What this is
What is a tier board review?
What is a tier board review?
A tier board review is the record produced by a short, standing daily management meeting run against a fixed agenda at a given level — line, area, site or executive. It captures what was reviewed, what was agreed, and who owns each action, so the board can be wiped without the decisions disappearing with it.
What does 'tier' mean in a tier board system?
Tier refers to the level at which the meeting is held — line, area, site or executive — with each tier reviewing a wider scope than the one below it and escalating what it can't resolve upward. A site's daily management system typically runs all four tiers on a cascading schedule.
What is a whiteboard action, and why does it need this record?
A whiteboard action is a task written up during the meeting, on the physical board the meeting is held at, with an intended life of about a day. Left there, it survives only until the board is next wiped — this record is what carries it, and its owner and date, into a system that outlives the cleaning cloth.
Scope
When is a tier board review required?
This record is one step in a larger programme. Using it for work that belongs to a neighbouring template produces records that are hard to report on later.
Use this template when
- A daily tier meeting has just been held, or is about to be, at line, area, site or executive level
- The board's actions need to be captured before the whiteboard is wiped and they're lost
- You are running the Daily Management System programme and this is its recurring review step
- A linked record needs this one to exist — the Meeting and Action Log or an Escalation references it
- The workspace is being set up, or the tier board register needs an entry added or retired
Do not use it for
- Gemba Walk Record, which records a structured walk of the process by a manager, not a standing meeting at a fixed board.
- Layered Process Audit, which checks a small number of critical process steps by different levels of management on different frequencies, rather than reviewing the whole day's performance.
- Meeting and Action Log, which holds the decisions and actions from any operational meeting through to closure — this record evidences the meeting; that one carries its actions.
- Daily Priority Plan, which sets today's plan rather than reviewing yesterday's performance against the fixed agenda.
- Anything outside KnowOps, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process.
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 9001 cl.9.3 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 9001 cl.9.3 asks organisations to review the management system at planned intervals; a tier board is that review compressed from an annual event into a daily cycle. The clauses below sit at the level this record actually operates at — inputs reviewed, outputs decided, and the corrective action loop that follows.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001 cl.9.3.2 | Management review must consider the performance and effectiveness of the QMS, including process performance and nonconformities. | Content |
| ISO 9001 cl.9.3.3 | Review outputs must include decisions on improvement opportunities and any need for changes to the QMS or resources. | Follow through |
| ISO 9001 cl.10.2 | Nonconformities require a documented corrective action with an owner, tracked to closure. | Outcome |
| ISO 9001 cl.9.1.3 | The organisation must analyse and evaluate performance data arising from monitoring and measurement. | Outcome |
| ISO 9001 cl.5.3 | Roles, responsibilities and authorities for reporting on QMS performance must be assigned and communicated. | Header |
| ISO 9001 cl.7.5.3 | Documented information evidencing conformity must be retained and protected against loss. | Header |
| ISO 9001 cl.5.1.1 | Top management must demonstrate leadership by ensuring the QMS achieves its intended results and by engaging people. | Conduct |
What it does not cover
- A review held in a meeting room instead of at the board, which strips out the visual management data the format depends on and turns a five-minute stand-up into a seated meeting.
- Actions raised without an owner or a date, which means the count of actions closed on time has nothing to measure against and the escalation trigger never fires.
- A whiteboard wiped before the actions are transcribed into the log, which is the exact failure this record exists to close — actions do not survive being wiped.
- Safety marked reviewed when it was skipped to save time, which inverts the fixed agenda's own ordering and hides the one item cl.9.3 expects reviewed first.
- An escalation ticked as raised with no reference to the log it landed in, which breaks the link this record depends on and leaves the next tier with nothing to open.
Global
Tier Board Review requirements by country
Tier boards are a management-system practice rather than a statutory one, but three instruments shape how rigorously they're expected to run and what an auditor asks to see.
ISO 9001:2015 cl.9.3
the baseline requirement to review the management system at planned intervals
A daily tier board is one legitimate way of meeting that requirement continuously rather than as an annual event, provided the review actually covers performance data and produces decisions.
IATF 16949:2016
an explicit requirement for daily review of production and quality performance, commonly implemented as tiered meetings and layered process audits
Suppliers into the US automotive chain are contractually held to this even where the OEM itself never inspects the board directly.
