What is the view on what constitutes adequate "authorisation" of a change to proceed for a GxP system?
I have always taken this to mean that specified individuals - e.g. System Owner and Quality Assurance must sign (either on paper on via e-signature) to indicate their approval.
However, I have just audited a system where their process is to provide verbal authorisation and have it minuted. (The fact that the minutes did not contain a list of attendees was their downfall in the audit.) But, it did make me wonder if this would actually be an acceptable solution?
Personally, I was not comfortable with this - it is easy to minute an attendee as being present when they were actually absent, but more difficult to produce an electronic signature...