Do OFI's (Opportunities for Improvement) really help?

I think that OFI's are useful (1) and I want to continue to receive them (2)

  • 1 - Very useful

    Votes: 11 31.4%
  • 1 - Occassionally useful

    Votes: 20 57.1%
  • 1 - A waste of time

    Votes: 3 8.6%
  • 2 - I want to continue to receive them

    Votes: 7 20.0%
  • 2 - I do not care

    Votes: 3 8.6%
  • 2 - Please stop

    Votes: 4 11.4%

  • Total voters
    35
  • Poll closed .

Howard Atkins

Forum Administrator
Leader
Admin
A large number of auditors use the mechanism of OFI's to "add meat" to the bones of an audit.
IMO it is almost impossible to write an OFI that is not a non conformance.

According to ISO 19011 - 6.2.2

The audit objectives define what is to be accomplished by the audit and may include the following:
a) determination of the extent of conformity of the auditee's management system, or parts of it, with audit criteria;
b) evaluation of the capability of the management system to ensure compliance with statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements;
c) evaluatation of the effectiveness of the management system in meeting its specified objectives;
d) identification of areas for potential improvement of the management system.

Further in the same clause
The audit objectives should be defined by the audit client. The audit scope and criteria should be defined between the audit client and the audit team leader in accordance with audit programme procedures. Any changes to the audit objectives, scope or criteria should be agreed to by the same parties.

From this it appears that the audited party is the one who decides whether he wants "identification of areas for potential improvement of the management system." or not.

As an auditee do you think that OFI's are helpfull?
Do you want to stop the CB (certification body)from issuing them?

We have had a number of discussions on the issue, I am publishing a poll to see what the feeling is.
The poll has 2 questions
(1) I think that OFI's are useful
(2) I want to continue to receive them

Please vote once for each question

Thank you
Howard
 
Last edited:

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
A large number of auditors use the mechanism of OFI's to "add meat" to the bones of an audit.
IMO it is almost impossible to write an OFI that is not a non conformance.
In my opinion, an Opportunity For Improvement is consulting pure and simple. Registrars use Opportunity For Improvement citations to convince customers that audits are 'Value Added'.

An Opportunity For Improvement cannot be a nonconformance because if it IS a nonconformance it has to be written up as a nonconformence.

One must look to the history of Opportunity For Improvement. It used to be called, amongst other things, an Observation. The rule was: Major Nonconformance, Minor Nonconformance, Observation. Observations, like Opportunities For Improvement, were (are) 'recommendations' (consulting) and represent an auditor's opinion. Sometimes the auditor is qualified to make such Observations/Recommendations, but often the auditor does not have the qualifications, not to mention in depth knowledge of the specific company, to be telling the company what they should be doing.
 

Stijloor

Leader
Super Moderator
Friends,

In the increasingly competitive world of 3rd party audits and QMS registrations, Registrars (and their auditors) are expected to add more value to the audit process. One of the few options they have is to identify OFI's. While some may consider this consulting, I am not against it, as long as the auditor does not explain to the audit client HOW this OFI can be implemented. The audit client can accept it or refuse to act upon it. However, the auditor should also clarify that the OFI is not an obligation, and will not lead to a possible nonconformity at the next audit. Because that's what some organizations believe; that they have to "resolve" the OFI, concerned that it may lead to trouble next time.

Stijloor.
 

AndyN

Moved On
I'm leary of any person who spends so little time in an organization, hardly knows the product, customer or the organization's culture and can diagnose something that needs improvement! In my experience, the OFI tends to be a rush to judgement about a symptom, that the auditor either had a paradigm about - we read about those here at the Cove often - or is a situation that was never investigated sufficiently.

Of course, the old rules regarding 'no-nonconformances' at registration from the QS-9000 days, slid the grading of such downhill, so that majors became minors and so on. Indeed I believe there's a recent ANAB advisory regarding this because frequently CB auditors' wording/content and grading of NCs is inconsistent. If it reads like a major it should be graded as such, a minor a minor etc. - is the ANAB message.

I agree that frequently they're a way to ameliorate a finding to make it palatable to the auditee.

As Howard maintains, they are often an NC without teeth. So, auditees take them lightly, after all, they don't have to do anything. In my past, such indications of a genesis of a problem were written in a summary report which is the position I take in teaching auditors. There is a place for OFIs, however to record them on a form which looks like a non-conformity, but has the box checked 'OFI', is confusing for the readers.

