There are many ways you can get data into a spreadsheet. You can type it in. You can copy and paste it in from another digital file. You can use a macro or some VBA to automatically pull it in from somewhere. You can use some of Excel's built-in features to 'connect' to an external source like a database. You could even dictate it in, cell by cell. Each of these input cases has its own hazards. Typing can be subject to typos. Copied data can be pasted into the wrong cells, or be the wrong shape entirely. Even within the categories there are different levels of hazard and risk - for example, if you're typing data in, are you reading it off of another record such as a written form? Or are you typing in an original observation such as a thermometer reading? If you're recording an original observation in a regulated capacity, then you might have to worry about protecting that as an electronic record. When you're connecting to some source outside of the spreadsheet like a database or xml file, are you in control of that source? Can you guarantee that the data format won't change between imports? Does the data needs some kind of cleaning to make it consistent, remove garbage, or to convert it to an expected format? As you might imagine, each of these scenarios might require different controls to ensure the integrity of your data. You should certainly consider how data will be input as part of the spreadsheet design. You might even need to limit how data can be input in your procedures, just to make sure you don't introduce some unknown hazards to the integrity of your data! Until next time, thanks for reading! – Brendan p.s. Enjoy this message? Read more at the Hyland Quality Systems website. |
I'm Brendan Hyland. I help regulated facilities transform their software, spreadsheets, workflows and documents from time-consuming, deviation-invoking, regulatory burdens, to the competitive advantage they were meant to be. Join me every week as we take a few minutes to explore, design, test and improve the critical systems we use in our facilities.
It’s the first step of the problem solving framework that I was taught back in Engineering school. Not ‘Plan’. Not “Define”. “I want to and I can”. That particular framework - the McMaster Six Step - never gained the popularity of the ones now used today, but in the end they all contain the same basic elements - research, planning & design, implementation, evaluation and iteration - just stated in different ways. However I’ve never really seen this particular element called out explicitly...
My eight year old son figured out a hack to make the music service work better for him. The kids have a Google smart speaker that is attached to a Spotify account so they can just ask for any of their favourite music. Anyone who has pre-teens in the house probably knows how much such a setup is used - all day every day. Coming from someone who had to run to the double-cassette boom box to press the record button any time a new favourite song came on the radio just so I could listen to it...
I’ve seen several quality leaders complain this week about their disappointment with generative AI - they’re not getting the results they expected. And I understand why - context is king! If you just ask AI to write a procedure or generate a quality document, you’ll get generic, mediocre output. Without enough context, AI can only produce something generic based on its training data. But how do you give it that context? By the time you’ve gone back and forth trying to “engineer the prompt” to...