Corrective Actions: Process, Examples and Corrective Action Plans

Corrective actions are steps taken to address the cause of an identified problem and prevent it from happening again.

They are an important part of effective health and safety, risk management and wider management systems. When an incident, failed inspection, non-conformance or repeated problem occurs, simply fixing the immediate issue may not be enough. Organisations need to understand why it happened and determine what needs to change.

An effective corrective action process therefore goes beyond recording that something has gone wrong. It connects the problem with investigation, root cause analysis, action plans, assigned responsibilities and a review of whether the action was effective.

For organisations managing safety across multiple people, locations or operations, environment, health and safety (EHS) software can help bring these different stages together and provide greater visibility of outstanding safety actions.

This guide explains what corrective actions are, how the corrective action process works, how they differ from preventive actions and how to develop an effective corrective action plan.

What are corrective actions?

Corrective actions are measures introduced to eliminate the cause of an existing problem or non-conformity and prevent recurrence.

The important word here is cause.

There is a difference between correcting a problem and taking corrective action.

For example, imagine oil has leaked from a piece of machinery onto a factory floor.

Cleaning the oil from the floor is a correction. It addresses the immediate hazard.

If an investigation determines that a failed seal caused the leak, replacing that seal and changing the maintenance or inspection process to prevent the same failure occurring again would be corrective action.

The same principle can be applied to many business processes.

A failed safety inspection may result in immediate corrective measures to make an area safe. A customer complaint may result in the immediate problem being resolved. An internal audit may uncover a non-conformance that is corrected straight away.

However, if the underlying issues remain, the same problem could occur again.

Effective corrective actions focus on delivering a more permanent solution rather than repeatedly treating the symptoms of a problem.

This makes corrective action an important component of continuous improvement. Instead of treating incidents, non-conformances and other problems as isolated events, organisations can use them to identify weaknesses in existing processes and improve performance.

Correction vs corrective action

Although the terms sound similar, a correction and corrective action serve different purposes.

A correction fixes a specific problem that already exists.

Corrective action addresses the reason the problem occurred.

Consider a damaged fire door identified during an inspection.

The immediate correction might be to repair the damaged component. However, a more thorough investigation could reveal that similar damage is repeatedly occurring because equipment is being stored incorrectly nearby.

The corrective action may involve changing the storage arrangement, updating written instructions and introducing additional fire door checks.

Both actions are valuable, but only the second addresses the underlying cause.

This distinction is important when organisations review corrective action reports. Marking an issue as resolved simply because the visible problem has been fixed can create the impression that risk has been addressed when the cause of the problem remains.

Corrective action vs preventive action

Corrective and preventive actions are closely related but are triggered at different stages.

Corrective actions are reactive. They address problems that have already occurred.

Preventive actions are proactive. They address potential risks or weaknesses before they result in a problem.

For example, suppose an employee falls because a walkway has inadequate lighting.

Investigating the incident, improving the lighting and reviewing inspection procedures would be corrective actions.

If an inspection identifies another poorly lit walkway where no incident has yet occurred and the lighting is upgraded, this would be a preventive measure.

Both approaches contribute to effective risk management.

Organisations should not rely solely on incidents to identify where improvements are required. Inspections, audits, risk assessments, employee feedback and safety observations can identify potential risks before someone is injured or operations are disrupted.

What happened to preventive action in ISO 9001:2015?

There is an important distinction when discussing corrective and preventive actions in relation to ISO 9001.

ISO 9001:2015 removed the separate requirement for preventive action that existed in previous versions of the standard.

This does not mean organisations should stop taking proactive measures.

Instead, ISO 9001:2015 introduced greater emphasis on risk-based thinking. Organisations are expected to consider risks and opportunities throughout their quality management system rather than treating preventive action as a separate process.

Corrective action remains a specific requirement when non-conformances occur.

When are corrective actions required?

Corrective actions can be triggered by many different events.

