Management review under ISO 9001:2026 keeps its purpose (9.3.1: top management reviews the QMS at planned intervals for its continuing suitability, adequacy, effectiveness and alignment with strategic direction) and its outputs (9.3.3: decisions on improvement opportunities, on changes to the QMS and on resource needs, with records). What changes is the input list in 9.3.2. It now has eight items instead of six: changes in the needs and expectations of interested parties is a new input (c)), and the single 2015 input on the effectiveness of actions to address risks and opportunities is split into two (g) risks, h) opportunities). Those inputs depend on the analysis required by 9.1.3, which is split the same way (e) risks, f) opportunities). An agenda built on the 2015 list will leave three items uncovered.
Gap assessment, documentation update, training, internal audit and support through your transition audit, delivered end to end by our expert, experienced, professional and friendly local Filipino lead auditors.
The inputs of 9.3.2, compared with ISO 9001:2015
| 2026 input | Content | Compared with 2015 |
|---|---|---|
| a) | Status of actions from previous management reviews | Same as 2015 a) |
| b) | Changes in external and internal issues relevant to the QMS | Same as 2015 b) |
| c) | Changes in needs and expectations of interested parties relevant to the QMS | New as a named input |
| d) 1) | Trends in nonconformities and corrective actions | Same as 2015 c) 1) |
| d) 2) | Trends in monitoring and measurement results | Same as 2015 c) 2) |
| d) 3) | Trends in audit results | Same as 2015 c) 3) |
| d) 4) | Customer satisfaction and feedback from relevant interested parties | Same as 2015 c) 4) |
| d) 5) | The extent to which quality objectives have been met | Same as 2015 c) 5) |
| d) 6) | Process performance and conformity of products and services | Same as 2015 c) 6) |
| d) 7) | The performance of external providers | Same as 2015 c) 7) |
| e) | Opportunities for improvement | Same as 2015 f) |
| f) | The adequacy of resources | Same as 2015 d) |
| g) | The effectiveness of actions taken to address risks (6.1.2) | 2015 e) covered risks and opportunities together |
| h) | The effectiveness of actions taken to address opportunities (6.1.3) | Split from the 2015 combined input |
Annex A.9.3 adds three points of interpretation. “Trends in audit results” refers to all audits: first-party (internal), second-party (customer) and third-party (certification). The intervals between reviews are determined by the organisation and can be influenced by risks, opportunities and changes in context, so a business going through a merger or a transition may need a review sooner than its annual date. And management review is the mechanism through which top management makes evidence-based decisions, including resource needs and improvement opportunities, which links it directly to the quality management principle of evidence-based decision-making.
Why the analysis in 9.1.3 has to be done first
Management review inputs are outputs of analysis, not raw data. Under 9.1.3 the organisation analyses and evaluates the data from monitoring and measurement, and the results of that analysis are used to evaluate eight things: a) the conformity of products and services; b) customer satisfaction; c) the performance and effectiveness of the QMS; d) the effectiveness of planning implementation; e) the effectiveness of actions taken to address risks; f) the effectiveness of actions taken to address opportunities; g) the performance of external providers; h) the need for improvements to the QMS. The 2026 change is the split of the 2015 item e) into e) and f). The NOTE that methods can include statistical techniques is retained.
The practical consequence: someone has to look at the risk register’s effectiveness column and the opportunity register’s effectiveness column and form a view before the meeting. If the registers do not carry an effectiveness result, 9.1.3 e) and f) cannot be met, and 9.3.2 g) and h) become a sentence in the minutes (“actions were effective”) that an auditor will test by asking for the data behind it.
An agenda that covers every input
The agenda below maps one to one onto 9.3.2 and produces the outputs 9.3.3 requires. It works for a two-hour annual review and, trimmed, for a quarterly one.