VDA 6.3 process audit
assesses whether the daily management process itself, not just its output, is being run to standard
An auditor working to VDA 6.3 will ask to see a run of past tier board records, not just today's, to check the format hasn't drifted.
How to complete it
How to complete a tier board review, step by step
Filling in each field is mechanical. The judgement calls are what make the record defensible when someone other than the chair reads it later.
A tier board that starts ten minutes late because the chair was pulled into a shift-change conversation is a different failure from one that starts late because nobody showed up. The field only records yes or no — the difference has to live elsewhere, or every late start looks the same to whoever reviews the trend.
The record exists because whiteboard actions get wiped. That only holds if someone transcribes new actions into the log before the board is cleaned, not after. A chair who fills in this record from memory the next morning has already recreated the failure it was built to prevent.
An item that could plausibly be resolved at this tier but is escalated anyway inflates the tier above with noise; an item that needed the next tier's authority but wasn't escalated sits unresolved indefinitely. The chair is making a call about authority, not urgency, and the two are frequently confused.
Content items — safety, quality, delivery, cost, people — are meant to be reviewed every time the board runs, even briefly. Marking one N/A because there was genuinely nothing new is different from skipping it because time ran out, and only one of those is a legitimate use of the option.
What auditors find
Most common tier board review findings
Patterns worth watching for once a run of these records exists, not just the day's entry.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Safety Reviewed First is marked Yes on every record for months, including days when the meeting overran and safety was the item cut to save time. | ISO 9001 cl.5.1.1 / cl.9.3.2 | Cross-check against Duration Minutes and Kept Within The Time — a board that consistently overruns and still reports every content item reviewed is not being read carefully. |
| Actions Raised and Actions Closed Since Last both stay near zero across a site with a known backlog visible elsewhere. | ISO 9001 cl.10.2 | Compare against the linked Meeting and Action Log — a live backlog with nothing raised at tier board usually means actions are being logged directly and the board isn't the entry point it's supposed to be. |
| Escalation Raised To The Next Tier is Yes with no Action Log ID and no corresponding record at the tier above. | ISO 9001 cl.9.3.3 | Treat the field and the ID as one control, not two — require the reference before the escalation can be marked done. |
| Held At The Board Rather Than A Meeting Room drifts to No over several weeks without anyone flagging it as a change to the format. | ISO 9001 cl.9.1.1 | Track this field on its own trend line — a slow drift back to meeting rooms is usually the first sign the format is being allowed to lapse. |
| Result Band shows Pass while Completeness Percent sits well under 100. | ISO 9001 cl.9.1.3 | Read the two fields together, not separately — a pass score on a half-answered form is the specific case the completeness field was added to catch. |
| Previous Actions Reviewed is marked Yes but Overdue Actions Challenged is marked No on the same record, repeatedly. | ISO 9001 cl.9.3.2 | The two fields should move together — reviewing previous actions without challenging the overdue ones is a review in name only. |
Case in point
Case in point: the action that came back a month later
A packing line raised a jam-prone infeed guard at three consecutive tier boards. Each time it was written on the whiteboard as an action, and each time the board was wiped at the end of the week before anyone transcribed it into the action log. The chair rotated between two supervisors, neither of whom had seen the earlier entries.
It resurfaced a fourth time when a different operator raised it as if new. By then it had cost roughly a shift's worth of downtime across the three intervening weeks — not because the tier board failed to identify the problem, but because nothing about the board's own process survived contact with a marker and a cloth.
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.
5 sections
- Reference
- OPS-014
- Archetype
- Record
- Record ID
- TIER-2026-000
- Scoring
- Actions closed on time
- Direction
- High is good
- Singleton
- Yes
- Basis
- ISO 9001 cl.9.3
- Links
- Feeds Meeting Action Log and Escalation
- Tags
- Daily management, Meeting
- Sections
- 5
- Fields
- 50
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 0
- Links out
- 4
Header
13 fieldsReview ID*
Auto sequence. Format TIER-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
Tier*
Line, area, site or executive.
Held*
Chair*
Attendees*
Duration Minutes*
Held At The Agreed Time*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Whiteboard Actions Live About A Day
The meeting is fine. What fails is that the actions are written in marker, wiped on Thursday, and raised again the following month by somebody who thought it was new.