These can include workplace incidents, near misses, failed inspections, internal audits, customer complaints, equipment failures, regulatory findings and repeated errors.

They can also arise when an organisation notices a pattern.

One isolated issue may have a simple explanation. If the same problem continues to occur across different jobs, sites or teams, it may indicate a weakness within the organisation’s processes or management systems.

Typical triggers include:

• Workplace accidents or incidents
• Near misses
• Failed safety inspections
• Audit findings
• Non-conformances
• Repeated equipment failures
• Customer complaints
• Employee safety concerns
• Regulatory compliance issues
• Repeated procedural errors
• Trends identified through safety data

This is one reason good reporting matters.

An individual safety observation may appear relatively minor. Multiple similar observations can reveal a much larger issue.

Velappity’s experience supporting organisations carrying out field-based inspections and assessments highlights the importance of connecting what is found in the field with what happens afterwards. Recording a problem is valuable, but the greater benefit comes from ensuring that identified issues can lead to appropriate action, responsibility and follow-up.

Digital incident reporting can also help organisations capture incidents, near misses and observations in a consistent way, creating a clearer starting point for investigation and corrective action.

What is the corrective action process?

An effective corrective action process is a systematic process for identifying a problem, understanding its cause, deciding what needs to change, implementing those changes and determining whether they worked.

A simple corrective action cycle can be broken into six stages:

1. Identify and document the problem
2. Contain the immediate impact
3. Identify the root cause
4. Develop a corrective action plan
5. Implement corrective actions
6. Review their effectiveness

The complexity of each stage should reflect the seriousness and potential consequences of the issue.

A minor isolated problem may require relatively simple corrective measures. A serious safety incident or repeated non-conformance may require a much more thorough investigation involving multiple relevant stakeholders.

1. Identify and document the problem

The first step is establishing exactly what has gone wrong.

A useful problem statement should be specific enough for someone unfamiliar with the issue to understand it.

It may establish:

• What happened
• Where it happened
• When it occurred
• Who or what was affected
• How the issue was identified
• Whether it has occurred previously
• What immediate consequences resulted

Avoid jumping straight to conclusions about why the problem occurred.

For example:

“Employee failed to follow procedure.”

This may sound like a cause, but it raises further questions.

Why was the procedure not followed? Was the employee trained? Was the procedure accessible? Was it practical? Had the process changed? Was the correct equipment available?

Proper documentation gives the subsequent investigation a factual starting point.

This is particularly important for organisations carrying out large numbers of inspections and assessments. Consistent digital records make it easier to establish what was identified, where it occurred and what evidence was captured at the time.

2. Take immediate corrective or containment action

Some problems require immediate action before a full investigation can take place.

These are often described as containment actions.

The objective is to control the immediate consequences and prevent further harm.

For example:

• Isolating defective equipment
• Cleaning a hazardous spill
• Closing an unsafe area
• Replacing damaged personal protective equipment (PPE)
• Temporarily stopping a process
• Correcting inaccurate documentation

These actions can be essential, particularly where health and safety is involved.

However, containment should not automatically be treated as the permanent solution.

If defective equipment is replaced without determining why it failed, the organisation may experience the same failure again.

Immediate corrective action controls the current problem while the wider corrective action process establishes what caused it.

3. Conduct root cause analysis

Root cause analysis is one of the most important parts of effective corrective action.

It seeks to identify the fundamental cause of a problem rather than simply identifying its visible symptoms.

This matters because corrective actions must address root causes if they are going to prevent recurrence.

Consider an employee who suffers an injury while using equipment.

It may initially appear that the worker simply used the equipment incorrectly. Further investigation might identify that the employee had not received updated training after the equipment was changed.

Going deeper may reveal that there was no formal process for identifying training requirements when new equipment was introduced.

The underlying problem is therefore not simply employee behaviour. It is a weakness in the management process.

Organisations investigating workplace incidents can use a structured incident investigation process to distinguish between immediate, underlying and root causes.

The 5 whys

The 5 Whys is a straightforward root cause analysis technique.

