Hi!

I would like to ask the following question:
a. Is it alright to outsource Internal Quality Audit?
Meaning we would just be contacting them during Audit season
They are not necessarily internal employees
Is there such a thing like that that you ask somebody (not ur employee) to conduct internal audit
They would most probably have auditing skills because they specialized in that matter

b. another problem why we come up with that idea was nobody wants to be an auditor and and because of this we thought of giving incentives
but the problem is they are alreay tired of money incentive and item incentive
can you suggest other form of incentive

thank you for helping

The internal of internal audit is not the person but rather the reason and manner of the audit.
In a lot of ways outside people have an advantage, especially in a small company.
Things are new to them, they do not have relationships with the people etc.
If you use out side people check that they are qualified and if you can get recomendations from others.

Incentives to be an auditor can be a difficult thing as the auditor can be seen as an unwanted person to the auditors.
The training of people to be auditors, not necessarily management will give them an insight to the system.
Try publicity of their achievement being trained, invitation to management meetings, a meal with the manger etc.

Hullo Kitty,

Is it alright to outsource Internal Quality Audit?Yes. I suggest a look at the following threads:

Outsourcing ISO 9000 Internal Audits (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7048)
Outsourcing Internal Audits (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6610)
Outsourcing Processes (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6213)
Outsourcing Internal Audits (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=2390)

can you suggest other form of incentive?
Well, they have to feel that auditing is worthwhile (-What's in it for me?) Some suggested reading again:

HOW do you find your internal auditors? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6235)
WHERE do you find your internal auditors? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6234)
Any IA success stories? Internal audits that have resulted in great improvements? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6352)
Internal Audit Success and Failure Factors Discussion (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=2268)

/Claes

Thanks for the thread links, Claes!

The internal of internal audit is not the person but rather the reason and manner of the audit...
Exactly. :yes:

Hi!

I would like to ask the following question:
a. Is it alright to outsource Internal Quality Audit?
Meaning we would just be contacting them during Audit season
They are not necessarily internal employees
Is there such a thing like that that you ask somebody (not ur employee) to conduct internal audit
They would most probably have auditing skills because they specialized in that matter

b. another problem why we come up with that idea was nobody wants to be an auditor and and because of this we thought of giving incentives
but the problem is they are alreay tired of money incentive and item incentive
can you suggest other form of incentive

thank you for helping
Answers: Of course it is alright to outsource your internal audit. Even registrars are outsourced suppliers of a "service".

And, of the best incentives is the "buzz" one gets when an audit genuinely delivers improvements, the auditees feel they have been helped, have a smile on their faces and are energized to do things better.


I have looked at the threads nobly suggested by Claes and add to the points made there, as follows:
1. Before you outsource, consider carefully what service you want. If it is a simple service with a simple report placed on file so that you can show your registrar an internal audit has been done, then that is not a serious effort and your management ought to be clear about what it gets for its money.

2. If you want someone who can help you to improve your processes, look for someone with experience. So-called qualifications, such as those of RAB, are of little importance, and are not necessary.

3. Remember, whoever you engage for this service will need time to become familiar with your orgaization, systems, processes, technology, strategy, market and so forth. I have experienced potential clients expecting an audit to be done in a day, including all preparation, performance, reporting and so forth. For reasons I have long explained elsewhere, I will turn down such assignments as I know they are futile, deliver little or no added-value for the client - though there is a host of consultants who will not agree and will be willing to take your money. So, if you engage a professional, experienced auditor, do so on the basis you want to build a "partnership". The first time the auditor is with you, he/she will take more time to prepare than on subsequent occasions, as he/she becomes familiar with your systems, processes, people etc.

4. You get what you pay for. But, as I recently advised one inquirer, if you really feel your operation is so efficient and cost-effective that you do not think there are savings to be obtained, greater than the audit fee, you are a truly remarkable company.

