Recently, as part of our yearly audit plan, our supplier QA dept was audited - without the auditor ever having visited the dept :mg: or asked any employee of said dept a single question. :mg: During the course of this audit he has managed to identify several nc's to be addressed. My concern, also being an auditor, is that are these valid audit findings when all the auditor has done is browse through old documents and draw his opinion from them?

Your thoughts, please

I would guess it depends on what sort of audit he/she was doing. If, for example, the audit was a process audit under 16949 or ISO 9000:2000 the supplier QA dept might have been viewed in relation to its input into the process being audited. If enough documentation within the process showed the planned input of the supplier QA department wasn't effective, I would think the findings could be valid without further further follow-up within the supplier QA department. Even if the QA department had procedures and comments contrary to the finding, it would still not alter the fact that things were not being done as planned.

I am not saying the auditor was correct. I am simply pointing out the need for more information on the audit scope and the findings.

Dave

Hi Willy, I'm basically in agreement with Dave - the nonconformances could very well be legitimate, especially if the audit scope was document review versus standard requirements. My question would be, what was the scope of the audit - if it was a process audit, the auditor should have sampled the employees performing the work. If it was identified as a management system audit, comparing documents versus relevant quality system standard requirements (ISO 9001:2000, ISO/TS 16949, etc.) would be an acceptable method.

Recently, as part of our yearly audit plan, our supplier QA dept was audited - without the auditor ever having visited the dept :mg: or asked any employee of said dept a single question. :mg: During the course of this audit he has managed to identify several nc's to be addressed. My concern, also being an auditor, is that are these valid audit findings when all the auditor has done is browse through old documents and draw his opinion from them? Your thoughts, please


Do you have defined and accepted criterion for audits and their types to be performed within your organization and, that of your suppliers operating systems? :confused:
If so, your definitions and criterion for audit performance processes should be followed and measures by your system.
If not, I would suggest you define criteria for audit performance processes.
Wallace. :rolleyes:

Your thoughts, please

Based on what you are saying, I would get that auditor some decent training and take a hard look at what your organization thinks an audit is, similat to what Wallace is saying.

But, since you claim to be an auditor, what do you think? If you think that auditor's approach is acceptable, I would suggest you join him/ her on the same training course for the fact that you ask the question raises that possible need in my mind.

Recently, as part of our yearly audit plan, our supplier QA dept was audited - without the auditor ever having visited the dept :mg: or asked any employee of said dept a single question. :mg: During the course of this audit he has managed to identify several nc's to be addressed. My concern, also being an auditor, is that are these valid audit findings when all the auditor has done is browse through old documents and draw his opinion from them?
Your thoughts, please
Maybe, just maybe, the auditor has developed ESP, mind reading techniques and telepathical powers. The CIA is looking for people like that. :lmao:

Dear All,


I have 1 OFI on these item:

1) The recording of the evidence should be improved for Manufacturing Process and Product audits.

Can anyone help me or give me opinion on how can I improved this? Maybe anyone can share with me sample of audit checklist or guideline on how to audit internal Product and Process Audit? Help me pls. Thank you.