The investigator repeatedly asks why something happened until the underlying cause becomes clearer.

For example:

Problem: A scheduled safety inspection was not completed.

Why? The inspector did not know it was due.

Why? They were not notified.

Why? The inspection schedule had not been updated.

Why? Responsibility for updating it was unclear.

Why? No process owner had been assigned after an organisational change.

The corrective action should therefore address ownership of the inspection process rather than simply telling the inspector not to miss another inspection.

Five questions are not mandatory. Some problems require fewer and others require more. The purpose is to move beyond the immediate explanation.

Ishikawa diagrams

An Ishikawa diagram, often called a fishbone or cause-and-effect diagram, can help teams visualise potential causes of a problem.

Potential causes can be grouped into areas such as people, processes, equipment, materials and environment.

This can be particularly useful when a problem may have several contributing factors rather than one obvious root cause.

Fault tree analysis

Fault tree analysis takes a top-down approach.

It begins with an unwanted event and maps the different failures or conditions that could have contributed to it.

This technique can be useful for more complex operational or safety problems where multiple events need to occur before a failure happens.

Whatever technique is used, root cause analysis should seek to answer why the problem occurred and what needs to change to prevent it happening again.

4. Develop a corrective action plan

Once the root cause has been identified, the organisation can determine what corrective measures are required.

A corrective action plan outlines the steps required to address the issue.

Effective action plans should be SMART:

Specific: Clearly define what needs to happen.

Measurable: Establish how completion and effectiveness will be assessed.

Attainable: Make sure the action can realistically be delivered.

Relevant: Ensure the action addresses the identified root cause.

Timebound: Set a clear completion date.

A corrective action plan should normally include the action required, responsible parties, timeframes, appropriate resources and any associated costs.

It should also establish how the organisation will determine whether the action has been successful.

This final point is easy to overlook.

Completing an action does not necessarily mean the problem has been solved.

5. Implement corrective actions

The next stage is putting the action plan into practice.

Each action should have clear ownership.

Where several departments or relevant stakeholders are involved, it should be clear who is responsible for each individual task and who has overall responsibility for ensuring the corrective action process is completed.

Depending on the problem, implementation could involve:

• Updating documented procedures
• Delivering additional training
• Repairing or replacing equipment
• Changing safety protocols
• Revising inspection frequencies
• Introducing additional controls
• Changing responsibilities
• Updating risk assessments
• Improving communication
• Altering business processes

The organisation also needs to provide appropriate resources.

Assigning corrective actions without sufficient time, authority, equipment or budget can result in action plans remaining open indefinitely.

This is where digital management systems can be particularly valuable. In Velappity’s experience, one of the practical challenges of safety management is not simply identifying actions but maintaining visibility once responsibility moves from the person carrying out an inspection or assessment to the person expected to resolve the issue.

Clear ownership and status information help reduce the risk of important actions disappearing into email chains, spreadsheets or paperwork.

6. Review the effectiveness of corrective actions

The corrective action process should not automatically end when an action is marked complete.

The organisation should determine whether it was effective.

This could involve:

• Reinspection
• Reviewing incident data
• Checking for repeated non-conformances
• Speaking to employees
• Reviewing subsequent audit findings
• Monitoring relevant performance indicators
• Reviewing whether risk has reduced

For example, imagine additional employee training is introduced following repeated procedural errors.

Recording that 100% of relevant employees attended the training confirms that the action was completed.

It does not demonstrate that the action was effective.

The organisation would need to determine whether the procedural errors subsequently decreased.

This distinction between completion and effectiveness is fundamental to continuous improvement.

Corrective action closure rates and overdue actions can also form part of wider health and safety KPIs, helping organisations understand whether identified safety issues are actually being addressed.

If a corrective action has not produced the intended result, further action may be required. This may include revisiting the root cause analysis and conducting a more thorough investigation.

How to create a corrective action plan

A corrective action plan provides a documented structure for moving from an identified problem to a permanent solution.

