What this is
What is a daily priority plan?
What is a daily priority plan?
It is a short, written statement of the small number of things that must happen today and who owns each one. It is prepared each morning by the area manager, usually agreed at the tier board, and it exists so that the day's priorities are a fixed reference rather than a memory that different people recall differently by lunchtime.
Why does it need to be written down rather than agreed verbally?
A verbal agreement has no fixed version. By the second interruption, the manager, the shift lead and the operator on the floor are each working from a slightly different memory of what was agreed. A written plan with named owners is the one thing everyone can point back to when priorities start to drift.
Who is accountable when a priority is dropped?
The named owner on that priority line, not the area manager who set the plan. The plan exists precisely to move accountability from the person running the tier board to the person doing the work, and it only functions if each priority carries one name, not a team.
Scope
When is a daily priority plan required?
This plan is one step in a larger programme. Using it to record work that belongs to a neighbouring template produces a record nobody can report against later.
Use this template when
- A new working day or shift is starting and priorities have not yet been fixed in writing
- The area manager has come out of the tier board with agreed priorities that need an owner and a record
- A priority has been carried forward from yesterday and needs to be re-owned rather than silently continued
- You are running the Daily Management System programme and this is today's instance of the daily step
- A linked record needs this one to exist — the Tier Board Review references it, and the Manning Plan is checked against it
Do not use it for
- Tier Board Review, which runs the daily management meeting itself against a fixed agenda and records what was agreed and by whom — the priority plan is one of its outputs, not a substitute for it
- Gemba Walk Record, which captures what a manager observed on a structured floor walk, not what was planned in advance
- Layered Process Audit, which checks that specified process steps are being followed, rather than setting what today's priorities are
- Meeting and Action Log, which is for general actions arising from any meeting, not the specific small set of daily must-do priorities
- Anything outside KnowOps, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 9001 cl.6.2 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 9001 cl.6.2 asks for quality objectives that are planned, resourced, assigned and evaluated. The daily priority plan is where that planning cycle happens at the scale of a single shift rather than a management review.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(a) | Define what will be done | Quality of the plan |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(b) | Determine what resources are required | Quality of the plan |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(c) | Assign who will be responsible | Quality of the plan |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(d) | Set when it will be completed | Header |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(e) | Decide how results will be evaluated | Outcome |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.1 | Objectives relevant to conformity, monitored and communicated | Quality of the plan |
| ISO 9001 cl.6.2.1 | Objectives updated as appropriate, not left to drift unreviewed | Outcome |
What it does not cover
- A plan with five or six priorities on it, which stops being a priority list and becomes an unmanaged task list once the shift gets interrupted.
- A priority with no named owner, which the Each Has A Named Owner field records as No and which the outcome section can then never fairly attribute.
- A plan agreed after the shift has already started, which the header's Set Before The Shift Started field is there specifically to catch.
- An interruption that recurs shift after shift without being escalated, which the Pattern Of Interruption Escalated field is left at No against.
- A priority silently dropped rather than carried forward, which the Carried Forward Rather Than Dropped field distinguishes, and which a tidy-looking plan can otherwise hide.
Global
Daily Priority Plan requirements by country
ISO 9001 sets the planning requirement everywhere the standard is certified against, but what a daily priority plan is expected to prove differs by market, and the areas this template covers — cutting rooms, chill stores, pasteurising — put it inside food-sector schemes as well.
ISO 9001:2015 cl.6.2
Certification auditors look for objective evidence of a planning cycle running continuously, not minutes reconstructed after the fact.
A dated, owned daily plan with an evaluated outcome is close to the cleanest evidence a site can offer that cl.6.2 is a live practice rather than a paper exercise.
BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety, Issue 9, cl.1.1.2
Senior management commitment has to be demonstrated through resourcing and follow-through, not stated intent.
A daily plan that is set, owned and reviewed every day is one of the few records that shows commitment operating at floor level between audits, rather than only at management review.
FDA FSMA Preventive Controls Rule, corrective action requirements
Corrective actions need a documented responsible person and a timeframe, connected back to what was supposed to happen.
Interruptions and dropped priorities captured on the daily plan are the raw material that a corrective action record later needs — without this, the timeline has to be reconstructed from memory.
How to complete it
How to complete a daily priority plan, step by step
Filling in every field is mechanical. Making the plan defensible when someone reviews it later comes down to four judgement calls the area manager has to get right.
Three is the number that survives a normal shift's interruptions. The moment the list reaches five or six it has stopped being a set of priorities and become a task list, and the Small Number Of Priorities field should be marked No rather than nudged through.
Priority One, Two and Three Delivered each want a genuine Yes or No against what was actually finished, not what is on track. A priority that is 90% done at the end of the shift is not delivered, and marking it Yes to make the day look clean defeats the point of scoring it at all.
