Choosing a Registrar - Registrar Recommendations

[John Broomfield]

Obtaining value from accredited certification

We should not be selecting a registrar for its quality management skills, or any technical skills. You want top notch system auditing skills and professionalism instead.

Certification is a marketing decision. Therefore select a registrar that is truly accredited, protects the independence of its certificates and is well-respected by the customers you seek.

Avoid OFIs and other ways of concealing system weaknesses from corrective action.

You may also insist on a registrar that demonstrates the value of its certificates to customers in your sector in keeping with your strategic plan.

John

 

[AndyN]

Obtaining value from accredited certification

We should not be selecting a registrar for its quality management skills, or any technical skills.

John

On what do you base THAT comment? Non-participation in industry groups for aerospace, telecom or automotive doesn't bring any benefits to the customers' certification? Getting rules etc handed down 2nd and 3rd hand (or worse) doesn't adversely affect the quality of the audits done? You may wish to rethink that gem, John...

 

[Marc]

Easy, fellows...

 

[John Broomfield]

On what do you base THAT comment? Non-participation in industry groups for aerospace, telecom or automotive doesn't bring any benefits to the customers' certification? Getting rules etc handed down 2nd and 3rd hand (or worse) doesn't adversely affect the quality of the audits done? You may wish to rethink that gem, John...

Andy,

Thank you for seeking clarification.

Of course, to be a "top notch system auditor" one must keep up to date on the audit criteria.

...but auditees should avoid expecting expertise from their auditor on how to conform and auditees should be able to rely on their auditor protecting their intellectual property as indeed any professional auditor would.

John

 

[AndyN]

Easy, fellows...

It's OK Marc! John and I know each other! He knows it's not personal...

 

[AndyN]

Andy,

Thank you for seeking clarification.

Of course, to be a "top notch system auditor" one must keep up to date on the audit criteria.

...but auditees should avoid expecting expertise from their auditor on how to conform and auditees should be able to rely on their auditor protecting their intellectual property as indeed any professional auditor would.

John

Agreed. Your second point is of course the same as saying "no consulting". I certainly don't agree with those who would advocate the auditor sharing experiences of what they've seen during audits - a slip twixt cup and lip at the lunch table when "off the clock" is highly improper!

When you wrote registrar, I tend to think of the entity not the specific auditor. Many individuals can only rely on their employers to keep them up to date with the latest (as do we in sales, as it's just as important) and that's what made me rebut your post... A CB SHOULD have technical competency and a client needs to be very aware. There are too many second and third rate CBs who just send auditors, WITHOUT investing ANYTHING in that person. I know from first hand experience...

 

[Marc]

It's OK Marc! John and I know each other! He knows it's not personal...

I posted so others who don't know that reading this know.

 

[cbearden]

I haven't read this entire thread but I would highly DISCOURAGE the use of LRQA...
I have recently been written Nonconformance's for what was deemed, "Auditor's Opinion"....The Auditor even admitted it...
I wont go into the details, but when the Auditor admits its his opinion he his writing you up for, you know something is wrong.....
Also, approx. 40% of the Audit was an exercise in Consulting with the Auditor showing me how we should run our company and how others in our Industry do it....Very Frustrating Audit...

 

[John Broomfield]

When you rightly complained to LRQA what did they say?

...and what did they do?

Or, is your recommendation based on the outcome of your complaint too?

 

[NWrubberQA]

Seems like that must be going around or being taught to auditors. Heard the same thing recently from an auditor and a person teaching an auditor class that they can write a finding based on their opinion. In most cases when these are contested they default to the standard and the finding is dropped.
I don't appreciate the consulting either unless I ask for an opinion. I feel like the specific organization should be judged / audited against the standard not what the auditor has seen in other places good or bad. Kind of defeats the purpose of having an objective, unbiased audit to the standard.