The level of detail required will depend on the nature of the issue, but a useful corrective action plan could contain the following information:

This information creates accountability.

Instead of recording a vague action such as “improve training”, an effective action plan might specify which employees require training, what the training will cover, who will deliver it and when it must be completed.

The organisation can then establish how effectiveness will be measured.

A structured corrective action plan is particularly valuable where regulatory requirements or internal management systems require evidence showing how identified issues were addressed.

Corrective action examples

Corrective actions can look very different depending on the problem.

The following examples show how the process can work in practice.

Example 1: Workplace slip

Problem: An employee slips on oil leaking from production equipment.

Immediate action: The spill is cleaned and the affected area temporarily restricted.

Root cause: Investigation identifies a deteriorated seal and discovers that the equipment was not included in the current preventive maintenance schedule.

Corrective action: Replace the seal, add the equipment to the maintenance programme and review similar machinery to identify whether the same issue could occur elsewhere.

Effectiveness check: Review subsequent inspections and maintenance records to determine whether further leaks occur.

The incident could also trigger a review of the relevant EHS risk assessment to determine whether existing controls remain appropriate.

Example 2: Repeated failed inspection

Problem: The same housekeeping issue is identified during three consecutive workplace inspections.

Immediate action: The affected area is cleared each time.

Root cause: Employees do not have a designated storage area for the materials creating the obstruction.

Corrective action: Create an appropriate storage area, update the relevant procedure and communicate the change to employees.

Effectiveness check: Review subsequent inspection results to determine whether the issue recurs.

This demonstrates why repeated simple corrections can be inefficient. The problem was repeatedly fixed, but the underlying cause remained until a corrective action was introduced.

Example 3: Customer complaints

Problem: An organisation receives repeated customer complaints about incomplete documentation.

Immediate action: Missing information is provided to affected customers.

Root cause: Investigation identifies that a recent process change removed a verification stage before documents were issued.

Corrective action: Reintroduce an appropriate verification step and assign responsibility to a process owner.

Effectiveness check: Monitor subsequent documentation errors and customer complaints.

Example 4: Safety procedure non-conformance

Problem: An internal audit finds that employees are not completing a required pre-use equipment check.

Immediate action: Employees are reminded to complete the check.

Root cause: The existing procedure is difficult to access in the field and employees are recording checks inconsistently.

Corrective action: Review the process, provide clear instructions and introduce a more accessible method for recording checks.

Effectiveness check: Review completion rates and carry out follow-up audits.

For organisations with field-based teams, this example highlights an important practical consideration. A process may look effective when written into a safety management system but still fail operationally if workers cannot easily follow or record it where the work actually takes place.

That is why Velappity focuses on digitising field-based processes such as inspections, assessments and safety records rather than treating compliance solely as a back-office exercise.

Corrective actions and ISO 9001

Corrective action is an established part of quality management and ISO 9001.

Under ISO 9001:2015, organisations are required to respond appropriately when a non-conformance occurs.

This includes controlling and correcting the issue where appropriate, dealing with its consequences and determining whether action is required to eliminate the cause so that it does not recur elsewhere.

This makes root cause analysis particularly important.

A simple correction may resolve the immediate non-conformance, but effective corrective action considers why the problem occurred and whether similar weaknesses exist elsewhere within the quality system.

Organisations should also review the effectiveness of corrective actions and retain appropriate documented information.

ISO 9001:2015 differs from earlier versions of the standard because preventive action is no longer treated as a separate requirement. Instead, risk-based thinking is integrated throughout the management system.

This encourages organisations to consider potential risks proactively while maintaining a structured corrective action process for problems that have already occurred.

How corrective actions support continuous improvement

Corrective actions should not be viewed solely as a compliance exercise.

Used properly, they provide organisations with information about where their processes, controls and management systems can be improved.

A repeated incident may reveal weaknesses in training.

A recurring non-conformance may highlight an ineffective procedure.

