Hi,

Our auditor informed us that an NCR might be raised because one of our personnel in the Table of Organization indicates a Department Manager whereas the actual position of the said person in the 201 file is only Supervisor.

Is this truly a non-conformity in the standard? What can we do to avoid an NCR? Please help.:(

All standards require roles to be defined...how have you defined it and how is it understood by the person involved whatever you call him?

The important thing is what he is required to know and do and whether or not he knows it and does it, not what he's called.

You auditor needs to refocus on the important stuff and stay away from dribble.

The only tiny thing I think of worth adding to Randy's answer is that the job definition should match actual responsibility levels. It needn't list a lot of specifics. However, if there are two jobs with different titles and the same description, I would wonder if one of the job descriptions is an error.

Of course by itself it's not a big deal, but where job descriptions are used to define roles, they should be accurate and the person should know their types - people don't have to memorize the things, or come even close. The process audit question is how the responsibilities are assigned, kept up and how people know what they are.

Hi,

Our auditor informed us that an NCR might be raised because one of our personnel in the Table of Organization indicates a Department Manager whereas the actual position of the said person in the 201 file is only Supervisor.

Is this truly a non-conformity in the standard? What can we do to avoid an NCR? Please help.:(

If this was the only instance of something that didn't match up (ie, your table said Department Manager, and the person is only a Supervisor), then presumably it's just a small error. One instance is just not enough evidence of a real problem in the system: it would be nitpicking and petty to to even talk of issuing an NCR over!

But if there were a few or more of these kinds of things, where the role information in the Table was contradicted by the actual role titles used in your organisation, and this meant that it wasn't actually clear in the documentation who was responsible for what, that's a different issue. In that case, there is a problem (clause 5.5.1).