Training of Internal Quality Auditors - Over all the aspects of ISO10011 Parts 1 & 2?

Dear Friends,
I am going to conduct an In-house- Internal Quality Auditor's Training. How to go about it? Does one has to cover all the aspects of ISO1011 Parts 1 & 2?. Or is there a simple way. After all this forum has views expressed that the internal audits are to confirm effectiveness of the Quality System and not of ISo9002:1994.
Any one can help me to develop a six hours ( that is max one get from the departments) course and if so, what shall I cover?

Come on folks you are all Learned Ones of the Lord ISO9000.

HELP!

Ghai

------------------

[barb butrym]

6 hours.....hhhhmmmmm

Start with the principals..why, value added stuff..just for an intro....then get into the audit plan. Do an exercise of sorts...maybe a flow chart.....split the group..flow something simple....purchase a car, start a car, prepare a cup of coffee....etc. then also ceate an audit check sheet/plan...one team audits the other. Discuss techniques and reports...then go plan an audit...together. Send them off to perform it. Meet again for a quick discussion the next day to present the report. Another good exercise is the one Marc had about the albatross..its somewhere on the board still...I Imagine. It makes you look for evidence.

just a quick off the cuff.....any specific help needed....just shout

[Marc]

Barb did an excellent (concise) job of what to do. As far as whether to check against ISO or QS compliance.... There's a lot of heated (in some list-servs) debate about whether internal auditors should be checking for ISO or QS compliance in their audits.

I say no - compliance to ISO or QS should be another function, so to speak.

I'm not sure if anyone is winning this clarified a 'requirement' directly in a 'standard'. So - you can do either (for now). But if you do, you should ensure that the auditors are really qualified to 'judge' ISO or QS compliance.

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 02-13-99).]

[Cari Spears]

Originally Posted by Marc

I say no - compliance to ISO or QS should be another function, so to speak.

I'm not sure if anyone is winning this clarified a 'requirement' directly in a 'standard'. So - you can do either (for now). But if you do, you should ensure that the auditors are really qualified to 'judge' ISO or QS compliance.

I agree. I've always felt that I'm capable (as Mgt. Rep.) to ensure/verify that processes/procedures comply with the standard. This is evident to auditors as I am either the (or one of the) "preparer" or "approver" of all of our level I and II documents. The audit team verifies that practices comply with our established QMS. In preparing our audit reports, we write observations and nonconformances against our own QMS requirements; though I may add references to the ISO standard clause(s) for clarification at times.

I've worked with Entella, PJ, Intertek, and now NSF-ISR and have never had an issue arise as a result of this approach. However, I suppose I could imagine some organizations or situations where this may not work.