. As a result, manufacturers will often find themselves wasting valuable time and space sorting through and storing the various nonconformances.
Whether the nonconformance comes as a result of the manufacturer or the original material supplier, these parts, components, and materials will likely amount to waste for the business if not dealt with appropriately. One of the best ways manufacturers deal with such situations is via a Material Review Board (MRB).
Scroll on to learn more about the Material Review Board and its role in dealing with defective and nonconforming materials.
What is a Material Review Board?
A Material Review Board is a group of various subject matter experts within a manufacturing business tasked with determining the fate of defective items and nonconforming materials in their facilities.
The board reviews the various defective nonconforming materials to determine the root cause of the deviation from quality expectations. Additionally, the board members deliberate and find solutions for the defective components through any number of different types of failure analyses.
The result is a functional system that incorporates quality in all production steps, ensuring the business provides high-quality products to its customers.
The board’s role typically falls within the quality and continuous improvement departments of the business. However, most manufacturers institute comprehensive Material Review Boards sourcing subject matter experts from various divisions and departments to capture multiple different perspectives.
Department representatives involved in the failure analysis efforts stem from:
Quality Assurance: The quality assurance and control department usually heads this undertaking, mainly due to its role of ensuring the quality of the materials coming into the facility and the products leaving the facility.
Engineering: Product engineers have more intimate and technical knowledge about the production processes in question. This allows them to identify defects during their failure analysis efforts.
For example, engineers look out for over-specifications, instances when part tolerances are narrower than the design calls for. Additionally, they are able to identify specific actions and processes that may result in negative quality consequences.
Procurement: Production plants often receive defective or non-standard raw materials. Procurement officers should be on hand to ensure that their purchases conform to the desired manufacturing expectations.
Production: Production representatives advise the MRB on the manufacturability of the design and materials required. This individual or group is responsible for ensuring that the designs can be produced at an expanded scale.
The Material Review Board process
The cross-departmental Material Review Board frequently meets to carry out their failure analysis efforts. Depending on the size of the manufacturing operation and the number of defective parts, this board can meet daily, weekly, or monthly.
But before these representatives convene, the below process plays out:
First, workers or supervisors discover a potential defect or nonconforming part, documenting and detailing the issue in a nonconformance report (NCR).
The identified material is clearly marked and segregated for board inspection.
The nonconformance report is forwarded to the Material Review Board chairman.
The board convenes a meeting. The members examine the part or parts, discussing causes and potential solutions. The different department-specific points of view make for comprehensive failure analysis.
The board determines the best course of action, a disposition that solves the issue. Then, all members sign off on the agreed decision, providing clarity and accountability to the process.
Key Roles and Responsibilities
A Material Review Board is a working group, not a formality. It brings together people from different parts of the organization to decide how to handle nonconforming material. Each member looks at the problem from a different angle i.e. the angle of risk, cost, and production impact and that mix keeps decisions grounded in reality.
Quality runs the process. The Quality Manager or Engineer usually keeps the MRB log, schedules the reviews, and makes sure every Nonconformance Report (NCR) is documented, investigated, and closed in line with company procedures and standards like ISO 9001 or AS9100.
Engineering looks at what can technically be done. They decide if a part can be reworked, repaired, or used as-is without affecting safety or function. Their call often drives whether a deviation request or corrective action is needed.
Production or Operations brings the view from the floor. They understand what happened, why it happened, and what can realistically be changed to keep it from happening again. They also confirm whether rework or re-inspection can fit within normal production timing.
When a nonconformance ties to a supplier or regulated component, Procurement, Supplier Quality, or Compliance join the review.
A digital MRB system doesn’t change who does what, it just removes the delays. Instead of routing paper or waiting on signatures, reviewers can log their input, approve dispositions, and close actions in one shared workspace. Everything stays visible, and traceability takes care of itself.
The different MRB disposition categories for dealing with nonconformities
The Material Review Board deals with nonconforming materials and defective parts in various ways.
These include:
Use-as-is: If the board finds that the nonconformity doesn’t affect the product’s form, fit, or function, it can recommend the part for production.
Rework and Repair: Analysis might show that the part doesn’t meet the requirements in the product design. However, sometimes the Board finds that the item can be reworked to fit the original dimensions.
The board issues this disposition if rework and repair costs don’t set the production process back.
Redesign the product: The board sometimes suggests a slight product redesign to fit the nonconforming item. This is especially the case when a minor defect won’t affect the final product function.
Return to vendor: If the parts have significant defects affecting the product form, fit, or function, the Material Review Board can recommend returning the parts to the vendor. The supplier representative communicates to the vendor, detailing the defects and seeking reassurance on part production process improvements.
Scrap: If the financial and time loss don’t justify rework or return to the vendor, the defective parts are scrapped. Detailed and critical quality analysis should inform future supplier decisions to eliminate defects in raw materials and the subsequent production process.
Depending on the findings of the MRB, quality teams may decide to develop and implement a comprehensive Quality Assurance Plan to outline specific quality standards that a part or product should adhere to, as well as optimize processes to address the root cause(s) of quality defects in the plant.
