So, you think you’ve got quality management figured out, and then—boom! A new acronym lands in your lap, leaving you scratching your head.
Don’t worry, you’re not alone. The world of quality assurance is filled with acronyms, and while they may seem overwhelming, understanding them is the first step toward mastering compliance and continual improvement.


In this pillar guide, we break down every major quality management acronym, explain when to use each one, and show how modern organizations are simplifying everything using a Continual Improvement Program (CIP) approach.

Understanding the Alphabet Soup of Quality Management

NCR – Non-Conformance Report

A Non-Conformance Report (NCR) is a formal record of a product, process, or service that does not meet predefined standards. NCRs are used to track and document these deviations, often leading to corrective actions when necessary. However, not all NCRs require root cause analysis; they are primarily used to log defects and determine how they were handled (e.g., rework, scrap, return to vendor).

Key characteristics:

  • Focuses on what went wrong, not necessarily why

  • May involve rework, repair, scrap, or concession

  • Root cause analysis is not always mandatory

Common NCR examples

  • Out-of-tolerance dimensions

  • Incorrect material used

  • Failed inspection results

NCRs are essential for quality control, but they do not always drive systemic improvement on their own.

Poorly managed NCRs often resurface during surveillance audits. Learn how to close audit non-conformities effectively to prevent repeat findings.

NCN: Non-Conformity Note

An NCN (Non-Conformity Note) is a term primarily used by certification bodies and auditors. While NCRs track product non-conformances, NCNs document audit-related non-conformities. If a process does not comply with ISO or other regulatory standards during an audit, an NCN is issued, prompting necessary corrective actions.

CAR: Corrective Action Request 

A Corrective Action Request (CAR) is a formal request for an investigation into a problem that has already occurred. CARs require a root cause analysis and corrective measures to prevent recurrence. Despite the term ‘request,’ oil and gas companies often use CAR to encompass the entire corrective action lifecycle.

CAR requirements

  • Root cause analysis (RCA)

  • Corrective action to eliminate the cause

  • Verification of effectiveness

PAR: Preventive Action Request 

A Preventive Action Request (PAR) is similar to a CAR but focuses on preventing potential issues before they arise. This involves identifying risks, analyzing root causes of possible failures, and implementing preventive measures to avoid future non-conformances.

PAR is used when:

  • Risks are identified

  • Trends indicate future failure

  • Lessons learned suggest preventive controls

Although ISO 9001:2015 emphasizes risk-based thinking, PARs remain valuable for documenting proactive improvement.

SCAR: Supplier Corrective Action Request 

A Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) is issued when a non-conformance originates from a supplier’s product or service. SCARs are formal requests requiring suppliers to analyze the issue, take corrective actions, and implement measures to prevent recurrence, ensuring quality in the supply chain.

SCARs are critical for:

  • Supply chain quality control

  • API Q1 supplier management

  • Vendor performance evaluation

Suppliers must:

  • Investigate root causes

  • Implement corrective actions

  • Prevent recurrence

Weak SCAR management is a major audit red flag in oil & gas and manufacturing sectors.

CAPA: Corrective Action Preventive Action

CAPA is a broad term used to describe the combined approach of corrective and preventive actions. Many quality management systems (QMS) use CAPA as a comprehensive process for identifying, addressing, and preventing quality issues.

CAPA systems typically include

  • Issue identification

  • Root cause analysis

  • Action planning

  • Implementation

  • Effectiveness review

While widely used, CAPA can become bureaucratic and fragmented when too many sub-acronyms are involved.

CPAR: Corrective Preventive Action Request

CPAR is an attempt to merge CAR and PAR into one term, but it often leads to confusion. Since corrective and preventive actions serve distinct purposes, it is advisable to use separate terms rather than CPAR.

Why CPAR causes problems

  • Corrective and preventive actions serve different purposes

  • Auditors may question intent and classification

  • Teams struggle to apply it consistently

Most mature QMS avoid CPAR in favor of clearer structures.

CIP: Continual Improvement Program

With so many acronyms, it’s easy to see why quality management can become overwhelming. Enter CIP (Continual Improvement Program)—a streamlined approach that eliminates confusion. Instead of deciding whether an issue falls under CAR, PAR, NCR, or SCAR, organizations can simply log everything under a single, unified CIP system. With CIP, any systemic issue, audit non-conformity, customer complaint, or opportunity for improvement gets documented under one umbrella. Employees don’t have to stress over terminology; they just contribute to continual improvement.

CIP covers

  • NCRs

  • Audit non-conformities

  • Customer complaints

  • Supplier issues

  • Improvement opportunities

Instead of asking “Is this a CAR or a PAR?”, teams simply log the issue under CIP and follow a standardized improvement workflow.

Conclusion

If quality acronyms are making your head spin, consider shifting to a CIP-focused system. Not only does it simplify quality management, but it also fosters a culture of continuous improvement. Regardless of whether your issue stems from an audit, supplier, or internal process, CIP ensures that quality remains a top priority.

Need help implementing a Continual Improvement Program? Let’s connect and make your quality management process seamless and effective!