Internal Auditor Trainee in tears!

I had my Internal Audit Team trained last week - and after two days of intensive training (one day on the standard, one day on auditing techniques as per 19011) we conducted our first Internal Audit as part of our training to give folks hands on experience - and to do a bit of a gap analysis.

After trying to get through all 21 Elements of the Drinking Water Quality Management Standard (I think we managed to cover off 15 or more - haven't reviewed my reports yet), and with my team doing a darn good job for their very first time auditing - I had one auditor hand me all her training material and say that she didn't understand anything and that she wouldn't be able to be "of value" so she may as well quit. I, and my trainer, managed to convince her that she wouldn't be thrown to the wolves, that I would be there as her lead to direct her and hold her hand as necessary, and that she would, contrary to her thoughts - be valuable and she would "get it" ... so she thought about it overnight and decided that she'd at least give it a try.

I guess I had forgotten how overwhelming the IA training can be - especially when you have absolutely no prior experience with quality standards and auditing! All 4 of my team members were looking like deer caught in the headlights - but they all (even my emotional one!) admitted they were starting to see how things connected!

So, I'm going to give them a couple of weeks to get their heads back to normal before I send them out in pairs to cover off the elements we didn't get to last week. (just kidding!)

Thank you for sharing this with us.

My boss, who is new to QA, came back this morning from his week at TS16949 lead auditor training in Chicago. He agrees he'll never look at auditing the same way again - is impressed by how much goes into it.

I wonder how your team of internal auditors was selected? What was this lady's background, that she does not feel she's able to understand "anything"? My heart goes out to her, it really can feel overwhelming. It seems to me you have tried to take and chew a very big bite in auditing the entire 21 emements in one shot! While it can help to see the connections, this is an awful lot of information and analysis to do in a short period. I would be surprised to see newbies do well at it.

I'm pleased to see you tried to reassure this lady, who may in fact have a great deal to offer that she's not yet recognized. That little boy at the parade (reference to The Emperor's New Clothes story) approach can be the critically valuable as long as she feels she has the authority to speak up and say "You know, this just doesn't make sense. Why do we do XYZ?".

I've had this happen during classes I've conducted and it makes my mascera run real bad

Hoenstly, I have had students undergo the same problem and it's pretty embarrasing, especially when it happens in class.

Being a teller of stories and provider of illustration I'll try to simplify auditor responsibility by talking about a bakery and baking a cake (this isn't a gender based thing)

Away from everyone else I'll tell the struggling student that all we are doing is making sure that a cake is made and baked correctly.

We make sure that the customer order is plainly understood by the bakery and that the bakery can bake the cake.

We then verify that the baker really knows how to bake a cake

We look at the recipe and verify that the recipe is correct for the type of cake.

We check the oven to see that it is at the correct temperature.

We watch the baker get and mix the ingrediants like the recipe says

We verify that the cake pan is correct for the type of cake and is prepared like the recipe calls for.

We then observe the cake being baked at the correct temperature for the right time.

We watch the cake being iced and decorated per customer instruction.

We watch the customer get the cake and pay for it with a smile on their face.

When we audit, all we are doing is making sure the cake is correct....and the trick is, we aren't required to be able to do it ourselves, we just watch and ask how.

Wow, Randy! Excellent example of "following the process!"

I guess that's why you get the big bucks

I'm not at all surprised to find someone feeling overwhelmed - two days 'training' - one of which (IHMO) is of dubious benefit to an internal auditor and then off and running on a gap assessment is often too much for most newbies........

I believe that - given that you took care to 'recruit' candidates based on their competencies, so that training was all they needed - most training isn't sufficiently individualized to be of real use other than to make someone 'dangerous'. Often, people don't exhibit any concern over the task, which has often worried me. This auditor had the sense to let you know.....

You now have a great place to develop those competencies.....

sudwel said:

After trying to get through all 21 Elements of the Drinking Water Quality Management Standard (I think we managed to cover off 15 or more - haven't reviewed my reports yet), and with my team doing a darn good job for their very first time auditing - I had one auditor hand me all her training material and say that she didn't understand anything and that she wouldn't be able to be "of value" so she may as well quit. I, and my trainer, managed to convince her that she wouldn't be thrown to the wolves, that I would be there as her lead to direct her and hold her hand as necessary, and that she would, contrary to her thoughts - be valuable and she would "get it" ... so she thought about it overnight and decided that she'd at least give it a try.

Click to expand...

Well done with the encouragement and comforting words.

It is important, however, to realize that some people would never make an effective auditor, internal or external. Some people could not develop the analytical skills necessary to deal with some of the complex business processes they would be expected to assess.

There is a tremendous emphasis on auditing as an exercise to verify conformance to procedures, which has led in the past to the concrete life jackets analogy. Auditing for conformance only goes so far and brings limited value to the organization. Auditing for effectiveness and improvement is much harder, but the payback much larger, when properly executed.

In my opinion, if someone honestly expresses a sense of being overwhelmed, after a couple of days of intensive training, they are being forthcoming. And, certainly, coaching and mentoring should help in overcoming their fears. However, real auditing brings stress, pressure and information overload. Not everyone can deal with that.