Kitty,

I have a network of QA people from other companies that I often use and they use me (much like this Forum). Go out and make yourself known to other QA people. You will be surprised at how welcome they will make you feel (again, much like the cove). I have networked all of the local and international companies within my region and we often have meetings to mull over problems or new ideas. We also, often perform Internal Audits on each others companies. It is a good way to learn new things, improve your auditing skills and in turn have someone that knows little about your processes cast an impartial eye over things. It also saves you money and time by not using your own employees.

I have internal auditors also and the incentive we give them is 'Training'. All of our IAs have a 'Certifcate IV in Workplace Assessment and Training', A 'Certificate IV in Front Line Management', Internal Auditors Course and must graded (completed the relevant skills set) for Supervisor position.

Note: Certificate IV is a tertiary level of education underneath University. They are CERT II, CERT III, CERT IV and Diploma then University.

Hi!

Thanks for the reply everyone!

I would like to ask what would be a possible criteria for giving incentive for auditor

I was thinking giving them a default incentive,

we have about 12 auditors

meaning they are already have the incentive and the incentive will be removed once the certifiying body found a nonconfomity on the process they audited. Meaning those auditor whose process was not audited during the surveillance is lucky.

what do you think? would that be fair? If not please do suggest one. Thanks!

...meaning they are already have the incentive and the incentive will be removed once the certifiying body found a nonconfomity on the process they audited. Meaning those auditor whose process was not audited during the surveillance is lucky...

Hi kitty -

Do you mean that you will give your internal auditors an incentive - something like a wage premium - and if the registrar auditor found a nonconformance in their last audit assignment area, then they would lose the extra pay?

I'm not in favor of negative reinforcement in general. Besides that, an auditor is simply sampling; anyone could come along behind and find something the previous auditor didn't see. (Especially an experienced registrar auditor - you are dealing with newbies.) That does not mean the previous auditor was remiss or unobservant, it means he was looking at something else that time.

I would think that "removing their incentive" would not be conducive to building confidence in your brand new auditors. JMO.

Cari,
I agree and here is my thoughts for what they are worth. If you wish to give the internal auditors incentive give them incentive for finding areas that need improvement and drive continuous improvement. I believe that is the biggest benefit of an audit. Besides it is better by far for an internal auditor to find an issue or potential issue than for the registrar imo.

Mark

...If you wish to give the internal auditors incentive give them incentive for finding areas that need improvement and drive continuous improvement...

Right - positive reinforcement. FWIW - the only incentive our internal auditors get is the joy of working for me, instead of their regular boss, for a day or two. :rolleyes: I jest, but seriously, the machinist gets to get off of his machine and do something else - and he audits the MGT/Business Planning stuff. The accounts receivables gal gets to get out of her cubby in the front office, and because she audits the shop floor / product realization stuff, she gets to wear jeans for the day. :D

Because their audit assignments are in areas that they don't normally tread day-to-day, they find it very interesting and a break from their norm, rather than extra work. I'll add that I keep things very simple and that they do not audit to the standard. They audit our practices against our system (internal procedures, work instructions, etc.). I, and the registrar auditor, verify that our system is compliant with the standard.

2. If you want someone who can help you to improve your processes, look for someone with experience. So-called qualifications, such as those of RAB, are of little importance, and are not necessary.



DUH!! The so called qualifications (do you not have one?) require experience to obtain, especially the RAB ones. I'm no great lover of the RAB, but they don't award a Lead Auditor cert to some clod just because he can pass a test and pay the fee.

Your understanding of the auditing process and a couple of other nice things also appears to be flawed. Have you ever heard of the word "compentency"? The competence of an auditor has to be verifiable as with anyone else within a management system, so using a "so-called" qualified auditor can help overcome that barrier. As a "so-called" qualified auditor I have hammered (just stating the facts here) the internal audit programs of organizations because they could not verify or provide evidence that their auditors knew krap or could audit.

