I am bringing this up because during the second audit, from the lead auditor, I kept hearing this statement: ISO 9001:2000 is all about performance. He brought into the equation continuous improvement in the sense that you have to improve performance everywhere. The only problem I had with this is it sounded more and more like a consulting session.
At the start, the lead auditor took off like a banshee. He was almost drilling the auditee (this was management). His focus was on whether what the auditee was doing was sensible (as opposed to compliant). While the lead auditor did mellow out, the interview remained somewhat contentious.
I have to give credit to the auditee. He was exceptionally bright and took all in stride. He ably answered questions and maintained a good, positive attitude and demeanor.
Registrar Audits II
I have now been through 2 registration audits to ISO 9001:2000. Each was a bit different. One was relatively focused on the stated requirements of the standard. The other was more focused upon performance .
How many times is a quote revised?
Sometimes as many as 2 or 3 times.
Is that a lot? Is there any way - shouldn t you get better or more complete information on customer needs and requirements up front so you don t have to requote so many times? Requotes cost you money, you know. I mean, if you re asking the right questions...
This went back and forth for quite a while. The auditor eventually accepted that, with consideration to the company and its products, that everything was being considered.
This is just one example of the difference with one auditor. I have mixed feelings about the difference. With a good auditor, this should not be a serious problem. However -- it leaves open much to interpretation and is - well, it s very close to consulting.
ISO 19011 - Quality and Environmental Management Systems Auditing Forum Discussions
. 