Conduct
6 fieldsFixed Agenda Followed*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Held At The Board Rather Than A Meeting Room*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Yesterday Reviewed Before Today Planned*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Data Current And Visible*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Everybody Who Should Attend Did*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Kept Within The Time*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Content
6 fieldsSafety Reviewed First*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Quality Reviewed*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Delivery And Output Reviewed*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Cost And Waste Reviewed*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
People And Manning Reviewed*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Escalations From The Tier Below Heard*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Follow through
6 fieldsPrevious Actions Reviewed*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Overdue Actions Challenged*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
New Actions Have An Owner*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
New Actions Have A Date*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Items Escalated To The Next Tier*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Feedback Given Downward*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Outcome
19 fieldsActions Raised*
Actions Closed Since Last*
Actions Overdue*
Escalation Raised To The Next Tier*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Action Log ID
Links to OPS-017 Log ID
Daily Report ID
Links to OPS-012 Report ID
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
Chair*
Signature*
Area Manager*
Second Signature*
OPS-014 · record IDs look like TIER-2026-000 · Feeds Meeting Action Log and Escalation
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The form is the easy part. Keeping the whiteboard's actions alive past Thursday, routing escalations to the tier that can actually act on them, and holding safety and quality reviews to the same standard every day is the work that actually slips.
Holds the tier board register against every site and tier, chases a record that hasn't been completed by the time the next one is due, and keeps the link to the Meeting Action Log current.
Picks up anything raised under Safety Reviewed First that needed an escalation, so a safety item flagged at the board doesn't wait for someone to notice it's still open.
Tracks Quality Reviewed alongside the CAPA references this record feeds, so a quality issue raised at tier board and a formal corrective action opened later are visibly the same thread.

Rolls completion, escalation and Result Band across every site into one view, and holds any write back to the record for your approval before it lands.
This template lives in KnowOps — frontline execution. Shift handover, production control, daily management, worker lifecycle and improvement.
Meet KnowOps→Glossary
Tier Board Review definitions and key terms
- Tier board
- A physical or visual board used to run a short, standing daily management meeting at a fixed level — line, area, site or executive — against a fixed agenda.
- Gemba
- The place where the work actually happens, as distinct from the office or meeting room where it's discussed. Not itself a field on this template, but the reason the board sits on the floor rather than in a meeting room.
- Layered process audit
- A separate check, done by different levels of management on different frequencies, that a small number of critical process steps are being followed as specified — feeds the tier board rather than replacing it.
- Escalation
- Moving an item this tier cannot resolve — because of authority, resource or cross-functional scope — up to the next tier, with a reference the receiving tier can open.
- Management review
- The ISO 9001 cl.9.3 requirement to review the management system's suitability, adequacy and effectiveness at planned intervals; a tier board is a continuous, compressed form of this rather than a substitute for it.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about tier board review
What is a tier board review?+
A tier board review is a record used in KnowOps that runs the daily management meeting against a fixed agenda and records what was agreed and by whom. It sits against ISO 9001 cl.9.3 and forms part of the Daily Management System programme.
Why does the whiteboard get wiped before actions are recorded?+
Because the board is meant to be reused the next day, and nobody owns the step of transcribing yesterday's actions before it's cleaned. That gap is the specific failure this record exists to close — every action needs a home outside the marker before the board is wiped.
What's the difference between this and the Meeting and Action Log?+
This record evidences that the meeting itself happened, to standard, with the right content covered. The Meeting and Action Log carries the actions it generates through to closure — the two are linked, not interchangeable.
Who chairs a tier board review?+
The area manager, by design — the template records Chair as a required field and expects a second signature from the area manager at sign-off, so the same person cannot silently skip both roles.
How is a tier board review scored?+
Scoring is actions closed on time, where high is good. The Content section and the Follow through section both feed a Result Band of Pass, Caution or Fail, alongside a Completeness Percent that stops a high score on a half-answered form counting as a pass.
Can the fixed agenda be changed?+
Yes — every field, option and conditional rule is editable. Most sites install the template as delivered, run it for a full cycle, and only then adjust the agenda order or content items once they've seen what the data actually shows.
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
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
Daily Priority Plan
Sets the small number of things that must happen today and who owns each
More in Daily Management
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
Daily Priority Plan
Sets the small number of things that must happen today and who owns 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 cl.9.3 — Management review
- ISO 9001:2015 cl.9.1 — Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation
- ISO 9001:2015 cl.10.2 — Nonconformity and corrective action
- IATF 16949:2016 — daily management and layered process audit requirements
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.