In reference to the above the following RAB certification doesn't count

SAYLE, SYDNEY SUE LAVER
6794 CORRIGAN DRIVE
BRIGHTON, MI 48116 US

Grade: QMS-LA
Certification: Q03883 Date Certified: 1994-12-23 Expiration: 2004-12-23
Available for hire: Y

FOE: Automotive, Truck, Off-Road Vehicle
FOE: Business, Professional, Personal Services
FOE: Distribution; Wholesale, Retail
FOE: Finance, Insurance, Real Estate
FOE: Health, Medical Services
FOE: Public Administration Services

I sure hope you don't get into trouble for saying that this persons qualification isn't important! :D

My question is "why would you want to spend the extra money?"
What is the overall benefit for the company?

Our company, like many others, expects you to do more than just what you have on your plate every day. Internal auditors learn so much about the company and the interactions between the various departments; it also pushes them beyond the day to day. So folks just don't fit; on the other hand, some folks make great auditors, very thorough and detail oriented.

What's the pay back? :confused:

Cari,
I agree and here is my thoughts for what they are worth. If you wish to give the internal auditors incentive give them incentive for finding areas that need improvement and drive continuous improvement. I believe that is the biggest benefit of an audit. Besides it is better by far for an internal auditor to find an issue or potential issue than for the registrar imo.

Mark

I think it will be hard to give incentive base on improvements they will see. does it mean i have to count how many improvements they will be presenting, correct me if i'm wrong. example they will be presenting improvements, so how will be the criteria for this one. Because i really don't know how to deal with this one. the bottome line why we give incentive to our auditor is this is an extra task on them and besides we want to enourage them also and give extra credit for their effort.

Help me please. I really don't know what criteria wud be fair to both side.

Thank you

I think it will be hard to give incentive base on improvements they will see. does it mean i have to count how many improvements they will be presenting, correct me if i'm wrong. example they will be presenting improvements, so how will be the criteria for this one. Because i really don't know how to deal with this one. the bottome line why we give incentive to our auditor is this is an extra task on them and besides we want to enourage them also and give extra credit for their effort.

Help me please. I really don't know what criteria wud be fair to both side.

Thank you
mjflkitty,
Well I do not have an incentive program, but if I did it would be based on what is found that can be improved and benefit the systems, processes, product or safety. Before they are implemented they would obviously have to be reviewed by the management and agreed to that it would be an improvment not just an addition.
I would not base incentive on how many are presented but on how many prove to be effective. If they are effective improvements it should translate into $$ for the company thus the reason for the incentive.
When I worked at Intier there was a guy who kept bringing in tools that he made at home that helped him assemble the insrument panels. When they saw it improved the system he got $50.00 a shot( he was not an auditor ). guess what. Others on the line started tring to find a way to get things flowing smoother too.

These are just what I would do if I had an incentive program.

My boss holds his wallet to close for us to do this here. I mentioned incentives for ideas that payoff and for efficiency gains and he said "they get a paycheck don't they? If thats not enough incentive they can go some where else." not many are happy working here and nobody gives ideas anymore. When we have a new hire they are excited for about a month because like the rest of us they see potential. But they get squashed too. :nopity:
I know I whine a lot and I appologize. I will try to be more possitive.

Mark

I think it will be hard to give incentive base on improvements they will see. does it mean i have to count how many improvements they will be presenting, correct me if i'm wrong. example they will be presenting improvements, so how will be the criteria for this one. Because i really don't know how to deal with this one. the bottome line why we give incentive to our auditor is this is an extra task on them and besides we want to enourage them also and give extra credit for their effort.

Maybe because I still actually enjoy (for the most part) my job, but is not just the idea to find ways to improve incentive enough? Why must $$$ come into this? Society's attitude is so highly "what's-in-it-for-me?" now. Whatever happened to doing a good job for the sake of doing a good job? Pride in one's work? Self-worth?