Common MRB Challenges and Practical Fixes
Even with clear procedures and capable people, MRB work can get bogged down. Most of the time, it’s not because of poor decisions, it’s because the system around those decisions is slow, scattered, or just too manual to keep up.
1. Disconnected data and documentation
A lot of MRB reviews still live in spreadsheets or shared folders. Someone updates one file, someone else works off an old version, and before long nobody’s sure what’s current. That’s how approvals get delayed and audit trails start to fray.
Fix: Keep all MRB records in one system. When everyone’s looking at the same data, the process moves faster and people spend less time tracking down the latest file.
2. Manual routing and follow-up
If your MRB depends on people passing forms or forwarding emails, it only takes one person being out of office for everything to stall.
Fix: Set up automated routing so NCRs move through each step without waiting on someone to remember. Everyone sees where things stand, and nothing gets lost.
3. Limited visibility into patterns
When data is buried in folders or scattered across drives, it’s tough to spot repeat issues. By the time a pattern becomes obvious, you’ve already built or received a lot of bad parts.
Fix: Use simple dashboards or summary reports to show recurring problems and closure times. You’ll see trends early enough to prevent the next one.
4. Compliance gaps
Audits go sideways when documentation isn’t consistent. Missing approvals or unclear records can turn a minor finding into a major one.
Fix: A digital MRB creates its own record of who approved what and when. That makes ISO or FDA reviews much easier, no chasing signatures or explaining gaps.
Moving MRB work into a shared digital system doesn’t change the people or the purpose. It just removes the waiting, guessing, and digging that slow everything down.
Simplifying quality efforts with Tulip
When it comes to managing your quality management efforts, the biggest contributing factor is the data and information you have surrounding quality defects.
In order to capture this data more effectively, you need a system that operators can easily leverage to provide real-time, objective feedback as they navigate their day-to-day work.
By integrating in-line quality checks with digital work instructions, for example, operators are able to inspect, identify, and report quality defects in real-time, providing the MRB team with the information they need to understand which processes and operators are most responsible for the nonconformances and defects they’re analyzing.
Most manufacturers already have enough forms and spreadsheets. What they need is a single place to manage nonconformances from the moment they’re found until they’re closed. Tulip makes that possible by turning MRB work into a connected, traceable process that fits into daily operations instead of sitting outside them.
From NCR to closure
An NCR can start right at the workstation. Operators record the problem directly in Tulip with photos, defect type, and quick notes on what happened. Quality teams see the issue immediately, assign actions, and follow it through review and disposition. Every update is captured in the same record, so nothing gets lost between departments.
Automated workflow steps
Tulip handles the routing and reminders that usually slow MRBs down. Approvers get notifications when it’s their turn to act, and the system moves the NCR to the next reviewer automatically. Built-in logic ensures the right steps are followed for each type of issue. That consistency shortens cycle time and keeps reviews moving even when people are busy.
Live dashboards and trend tracking
Because all MRB data lives in one place, reports don’t need to be built manually. Dashboards show open cases, common defect types, and rework volume in real time. Quality and engineering can spot recurring problems and make process changes before they spread further.
Connected systems and full traceability
Tulip links MRB data with existing MES, ERP, or QMS systems. Every disposition connects back to its related batch, order, or supplier record. That makes it simple to trace a part’s history and demonstrate compliance when auditors ask for proof.
Digitizing MRB work with Tulip isn’t about adding tools, it’s about removing barriers. Reviews happen faster, records stay clean, and everyone involved can see what’s next without digging through folders or email chains.
If you’re interested in learning more about how Tulip can help streamline your quality management practices, reach out to a member of our team today!
-
Each record needs to tell the full story of the nonconformance with NCR number, part or batch ID, a short description of the problem, root cause, disposition, who approved it, and when it was closed. Digital systems add timestamps and attachments automatically, which keeps everything traceable without extra work.
-
There’s no fixed rule. The right pace depends on how fast you build and how complex the product is. Some teams meet daily to review new issues as they come in. Others find that a weekly or biweekly cadence keeps things manageable. What matters is staying consistent so NCRs don’t stack up.
-
If the problem involves a supplier part, they should be looped in early. With digital MRBs, suppliers can log in through a secure link, see their NCRs, and upload any evidence or corrective actions. It’s cleaner than managing the back-and-forth through email.
-
An MRB handles material that doesn’t meet current specs. A CCB manages proposed design or process changes that could affect those specs in the future. They often overlap, recurring MRB findings can trigger a design change, which then goes through the CCB.
-
There’s a lot of useful information hiding in MRB records. Looking at defect patterns, closure times, and supplier history can show where process fixes will make the biggest difference. Digital MRBs make it easier to see those trends without hours of manual report building.
-
Everything’s already logged i.e. who reviewed, what was decided, and when it happened. When an auditor asks for proof, you can pull it up in seconds instead of digging through files. It saves time and avoids the last-minute scramble.
Streamline your quality management efforts With Tulip
Learn how leading manufacturers are using Tulip to capture real-time data, track production, and improve quality across their operations.