Engineering Audits - Internal Audits

[stlwtrs]

Trying to change up my audit process for engineering. In the past I have always audited Projects because they typically follow the APQP Planning process which logically includes all the important aspects of engineering that impact the TS standard. I would like to work the audit similiar to auditing the production floor and get into the engineering offices, closer to the action and audit individuals. Anyone have any experience with this... any comments, suggestions or pointers. Part of me says why change, but the other side is always looking for new approach to keep the audit process fresh.

 

[normzone]

Well, remember that you're auditing processes, not people. Product is the result of processes.

Of course, people execute those processes.

Would it serve to pick a piece of product that's shipping and work back through the processes that got it there, including design? YMMV depending on the volume/mix ratio you deal with.

 

[pldey42]

Trying to change up my audit process for engineering. In the past I have always audited Projects because they typically follow the APQP Planning process which logically includes all the important aspects of engineering that impact the TS standard. I would like to work the audit similiar to auditing the production floor and get into the engineering offices, closer to the action and audit individuals. Anyone have any experience with this... any comments, suggestions or pointers. Part of me says why change, but the other side is always looking for new approach to keep the audit process fresh.

How did you audit the aspects of engineering that impact the TS standard without getting into the engineering offices?

The engineers too will ask, "Why change?" and are unlikely to accept "to keep the audit process fresh" as an answer. Is there any kind of root cause analysis and trend that suggests problems with the design process? Because if there are indications that some problems are present due to poor design, that gives focus for planning a process-oriented audit of design, and rationale to justify doing it.

Hope this helps
Pat

 

[stlwtrs]

Do I dare say it. Our project audits are performed as a dreaded "Meeting Room Audit" with all the responsible parties for the project in question. In the Project Audit, we typcially have the key players in the room, but overall I am probalbly only touching 10 % of the engineeering community and thought it would be best to get out in the areas. Honestly, I have a agenda as well which is communicating the ISO TS Standard and Quality Systems as much as I can. This is a corporate headquarters and we have over 180 engineers, designers, etc. in the group. I plan to continue the project audits, however my intent was to add audits for the individual engineering areas to get in the work area.

 

[stlwtrs]

Completely agree with you on the process audit focus. My concern is that the project audits are setup as meeting room audits. All responsible parties are in the room, included engineering. We are a corporate headquarters with over 100+ engineers, designers, etc. and I feel like in the project audits I am not getting a chance to talk with the workers. Typically the managers attend the meetings and control the show. I guess, I could of course do a better job as a auditor and move that focus away from manager input. Appreciate your feedback.

 

[pldey42]

Ah! So you're getting the sanitised version then, as I'm sure you realise.

A long time ago I was writing software together with many other engineers and the build team, in another building, regularly broke it big time by using a misadvised build method that made their lives easier, and everyone else's impossible. When we told managers, they said we were wrong. They were wrong. The project was delivered non-functional, because managers had completed the final "QC" checklist, which did not include the question "Does it work?" They knew it didn't.

So you're on the right track I believe. The engineers will thank you if you can help them be more successful.

Hope this helps
Pat

 

[Kronos147]

The engineers too will ask, "Why change?" and are unlikely to accept "to keep the audit process fresh" as an answer.

The answer should be our internal audit procedures dictate we follow the process through all of the activities and participants to ensure compliance.

"Real boats rock." It's better to find the problem and have a solution in process than let an outside auditor find it and have them manage the corrective action, no?

Eric

 

[normzone]

"Real boats rock" just joined some other pithy statements on my white board, thanks.