Are all of my Internal Auditors happy when it comes time to do an audit? No. Because it usually means they have to readjust their normal job schedule to accomodate the audit. However, once they start auditing, they're actually happy to be there. It's a change-of-pace from their normal job. They get away from their usual area (be it a lab or a desk) and get to talk to people they would not normally talk to and get to see other aspects of the business. They learn how others impact their job and how their own job impacts others. They see the tools and methodologies used at their own desk used in other areas perhaps in a different (and more effective) manner - and if less effective, they put forth an Opportunity for Improvement to have the auditee come and see their area.

Having a financial incentive for audits has me fearing that your audits will have lots of findings with little value. We have performance incentive program where I work for production based activities and how well departments have adopted some of the methodolgies. If you have a $$$ system for audits, everyone will want to be an auditor, but do no value-added work and that defeats the purpose of an audit.

I strongly urge you to not implement a financial incentive for your Internal Auditor, mjflkitty! The auditors should feel as if they want to help improve the company.

DUH!! The so called qualifications (do you not have one?) require experience to obtain, especially the RAB ones. I'm no great lover of the RAB, but they don't award a Lead Auditor cert to some clod just because he can pass a test and pay the fee.

Your understanding of the auditing process and a couple of other nice things also appears to be flawed. Have you ever heard of the word "compentency"? The competence of an auditor has to be verifiable as with anyone else within a management system, so using a "so-called" qualified auditor can help overcome that barrier. As a "so-called" qualified auditor I have hammered (just stating the facts here) the internal audit programs of organizations because they could not verify or provide evidence that their auditors knew krap or could audit.

In reference to the above the following RAB certification doesn't count

SAYLE, SYDNEY SUE LAVER
6794 CORRIGAN DRIVE
BRIGHTON, MI 48116 US

Grade: QMS-LA
Certification: Q03883 Date Certified: 1994-12-23 Expiration: 2004-12-23
Available for hire: Y

FOE: Automotive, Truck, Off-Road Vehicle
FOE: Business, Professional, Personal Services
FOE: Distribution; Wholesale, Retail
FOE: Finance, Insurance, Real Estate
FOE: Health, Medical Services
FOE: Public Administration Services

I sure hope you don't get into trouble for saying that this persons qualification isn't important! :D

Ah! At the end of a busy day, helping clients clean up problems left by incopmpetent auditors, it is so nice to have something to laugh about. Thank you, Randy.

Yes, I have indeed heard about "competence" - I have written about the subject, in fact. It is the "demonstrated ability" to actually perform an assigned task. To my knowledge, the RAB, as is the case for other present day certifiers of auditors, makes no attempt to actually witness an auditor preparing, performing or reporting an audit. That is they make no attempt to watch an auditor "demonstrate" he/she can actaually audit. Nor do they aver a "certified auditor" is necessarily experienced in particular processes. The certificate actually only means they believe the person should be able to prepare, perform and report an audit. The person's actual auditing expereince is based on references. Of course, the dirty little secret is that there is very little verification of the standard of auditing achieved and many references are on the basis of buddy and crony sign-offs - especially when relating to internal auditing experiences.

So, does an RAB or similar auditor certificate infer competence for the particular audit? Well, one needs to consider all of the (common) horror stories about registrars. One needs to ask which certified auditors involved in the BF tire deaths and were "struck off". And one has to examine one's personal experience of looking at the outcome of so many "audits" performed by "certified auditors". They certainly do exhibit the traits of "clods who passed a test and paid a fee."

If one wants to engage an outside auditor, which is the original point of this thread, you need one who is au fait with the technology etc if they are to add value as distinct from performing the typical "docs and stickers" audits.

I have observed far too many trained and certified auditors who cannot effectively audit a process - only do nit pick jobs - as they really do not understand what it is the auditee is doing. Equally well, I have observed a considerable number of people who are terrific auditors who lack substantial training and possess no certification. Regardless of what training has been given, when it comes to competence, I prefer the Missouri wisdom.