Several similar safety observations may identify an emerging risk.

Repeated overdue actions may indicate that responsibilities or resources are unclear.

Looking at these patterns allows organisations to move beyond resolving individual issues and begin improving processes systematically.

This is also where corrective action connects closely with risk management.

Lessons from incidents, inspections and corrective action reports may require existing risk assessments to be reviewed and controls changed. Equally, risk assessments can identify proactive measures that prevent future problems from occurring.

Corrective actions therefore form part of a wider improvement cycle:

Identify → Investigate → Act → Review → Learn → Improve

Managing corrective actions digitally

Corrective action becomes increasingly difficult to manage when an organisation has multiple sites, teams, inspections, assessments and action owners.

A spreadsheet may record that an action exists, but organisations also need visibility of the information surrounding it.

What triggered the action? What evidence was collected? Who is responsible? When is it due? Has it been completed? Has anyone confirmed that it worked?

When information is spread across paper forms, spreadsheets, emails and separate systems, maintaining that connection becomes harder.

A digital health and safety management software platform can help organisations connect inspections, assessments and other safety records rather than treating them as isolated documents.

This is particularly relevant to field-based safety management.

Velappity was designed around the practical reality that important health and safety information is often generated away from a desk. Inspectors and field teams may identify issues, capture evidence and complete assessments while on site, while responsibility for resolving those issues may sit elsewhere within the organisation.

Digitising that workflow can make it easier to maintain an auditable trail between what was identified and what happened next.

For safety teams, the objective is not simply to create more records. It is to make those records useful.

When incident information, risk assessments, inspections and actions form part of a connected process, organisations are better placed to identify recurring problems, demonstrate ongoing compliance and support continual improvement.

Corrective action FAQs

What is an example of corrective action?

An example of corrective action is investigating repeated equipment failures, identifying inadequate preventive maintenance as the root cause and changing the maintenance process to prevent the failure recurring.

Repairing the failed equipment alone would be a correction. Changing the underlying process is the corrective action.

What are the steps in the corrective action process?

A simple corrective action process involves six stages:

1. Identify and document the problem.
2. Contain its immediate impact.
3. Conduct root cause analysis.
4. Create a corrective action plan.
5. Implement corrective actions.
6. Review their effectiveness.

The process may require additional investigation for serious or complex problems.

What is the difference between correction and corrective action?

A correction fixes an identified problem. Corrective action addresses the root cause of that problem to prevent recurrence.

For example, replacing a damaged component is a correction. Determining why components repeatedly become damaged and changing the relevant process is corrective action.

What is the difference between corrective and preventive action?

Corrective actions are reactive and address an existing problem. Preventive actions are proactive and seek to prevent a potential problem from occurring.

Both can contribute to risk management and continuous improvement, although ISO 9001:2015 no longer includes preventive action as a separate requirement.

What should a corrective action plan include?

A corrective action plan should include a clear problem statement, immediate containment measures, root cause, required corrective actions, responsible parties, timeframes, resources and costs where relevant and a method for measuring effectiveness.

Actions should be specific enough that responsibilities and completion requirements are clear.

Does ISO 9001 require preventive action?

ISO 9001:2015 does not contain a separate preventive action requirement. Preventive thinking is instead incorporated through the standard’s risk-based approach.

Corrective action remains required when non-conformances occur, including evaluating what caused the issue and whether action is needed to prevent recurrence.

Build a more connected corrective action process

Corrective actions are most effective when they form part of a wider process rather than becoming standalone tasks.

An incident, inspection finding or non-conformance should be documented, investigated and linked to an appropriate action. Responsibility should be clear, progress should be visible and completed actions should be reviewed to determine whether they actually addressed the root cause.

For organisations managing health and safety across field teams, multiple locations or complex operations, Velappity’s health and safety management software provides a digital approach to managing inspections, assessments and safety information.

By connecting information captured in the field with wider safety management processes, organisations can improve visibility, strengthen compliance and turn identified problems into meaningful improvements.