Again, this is one area of internal audits where external audit techniques are inappropriate - grading of NCs. If the finding is well written, management should see the gravity of the situation and act upon it. Not rely on a (superficial) grade.........
 

SteelMaiden

Super Moderator
Trusted Information Resource
Our auditor is no stranger to our industry. I'll never hold the management positions our auditor has. OFI's I get are down to earth ideas, I don't consider them consulting at all. We are never expected to put them into place unless we see some real value. Now, on the environmental side, our auditor knows very little about our industry, and understands even less about our culture. OFI's there are mainly ways to make the auditor comfy, not help us. I absolutely hate getting OFIs on the Env. side. Either way, I guess I don't really care if someone feels OFIs are consulting. We will do what works well for us, and if I can improve the way we do things, I don't really care where the idea came from. Bring 'em on!
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
In the increasingly competitive world of 3rd party audits and QMS registrations, Registrars (and their auditors) are expected to add more value to the audit process. One of the few options they have is to identify OFI's.
Which is.... (Wait for it....) Consulting...
While some may consider this consulting, I am not against it, as long as the auditor does not explain to the audit client HOW this OFI can be implemented.
I do think most auditors do make that quite clear. I'm not necessarily against it, but then again... I have been called in by a number of companies over the years who admittedly didn't have an 'ISO Specialist' (no one there really understood ISO requirements), to help them straighten out all the problems caused by *assuming* the auditor must know what they're doing by suggesting they do this or that via an 'Observation' (aka Opportunities For Improvement). They ended up with bloated, non-value added documentation and/or systems that didn't fit that company's specific needs, and which often degraded existing systems. I evaluated one company that first registered in 1991 a few years ago. They ended up with 2 sets of work instructions and many other duplications. Talking to the operators who kept 2 sets of books they explained the documentation thy had before ISO worked fine, but every time an auditor came in they would make recommendations, upper management said "Do what the auditor says", so they ended up with documents they actually used and documents for the ISO auditor. Granted that was stupid, in my opinion, and I told them so. Their main problem was they had no one on staff who really understood ISO requirements (and this is a BIG company in Canada) who could interact with the auditor and who could look at their systems and integrate what they had into a system which works for them.

I come back to the same point I made above, it's consulting, pure and simple. Instead of masking what it is by using a couple of fancy words (Opportunities For Improvement, Observation, etc.), they should come out and say exactly what it is. The deception its self is a negative. It seems these days redefining words is a popular thing to do.

My question would be: Is this a conflict of interest or not? What is the registrar's mandate?
 
S

SilverHawk

Our TUV PSB auditors are not only strangers but also aliens to our business activity. Each year different auditors from China, Spore, Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia would come and perform the audits. Not only they issue tons of OFIs which are of not significant value-adding but the OFIs are full of rubbish which are not applicable to our nature of business just because they are so learned and created as super human beings and we are merely a parasite to their daily works. They thinks that we are useless animals subjected to the wits and fancies. Yet the auditors insisted that we addressed all the OFIs and they never even bother to review them at the next Surveillance audits as they are always new "kids on the block" tailing along as observers and monitoring auditors to witness our audits. At one year, we protested to have more than 1 observer and we were harassed with even more insulting remarks.

Just issued us the NCRs and we shall addressed them...OFIs are a waste of time as they are not value-adding but pain in the back and the auditors NEVER reveiw them!!!
 

Stijloor

Leader
Super Moderator
OFIs are a waste of time as they are not value-adding but pain in the back and the auditors NEVER review them!!!

I do not think that generalizing OFI's is appropriate. Every OFI can be evaluated at its own merit and in the proper context. You do not have to accept suggestions, you decide if it's worth it. Perhaps worth a review and then you decide. Auditors do not have to review them when they visit you again because OFI's are just suggestions.

Stijloor.
 

harry

Trusted Information Resource
Hi SilverHawk,

I must admit that I am not that familiar with the medical industry (I supposed you are from it) but do you have a choice? To have an auditor the way you described does nothing to help you or your organization.

I think it's time you shop around for another one or are you tied up with them due to other factors like they being your NB, etc?
 
Top Bottom