Sorry to hear about your struggle with auditing, but it might be a matter of approach. Your posting suggests that you take an elemental approach to auditing, rather than a process approach to auditing. You can use the process approach to audit even if an elemental approach was used to implement the system. The process approach is easier, more sensible, and often results in better findings. Get back to me if you would like to know more . . .

Thanks everyone for your encouragement and kind words! My overwhelmed auditor is the only one on my team that hadn't volunteered for a spot on the team - she was recruited by my boss, as I wanted 4 auditors and was having a hard time finding another volunteer, and he talked with her and she came on board - not fully understanding what was going to be involved. But - she does have an eye for detail, so I think with experience her confidence will grow and I think she will do an excellent job! I specifically asked for volunteers outside of our area of the municipality, as we have a very small staff in the water department, and as they can't audit their own work - it would have been difficult to schedule the audits! So, my auditors come from different City departments - and although they don't understand the drinking water process - they see that the auditing skills can benefit their positions (well - 3 of the 4 do at this point!) - so I'm expecting lots of hand holding initially - but think once they start to 'get' the audit process and the more "technical" processes they'll audit, they'll all be awesome!

I REALLY like your analogy, Randy! I've used a similar one over the years when I have personnel that state procedures are "useless" - I just say "would you bake a cake without following a recipe? Just think of a procedure as the "recipe" for doing this task"!

ISO 9001 Guy said:

Sorry to hear about your struggle with auditing, but it might be a matter of approach. Your posting suggests that you take an elemental approach to auditing, rather than a process approach to auditing. You can use the process approach to audit even if an elemental approach was used to implement the system. The process approach is easier, more sensible, and often results in better findings. Get back to me if you would like to know more . . .

Click to expand...

Thanks! I actually have my audits set up as process audits - we didn't get to a couple of the "processes" so we haven't covered all the elements yet! My trainer, who was "brought up" in the "element-based approach" actually thinks element-based audits are easier for "newbies" to grasp than processes - as often the entire process isn't understood by newbies... but I prefer getting them started on learning the processes and thus audit them!

sudwel said:

I had my Internal Audit Team trained last week - and after two days of intensive training (one day on the standard, one day on auditing techniques as per 19011) we conducted our first Internal Audit as part of our training to give folks hands on experience - and to do a bit of a gap analysis.

After trying to get through all 21 Elements of the Drinking Water Quality Management Standard (I think we managed to cover off 15 or more - haven't reviewed my reports yet), and with my team doing a darn good job for their very first time auditing - I had one auditor hand me all her training material and say that she didn't understand anything and that she wouldn't be able to be "of value" so she may as well quit. I, and my trainer, managed to convince her that she wouldn't be thrown to the wolves, that I would be there as her lead to direct her and hold her hand as necessary, and that she would, contrary to her thoughts - be valuable and she would "get it" ... so she thought about it overnight and decided that she'd at least give it a try.

I guess I had forgotten how overwhelming the IA training can be - especially when you have absolutely no prior experience with quality standards and auditing! All 4 of my team members were looking like deer caught in the headlights - but they all (even my emotional one!) admitted they were starting to see how things connected!

So, I'm going to give them a couple of weeks to get their heads back to normal before I send them out in pairs to cover off the elements we didn't get to last week. (just kidding!)

Click to expand...

Auditing in pairs is an excellent idea for as long as you can afford it and at least for the first three audits after training.

However competence starts with careful selection of the trainees. ISO 19011 reminds us that auditors should have these attributes:

a) ethical, i.e. fair, truthful, sincere, honest and discreet;
b) open minded, i.e. willing to consider alternative ideas or points of view;
c) diplomatic, i.e. tactful in dealing with people;
d) observant, i.e. actively aware of physical surroundings and activities;
e) perceptive, i.e. instinctively aware of and able to understand situations;
f) versatile, i.e. adjusts readily to different situations;
g) tenacious, i.e. persistent, focused on achieving objectives;
h) decisive, i.e. reaches timely conclusions based on logical reasoning and analysis; and
i) self-reliant, i.e. acts and functions independently while interacting effectively with others

We are either wired with these attributes or not. Audit is our gift or not. Auditor training (at least 3 days) for someone without these attributes would be a waste.

Does anyone have a questionnaire to determine if the candidates for auditor training have these attributes?

I have a team of 11 auditors covering 4 locations and very diverse processes.

I have recently been conducting training with all of them, covering the changes in the standard and trying to encourage a more process approach to auditing and raising the bar with the way we audit. Following this training I have had a couple that have come to me and said "I don't want to do this any more as I don't like this new approach" - they like the nitty gritty detailed auditing.

What I have realised is that some get it some just don't. As we are trying to introduce a more holistic approach to our audit schedule the process approach is key while looking at the big picture.

For the ones that get it, good luck to them but for the ones that don't and I don't want to lose them off the team, what to do?

There are still some areas of our business that require more of the old fashioned work instruction/procedure type auditing at operational level with attention to detail, these are the guys/girls that are good at that aslo buddying them up with the other type of auditor is a good idea as while one will be concentrating on the big picture the other one will pick up on the day to day detail and hopeuflly in time both auditor types will benefit and learn from each other.

Lets hope it works

Chrissie x