As to my wife's views about my views, they are, as is said, a matter for Randy to speculate upon and for me to know. She is indeed flattered to note his interest and the free publicity he provides by reproducing them in the illustrious Cove, but they are not germane to the original question raised in this thread.

Oh yes, Randy, I was first "certified" as an auditor in 1977, having been doing them for several years. That was for auditing to ANSI N45.2 and associated standards for the Nuclear Industry. :D And, my audit training course was one of the first group of four such registered by the IQA back in 1984 when that body started the first scheme for "certifying" audit courses and auditors - long before the RAB was even a twinkle in the ASQ's eyes. I removed my course from that scheme in 1990-1991 as I felt its evolved requirements required people to be trained inadequately: my approach, rejected by that body back then when the original ISO 9K had not long been released, is now known as the "process approach". Since it is now the adopted approach, I suppose there must be some people around the world who reckon I do know something about the audit process. Happily, none of my clients have cared since I first started as a consultant, in 1983, whether or not I was "certified" but as they still occasionally come back to me (some after twenty years of so of association), I guess they must feel I know something about the audit "process". I prefer their certificates - repeat business, promptly paid invoices and kind letters of commendation.

Have a nice day and let's enjoy a six pack together some time.

Allan I love you and your sense of humor. You have proven yourself in my eyes to be a gentleman who can laugh and have fun :applause: I'm sure you had a chuckle or two with my previous entry.

If the opportunity ever presents itself I'll definitely not shy away from sharing a brew.

Hi Everyone!

Thank you for giving me an idea that I would consider our objective as one of the basis for giving our auditors incentive

Thank you, Thank you Thank you :bigwave: :thanx: :thanx:

Hello mjflkitty,

The discussion had me thinking of outsourcing internal audits for some of the firms I'm assisting. I'm currently looking into how this can be integrated into their established system.

If you don't mind my asking, may I know where you are based? I'm in Iloilo City in Western Visayas.

Best regards. :bigwave:

I'm here in Eastwood City, in Quezon City :)

Hi!

I'm based in Manila


I would like to ask your opinion:
would it be fair to place the task(internal quality auditing) in the objective setting(objective setting is the list of task an employee should do, it's a mandatory, in other words it' part of the job description already, but take note this are not new employee, old employee that were requested to be an auditor) of the employee rather than give them incentive to motivate them?

Hi!

I'm based in Manila


I would like to ask your opinion:
would it be fair to place the task(internal quality auditing) in the objective setting(objective setting is the list of task an employee should do, it's a mandatory, in other words it' part of the job description already, but take note this are not new employee, old employee that were requested to be an auditor) of the employee rather than give them incentive to motivate them?
Yes, it would be reasonable. But, remember if you assign that responsibility to an individual in their job description that will also mean they will be held accountable for accomplishing the assigned tasks. If the tasks are to be properly done, those people must have the necessary education, experience and be considered competent to do it. That may mean they require proper training and to have been assessed as being able to perform an audit BEFORE they are asked to do one.

Additionally, for any audit, it is important that management gives the necessary support and resources so that it can be done. You cannot hold an auditor responsible for the results of an audit if they are not provided with those things. For additional comment etc I would refer you to my book, "Management Audits", because space precludes a more thorough explanation in the Cove.

I hope this helps.

Hi!

I'm based in Manila


I would like to ask your opinion:
would it be fair to place the task(internal quality auditing) in the objective setting(objective setting is the list of task an employee should do, it's a mandatory, in other words it' part of the job description already, but take note this are not new employee, old employee that were requested to be an auditor) of the employee rather than give them incentive to motivate them?

I'm an Analyst here in makati, Phil. and part of the pool of Auditors of IQA. Auditing of Quality system is part of my job description and Goal objectives for the year.
In the first years of our certification, Merit points is just added to my overall grade pts after the appraisal system.
On top of this, we receive (minimal) cash rewards in form of gift cheques. :D