One late delivery is a day. The same interruption on three consecutive plans is a pattern, and Pattern Of Interruption Escalated exists to force that judgement rather than let each day be assessed in isolation from the ones either side of it.
Technically it can still be completed, but Set Before The Shift Started exists because a plan fixed after the shift is under way has already missed the point — priorities have started forming on their own by then, and the plan is retrofitted around them rather than setting them.
What auditors find
Most common daily priority plan findings
The same six gaps show up across sites running this template, usually because the plan is treated as a formality that follows the tier board rather than a record that has to hold up on its own.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Set Before The Shift Started is marked Yes but the Date and Time on the record postdates the shift start recorded elsewhere. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(d) | Timestamp the plan on first save and flag any record created after the recorded shift start. |
| A priority is marked Complete in Status while its line under Priority One, Two or Three Delivered is still No. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(c) | Block the plan from closing while any owned priority remains undelivered without a Carried Forward entry. |
| The same interruption text appears in Main Interruption across several consecutive plans with Pattern Of Interruption Escalated left at No. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.1 | Compare Main Interruption text run to run and prompt escalation once a repeat is detected. |
| Priorities Delivered as a number does not match the count of Yes answers across the three individual delivery fields. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(e) | Derive Priorities Delivered from the three fields automatically instead of a separate hand-entered figure. |
| Carried Forward is marked Yes with no reference back to the Plan ID it was carried from. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.1 | Require the prior day's Plan ID whenever Carried Forward is Yes. |
| Second Signature is captured from the Production Manager before Reviewed At The End Of The Day has been answered. | ISO 9001 cl.6.2.2(e) | Sequence the sign-off so evaluation of the day's outcome precedes the second signature, not the other way round. |
Case in point
Case in point: the plan that held on paper but not on the floor
A boning hall's daily priority plan showed three priorities, three named owners, all marked delivered, for eleven straight days. The tier board never queried it because the numbers looked exactly like what a healthy plan should look like.
A gemba walk on the twelfth day found the same equipment fault being worked around by the same operator each shift, never logged as an interruption because logging it would have meant admitting Priority Two hadn't actually been delivered clean. The plan wasn't dishonest so much as optimistic — and nothing in the form had forced anyone to reconcile that optimism against what the floor could see.
The template
The template, field by field
The form exactly as it installs. Every field, option, score and conditional rule is editable, and the links to other templates come with it.
4 sections
- Reference
- OPS-018
- Archetype
- Plan
- Record ID
- DPP-2026-000
- Scoring
- Priorities delivered
- Direction
- High is good
- Singleton
- Yes
- Basis
- ISO 9001 cl.6.2
- Links
- Links Tier Board Review and Manning Plan
- Tags
- Daily management, Planning
- Sections
- 4
- Fields
- 44
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 0
- Links out
- 3
Header
13 fieldsPlan ID*
Auto sequence. Format DPP-2026-000.
The record's own ID. Other templates point at this value.
Status*
Drives who this goes to next.
- Planned2 pts
- In progress2 pts
- Complete3 pts
- Deferred0 pts
- Open0 pts
- Closed3 pts
- Overdue0 pts
Date and Time*
Completed By*
Site*
Site ID*
Format SITE-000.
Links to FDN-001 Site ID
Day*
Area*
Owner*
Priorities Set*
Set Before The Shift Started*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Agreed At The Tier Board*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Priorities Change By Lunchtime
Three things that must happen today, written down with an owner each, survive the first interruption. The same three held in somebody's head do not.
Quality of the plan
6 fieldsSmall Number Of Priorities*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Each Has A Named Owner*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Each Is Achievable Today*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Linked To A Larger Objective*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Constraints Identified*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Communicated To The Team*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Outcome
6 fieldsPriority One Delivered*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Priority Two Delivered*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Priority Three Delivered*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Interruptions Recorded*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Carried Forward Rather Than Dropped*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Reviewed At The End Of The Day*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Outcome
19 fieldsPriorities Delivered*
Plan Held Through The Day*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Main Interruption
Carried Forward*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Tier Board ID
Links to OPS-014 Review ID
Pattern Of Interruption Escalated*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Items Assessed*
Excludes anything marked N/A.
Items Failed*
Score Percent*
Calculated on submission. High is good. N/A items leave the denominator.
Result Band*
- Pass3 pts
- Caution1 pt
- Fail0 pts
Completeness Percent*
How much of the template was actually answered. A high score on a half completed form is not a high score.
Action Required*
Raise the action record, then enter its reference here.
- No2 pts
- Yes0 pts
Priority
- High0 pts
- Medium1 pt
- Low3 pts
CAPA ID
Format CAPA-2026-00000.
