Meeting AS9100 Rev C Requirements - Major help wanted

[Wes Bucey]

In Reply to Parent Post by n25philly

Well, before I took over as Management Rep, the clean everything up a week or two before the audit approach was how things were done. We've come a long way since then, but the business culture in it's own here is pretty bad, so instead of banging my head against the wall in a futile attempt to change something I can't change I work within the system.

In general the guys are pretty good now. The biggest change I made was adopting a "let them fail policy". It used to be the auditors would run around trying to do everything for the guys on the shop floor. I ended that. I tell everyone what they are required to do, and if they fail to do it then let the auditor come in a write them up. At times that seems to be the only way to get them to listen. The only audit we do by surprise is the shop floor audit (everything else is scheduled with a board listing what is happening when and with advanced notice to anyone involved) I get what you are talking about with creating that environment, but we didn't create it, we are stuck in it. (I'm actually against the shop floor audit, but that plant manager wants it and finds it very helpful)

The only problem with the rest of our audits is that we have apparently going about them wrong along as we've been auditing mainly for compliance. We didn't know any better, no auditer that has come in until now every questioned it, and both me and the previous management rep both took different outside training courses and never heard anything about doing it a different way. This is what we are trying to rectify.

The difference between a "cops & robbers" situation and the ideal internal audit
(which is to determine one of four possible situations without finger pointing or punishment - no rewards, either - just "business as usual":

1. everything is going according to plan - no changes needed
2. operations match plan, but throughput is below plan [Why?]
3. operations do not match plan and the throughput is not achieving the plan [change the operation?]
4. operations do not match plan and throughput is exceeding the plan [change the plan?])

The execution of a successful internal audit is when the "troops" give input (this method stinks//this method is terrific//why don't we try . . .?//etc. etc.)

As soon as anybody gets the idea the audit is to "catch" somebody, you have introduced an "us versus them" dynamic, which can have terrible repercussions.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by n25philly

I don't know how we could do that audit without it being a surprise. It's meant to see how they do things on a daily basis, not when they are on their best behavior. <snip>

If you have to do unannounced audits continually, it means that the strategy isn't working.

[AndyN]

In Reply to Parent Post by n25philly

The only problem with the rest of our audits is that we have apparently going about them wrong along as we've been auditing mainly for compliance. We didn't know any better, no auditer that has come in until now every questioned it, and both me and the previous management rep both took different outside training courses and never heard anything about doing it a different way. This is what we are trying to rectify.

You are the unwitting victim of the way auditor training has been for years. You got, basically, the same training as the CB auditors! So, they see no difference between what they do and what you do. It seems that it took a 'new generation' of auditor, from the AS "world" to point out the difference. I wonder if his own organization has seen the need to ensure his colleagues are similarly up to speed.

[Mikishots]

In Reply to Parent Post by n25philly

...and if they fail to do it then let the auditor come in a write them up.

Really? What about writing a non-conformance to correct the process?