| Agenda item | Input covered | What to bring |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Actions from the last review: done, late, dropped | a) | Action log with owners and dates |
| 2. What changed around us: market, legal, technology, competitors, climate-related conditions; what changed inside: people, capacity, systems | b) | Updated context notes (4.1) |
| 3. What changed in what customers, regulators, owners, staff, suppliers and others expect of us | c) | Updated interested-party table (4.2); customer requirement changes; new contract or regulatory expectations |
| 4. Performance trends: nonconformities and corrective actions; monitoring and measurement; audits (internal, customer, certification); customer satisfaction and other feedback; objectives; process and product performance; supplier performance | d) 1) to 7) | KPI pack with trend lines, not point values; audit findings and closure; objective status |
| 5. Improvement opportunities identified since the last review | e) | List from process owners, audits, analysis (10.1) |
| 6. Are resources adequate for what the system has to do next year | f) | Resource requests and constraints |
| 7. Did the actions we took on risks work | g) | Risk register effectiveness results (9.1.3 e)) |
| 8. Did the actions we took on opportunities deliver | h) | Opportunity register effectiveness results (9.1.3 f)) |
| 9. Decisions: improvements to pursue, changes to the QMS, resources to provide; owners and dates | 9.3.3 | Minutes recorded as decisions with owners |
Minutes should read as decisions with owners and dates, not as a narrative of the discussion. “Noted” is not an output. Under 9.3.3 the results shall include decisions related to continual improvement opportunities and any need for changes to the QMS and resource needs, and documented information shall be available as evidence of the results. Two sentences of decisions per agenda item satisfy that; ten pages of attendance and slides without decisions do not.
Common findings and how the 2026 wording produces them
Three patterns produce findings in 2026 audits. The first is the annual meeting with 2015 headings: it misses interested-party changes (c)) and treats risks and opportunities as one line, so g) and h) cannot be shown separately. The second is the review as presentation: management is briefed, nothing is decided, and 9.3.3 cannot be evidenced. The third is the review without analysis: raw complaint counts are shown but not evaluated, so 9.1.3 is not met and the inputs to 9.3.2 d) are data rather than evaluated trends. All three are fixed by the agenda above and by completing the effectiveness columns in the registers before the meeting.
Don’t take our word for it — read our clients’.
80+ verbatim client feedback letters → — searchable by standard and industry, quoted word-for-word from signed originals you can verify. And see the organizations we serve — Unilab, McDonald’s, SAP, GE, ZTE, JLL and more.
Get a management review agenda that passes a 2026 audit
Free consultation for certified companies and first-timers · ISO 9001:2026 transition and implementation planning against the ISO 9001:2026 standard · itemized quotation within 48 hours. Call +63 977 815 1204, email info@iso-philippines.com, or book your slot →.
Frequently asked questions
What is new in the management review inputs of ISO 9001:2026? One new input, changes in the needs and expectations of interested parties (9.3.2 c)), and the split of the effectiveness of actions on risks and on opportunities into two inputs (9.3.2 g) and h)). The list runs a) to h).
How often must management review be held under ISO 9001:2026? At planned intervals set by the organisation (9.3.1). Annex A.9.3 says the interval can be influenced by risks, opportunities and changes in context; there is no prescribed frequency.
Does management review have to be a meeting? No. The standard requires a review by top management with the inputs of 9.3.2 and the outputs of 9.3.3, and records of the results. It can be a meeting, a series of meetings or a structured written review, as long as top management conducts it.
What records does management review require? Documented information as evidence of the results of management reviews (9.3.3): the decisions on improvement, on changes to the QMS and on resources.
What is the link between 9.1.3 and 9.3.2? 9.1.3 requires the organisation to analyse and evaluate its data, including the effectiveness of actions on risks (e)) and on opportunities (f)); those evaluations are the inputs 9.3.2 g) and h). Without the analysis, the inputs are assertions.
Can management review be combined with other management system reviews? Yes. Annex A.6.2 notes that linking objectives across management systems supports coherence, and an integrated review is common practice. Each system’s required inputs must still be covered.
Read next
Risks and opportunities in ISO 9001:2026; leadership, policy and roles; the clause-by-clause register; the ISO 9001:2026 playbook; and ISO 9001:2026 transition consulting from Sterling.
Sources
ISO 9001:2026, Quality management systems — Requirements, sixth edition (published 16 September 2026): 9.1.3, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, Annex A.6.2, A.9.1, A.9.3. ISO 9001:2015, 9.1.3 and 9.3.2, for the comparison.
Certified to ISO 9001:2015? Take the free ten-minute ISO 9001:2026 gap check, then let a local Sterling lead auditor turn your result into your transition plan.
