Hi
I am in the process of writting up a short cheet sheet for my managment regarding external audits. I am using the ISO:19011 auditing gidlelines for template. My question is:

During the interview section of the audit can the auditee have a represenative in the same room while the audtor is intervieing the employee?


Tim

:thanks:

Hi
I am in the process of writting up a short cheet sheet for my managment regarding external audits. I am using the ISO:19011 auditing gidlelines for template. My question is:

During the interview section of the audit can the auditee have a represenative in the same room while the audtor is intervieing the employee?


Tim

:thanks:

Yes. But the other person maybe either an escort for the audit team or an observer. In either case, onlky the auditee must be allowed to answer whatever questions the auditor (audit team) might pose.

Ok,
If the "guide" is some one like the company ISO person can I step in when a auditor may lead the employee or ask question that may be out of the expertice of the employee?


Tim :thanks:

Ok,
If the "guide" is some one like the company ISO person can I step in when a auditor may lead the employee or ask question that may be out of the expertice of the employee?


Tim :thanks:
If the employee does not have the expertise, why has that person been assigned to the particular process? In this case, No you cannot intervene: the auditor has found a problem with the training/ competence/ assignment of the auditee.

But, if the auditor is addresssing the wrong person, as the guide, you should take the hit for getting the auditor to the wrong place. In that case, apologise and learn your own (personal) lesson.

It is wrong, though, for an auditor to lead an auditee into an incorrect answer or to a predrawn conclusion. But, a good company will have trained its own people in how to be audited such that they are aware of the need to resist being lead along to an incorrect/ unfair conclusion. Process owners should be trained to respond accordingly. As the guide, take note of the situation. Then, at the exit intervioew you have every right to object to the auditor's inaccurate conclusions. One of my 12 Golden Rules of auditing, in my books etc. is that the auditor: must "always present a true and fair view". Thus, if the auditortries to present a view that is not fairly based, the auditee has every right to object. After all, the auditor's conclusions will go on file and might later mislead non-participants.

Hi
I am in the process of writting up a short cheet sheet for my managment regarding external audits. I am using the ISO:19011 auditing gidlelines for template. My question is:

During the interview section of the audit can the auditee have a represenative in the same room while the audtor is intervieing the employee?

Tim



Tim

Here is what we do. Similar to what Alan says. The auditee should be able to answer..if not there is a problem.

Audit Roles and Responsibilities

There are three groups involved (auditee, process owner, audit guide)

Audit Guides (QA)

Bring the auditor to the area, and introduce him to the process owner

Stand ready to assist if auditee and process owner are not able to answer

Observe the audit, interpret QS/TS rules to benefit the company

Process Owner
Please be present at all times during the audit to add your support and authority


If you are called away for urgent matters, we will move to another area and come back to see you when you are available

If you can’t attend at all please appoint a deputy to act for you

Auditee (Team Members)

The auditor will want to ask Process Owners Team Members questions since these are the people doing the work

Team Members will be expected to be able to answer the audit questions

If they can’t answer, then the process owner should step in to provide an explanation

If the process owner can’t provide an answer, then the audit guides will try to resolve the issue


Audit Guides are “The Third to Speak” – and if we speak it means there is a problem in your area

I have always taken a little different approach than what Allen is posing. I have always assigned an Internal Auditor as a guide for the Third-Party Assessor (or even to a Second-Party auditor).

In addition to the role of guide, I have asked that our "guides" participate where necessary as "interpreters", where the external auditor may not be using jargon that is understood by the auditee and it becomes necessary for the guide to step in and re-word the auditor's questions in an effort to clarify the question for the auditee. The guide is NOT to answer the question, nor are they allowed to guide the auditee towards a response (other than forming the question in a way understandable by the auditee).

I have never had an external auditor object to this methodology, and in-fact have found many that have been thankful for the assist.

In addition to the role of guide, I have asked that our "guides" participate where necessary as "interpreters", where the external auditor may not be using jargon that is understood by the auditee and it becomes necessary for the guide to step in and re-word the auditor's questions in an effort to clarify the question for the auditee. .

That can be OK, but, I have always taught the auditors that eye contact is important with the auditee and to rephrase the question if it seems the auditee cannot understand it. Another of my 12 Golden Rules is: "Always communicate effectively with the auditee (process owner)."

Thus if the "guide" needs to translate, in order for the auditee to comprehend, it suggests the auditor is less than accomplished in his/ her question technique.

...a little different approach than what Allen is posing...

In addition to the role of guide, I have asked that our "guides" participate where necessary as "interpreters", where the external auditor may not be using jargon that is understood by the auditee and it becomes necessary for the guide to step in and re-word the auditor's questions in an effort to clarify the question for the auditee. The guide is NOT to answer the question, nor are they allowed to guide the auditee towards a response (other than forming the question in a way understandable by the auditee).
This was the response that was forming in my head - I could not have said it better. I just wanted to also add that there is nothing wrong with anyone saying "I don't know the answer to that - I would go ask so-and-so or go look it up in procedure XYZ."

That can be OK, but, I have always taught the auditors that eye contact is important with the auditee and to rephrase the question if it seems the auditee cannot understand it. Another of my 12 Golden Rules is: "Always communicate effectively with the auditee (process owner)."

Thus if the "guide" needs to translate, in order for the auditee to comprehend, it suggests the auditor is less than accomplished in his/ her question technique.
We are talking about external audits. Besides - I am way less "rigid" about this with internal audits. I take advantage of internal audits to "coach" auditees in order for them to feel more comfortable when the registrar or customer auditor is here.

We are talking about external audits. Besides - I am way less "rigid" about this with internal audits. I take advantage of internal audits to "coach" auditees in order for them to feel more comfortable when the registrar or customer auditor is here.

I care not of the type of audit. It is for the auditor to communicate effectively with the auditee. If on an internal audit, the auditor is incapable of that there is a problem as the internal auditor should have the advantage of being more intimately acquainted with the organization's processes and therefore able to express his/ her questions accordingly.

...I have always taught the auditors...
This is the reason I pointed out that Zuggy is talking about external audits.

We will just have to disagree on this one. I feel your take on this is much too rigid.

Hi,
Basically, the list is great...
Because some time, If we are going to audit the managers. We are often loosing touch, questions to ask because primarily there are two points that must be considered, its either we fear that we ask a question which is not related to the process and the choice of words that we used. just like on our end, most persons conducting the audit synopsis, is very afraid in presenting most probably because you'll be presenting to the top management and one might feel intimidated. :whip:
Thank you very much. :thanx:
Best regards,
Raffy :cool: