Green Belt Project for Improving Internal Process Auditing and Metrics

abhipatel

Involved In Discussions
Hi,

manager is planning to give me a green belt project for improving internal process auditing...anyone has been there before???.

here is some research have done(and some description of the current process)...

each cell is self- audited 1 time per shift( X 3 shifts per day) - by an operator
each cell is audited bi-weekly by an internal auditor
each cell is randomly audited by manager (no timeframes)
each cell is also randomly audited by site quality team (no timeframes)

using a "stop-light signal chart" to display results...issue is the self-audits are always green and the cells quite often fail internal auditor & the other audits...

how would i create an audit effectiveness or efficiency metric?

any other ideas? can anyone suggest some plans? Thanks
 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
how would i create an audit effectiveness or efficiency metric?

It would help to know what you are auditing, but I will give you some general ideas, I guess.

By the looks of that audit system, I can think of two things:

1. Is the finding per audit metric indicative of efficient audit frequency. Assuming the audits are effective, do they have findings every audit. If not, is there evidence that the audit is too frequent, thereby an inefficient use of resources?

2. For effectiveness, I would look toward the findings. Paretoize the types of findings, then look for improvement projects. For example, is there always a large number of documentation issues? Well, OK, the audits found them - they did their job. But, what change in the process is going to eliminate that as a finding? You might also look for correlation between the auditors for effectiveness. Do they all find documentations issues, or do some find that, others find gage issues. They may need some training on finding areas of non-conformance they are not familiar with.

Just some thoughts...
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
When considering internal process auditing metrics I like to think about performance.

This means going war far beyond how many audits are performed, how many findings are recorded, and even how quickly the fixes are inplace. These things do not tell me anything about how the audit process is helping the organization to achieve its goals.

Let us draw a distinction between the kind of auditing we are referring to. I am referring to system audits - audits of processes, as a registrar would do except in rather more depth. What kind of auditing are you referring to?

If there is a new process or work group, having the cell of people audit themselves frequently (once per shift) can be worthwhile if the audit is a limited check of a sample or performance to a procedure, and is overseen by an experienced authority.

A weekly supervisor audit can be useful if the standards of expectations are well defined. The management can also do these as long as no contradictions between the "auditors" result. The he said/she said effect can be very damaging. This MBWA method has been around for quite awhile. It should not be called an audit, as the term audit implies there are stringent requirements and punitive consequences.

I have heard of stop light signal charts - they were well received when used constructively.

This thread has a paper that might help you.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Hi,

manager is planning to give me a green belt project for improving internal process auditing...anyone has been there before???.

here is some research have done(and some description of the current process)...

each cell is self- audited 1 time per shift( X 3 shifts per day) - by an operator
each cell is audited bi-weekly by an internal auditor
each cell is randomly audited by manager (no timeframes)
each cell is also randomly audited by site quality team (no timeframes)

using a "stop-light signal chart" to display results...issue is the self-audits are always green and the cells quite often fail internal auditor & the other audits...

how would i create an audit effectiveness or efficiency metric?

any other ideas? can anyone suggest some plans? Thanks

I rather doubt that anyone has applied 6 Sigma techniques to internal audits. IMHO - being very straight with you - there are a number of things I need to know and observations I can make.

Why does your boss think audits need improvement? What is 'telling him' that you need to work on them? That said, looking at what you've described, audits appear to me to be out of control! Way too many being done! And, as a result, I'd suggest that you look at the scheduling of audits!

ISO 9001 makes it a requirement to audit based on status and importance, and I think there's a clue here to what's going on. Are your processes so far out of whack, that they need auditing that frequently? Another aspect of this is 'randomly' - it gives the impression of trying to 'catch people' doing wrong! Bad, bad, bad......

In addition, you could take a look at the competency of your auditors. Are you really sure that they are focusing on the correct issues. But I hesitate, because without effective audit program management, you'll only be addressing parts, and the audit program is greater than the sum of its parts.

You should address your improvement to audit program management. Once you have that ironed out, the rest will fall into place....if done correctly! Look to ISO 19011 (the USA version) for guidance.......
 

abhipatel

Involved In Discussions
Here are some common answers to the questions:

1. The reason why daily auditing was put in place - (auditing here refers to check of conformance to procedures ...say eg. filling out process logs correctly and duly, checking chemical expiries , calibrations & PMs, 5S etc etc...) was that during key customer/external audits the floor was NEVER in "audit ready condition" and last moment band-aids and checks + rechecks had to applied.

2. Yes i agree they are far too frequent....in a way gives a false sense of security everything is ok.....the issue here is the results portrayed out by daily audits are never never translated when an "effective audit" is done by qualified auditors (in this case bi-weekly or random)

The issue here is the fails are so so repetitive (document control always top hitter) that my manager is really reluctant to remove the daily auditing even though it is practically not serving its purpose.......he wants to error-proof the process to a level wherein this results are true reflections of cell working status and than remove them - management is willing to spend that extra buck for audit hrs rather than take a chance for not being ready for a key tour/audit from customer.

Know the scope is a bit wide here though you all have directed me to a good extent...thanks...

Any additional information is welcome. Thanks once again to all!
 
Top Bottom