Registered Quality Internal Auditor Qualifications - What needed? Audits? Experience?

[Qualiman]

I need some clarification please:
To become an authorized Auditor (To lead/conduct internal audits and give seminars to people in order they become Internal Auditors), Is needed:
- To attend the 5 days course ($ 1500 US)
- Or is enough to demonstrate quality experience and skills, including "hours" in Internal Audits to a National authorized Bureau (for instance of Mexico) based on ISO 10011 part 2 ?

Thank you in advance for your help

[Marc]

A 'Lost' oldie. Your current thoughts and comments?

[JWenmeekers]

More than one item here: Auditor and Internal Auditor, training for/to become Internal Auditor.

Auditor and training is for me ‘registered’, which means also experience and demonstrating skills, and a sort of ‘official paper’ from an official ‘organization’.

Because Audit says for me ‘system’ audit = ISO (whatever number) knowledge = registrar.

Training, no doubt about that, has to be recognize.

Internal Audit; says for me ‘procedure’ audit, not much to do with QA system.
So why a registered ? Who’s giving the training ? Registrar ?. No doubt they push for that, parallel income..
You do an internal audit because the standard says so, there is already proof of accordance with the standard (company is registered), not much ISO knowledge required here.
Internal audit should be what the word says, internal, inside the company, the ‘how do they do it’, procedure against practice, real every day (work)live against what on paper.

Here experience with the process (product) is a plus.

I refused several jobs because I was not familiar with the production process and believed that my work wouldn’t have an added value for the customer.
Maybe for me, personally, but I don’t think the customer has to pay for that in the first place.

There are 'other' ways to gain experience.

I work close with colleagues (external) internal auditors in a system 'audit the auditor'. I go with a colleague on a job, the customer knows it, agree with it (or not) and I'm paid by the colleague. The next time it's my turn to pay him.

Win win situation and gain of experience for both.
.

[Helmut Jilling]

Originally Posted by JWenmeekers

Internal Audit; says for me ‘procedure’ audit, not much to do with QA system.

Internal audits still need to audit the whole process, not just the procedure. A procedure audit alone would not be a compliant internal audit.

You do an internal audit because the standard says so, there is already proof of accordance with the standard (company is registered), not much ISO knowledge required here.

It is best to do the audit because it will help a company improve.

Internal audit should be what the word says, internal, inside the company, the ‘how do they do it’, procedure against practice, real every day (work)live against what on paper.

I agree with you here. This is beneficial. But also audit the inputs and outputs, the metrics and current performance of each process.

[JWenmeekers]

Originally Posted by hjilling

Internal audits still need to audit the whole process, not just the procedure. A procedure audit alone would not be a compliant internal audit.

I can’t put thing in words in English like I do in Dutch or French….

When I say procedure, in this context, I mean processes are in the procedures (they should), procedures (with the WI) says what the process does, so procedure is, in this context, process.
( …it’s hard to translate my ideas and thoughts).

It is best to do the audit because it will help a company improve..

I wanted to point out the difference between audit (of the QA system – f.i. by registrar) and internal audit (processes and not – again/also – the system). Although some auditors want that the system is also audited again, I don’t think this make sence….

But also audit the inputs and outputs, the metrics and current performance of each process.

Process is for me: 'where do I come from and with what, is this the right place, what do I have to do here, where do I go now, what do I leave behind and what do I take with me'. So yes, the in- and outputs, metrics and performance of each process are integrated

[Helmut Jilling]

Thank you for clarifying. I speak a couple languages, and certainly appreciate the difficulty in expressing oneself in another language.