Links to FDN-014 CAPA ID
Action Owner
Area Manager*
Signature*
Production Manager*
Second Signature*
OPS-018 · record IDs look like DPP-2026-000 · Links Tier Board Review and Manning Plan
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
Writing three priorities down is the easy part. Catching the plan that quietly slips — the owner who's not on shift, the interruption nobody escalated — is the work that actually needs watching every day.
Holds the daily priority plan against the tier board and manning records, flags plans agreed after the shift started, and keeps the carried-forward chain intact from one day to the next.
Tracks whether daily priorities stay linked to the objectives cl.6.2 actually requires, rather than drifting into an unrelated task list that happens to be reviewed each morning.
Picks up recurring interruptions logged on the plan — the same fault worked around shift after shift — and turns a pattern the form only flags into a maintenance action with an owner.

Rolls today's priorities, their owners and their delivery status into one view across every area, and holds any write to the plan for your approval before it changes a live record.
This template lives in KnowOps — frontline execution. Shift handover, production control, daily management, worker lifecycle and improvement.
Meet KnowOps→Glossary
Daily Priority Plan definitions and key terms
- Tier board
- The short, standing daily management meeting where priorities, actions and escalations are reviewed against a fixed agenda, usually where this plan is agreed.
- Gemba
- The actual place where the work happens — the floor, not the office — and the basis for walks that check whether a plan matches reality.
- Daily Management System
- The programme this template belongs to: tier boards, gemba walks, layered audits, action logs and the daily plan, run as a connected daily cycle rather than separate paperwork.
- Quality objective
- A specific, planned target linked to the quality policy, which ISO 9001 cl.6.2 requires to be resourced, assigned and evaluated — the daily priority plan applies this at shift scale.
- Carried forward
- A priority explicitly re-owned into the next day's plan, as distinct from one that was simply dropped and never delivered.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about daily priority plan
Is the daily priority plan the same record as the tier board minutes?+
No. The tier board agrees the priorities; this template is the standalone record of what was agreed, who owns it and whether it was delivered, and it is referenced back to the Tier Board Review ID rather than replacing it.
What happens if a priority genuinely cannot be delivered today?+
It should be marked not delivered honestly and either carried forward with a reference to this plan, or explicitly dropped with the reason captured, rather than marked Yes to keep the day's record looking complete.
Why does the template score Set Before The Shift Started and Agreed At The Tier Board separately?+
A plan can be written before the shift starts without ever having gone through the tier board, and vice versa on a day the board is skipped. They are two different disciplines and the template scores them as such.
Who should be entering Priorities Delivered, the numeric field?+
It should be derived from the individual Priority One, Two and Three Delivered answers rather than entered separately — a hand-typed figure that disagrees with the underlying answers is the most common defect on this template.
Does every site need to run this as a singleton?+
Yes, it is designed as one active plan per workspace per day, set up once and maintained through the Daily Management System programme, rather than a fresh template instance for every unrelated event.
Can the plan be changed to fit a site that doesn't run a tier board?+
Yes. Every field, option and link is editable, including the Agreed At The Tier Board field, but most sites are better served by adopting the standing tier board than by removing the field that checks for it.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Daily Management System
Audit Finding Record
Records a single audit finding with its evidence, clause reference and classification
Daily Production Report
Summarises the day across lines: output, attainment, losses, quality and the issues carried forward
Tier Board Review
Runs the daily management meeting against a fixed agenda and records what was agreed and by whom
Gemba Walk Record
Records a structured walk of the process by a manager, what was observed and what was raised
Layered Process Audit
Checks that a small number of critical process steps are being done as specified, by different levels of management on different frequencies
Meeting and Action Log
Holds the decisions and actions from any operational meeting, with an owner and a date on each
More in Daily Management
Tier Board Review
Runs the daily management meeting against a fixed agenda and records what was agreed and by whom
Gemba Walk Record
Records a structured walk of the process by a manager, what was observed and what was raised
Layered Process Audit
Checks that a small number of critical process steps are being done as specified, by different levels of management on different frequencies
Meeting and Action Log
Holds the decisions and actions from any operational meeting, with an owner and a date on each

Written and reviewed by
Siddarth Singh
Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Knowella
Certified Safety Professional and industrial and systems engineer with more than a decade inside food supply chain, freight and manufacturing operations. This page was written against the current text of the standards it cites, not against secondary summaries of them.
- Certified Safety Professional (CSP), Board of Certified Safety Professionals
- MBA, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
- MS and BS, The Ohio State University, Industrial and Systems Engineering
- Six Sigma Black Belt
Sources and last review. Reviewed 16 August 2026 against:
- ISO 9001:2015 — Quality management systems, cl.6.2
- ISO 9001:2015 — Quality management systems, cl.9.1.3
- ISO 9000:2015 — Fundamentals and vocabulary
- BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety, Issue 9 — cl.1.1.2
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.