Is it OK for an auditor to issue any observation for improvement when he/ she found anything that is stated in the guideline was not carried out and it was not stated anywhere in the standard (used for auditing) itself?
i.e., in IATF guidance to ISO/ TS 16949 talk something about employee motivation and emplowerment whereby common measurement of employee satisfaction was surveys, awards, improvement suggestions, poster campaigns and etc...
If any of the above was not carried out per the guidance, was it a non-compliance or what? (take into consideration internal procedure never mentioned anything about the suggested scheme to measure the employee satisfaction, instead they choose to be different from what guidance was given)
You should only raise a non-compliance where a requirement (a SHALL statement) is not being carried out. This SHALL statement should appear somewhere in the audit criteria (what you are auditing against). So if the audit is undertaken against TS16949 you could not cite suggestions in guidance documents as an NC.
However I would think it fair to point to 'best practice' in the audit report as a suggestion, perhaps highlighted as an observation.
If the customer calls out the use of the IATF guidance in their system, then the IATF guidance becomes auditable and a N/C can be issued. If not, then the answer is No. You may however issue an Opportunity for Improvement based on the guidance (IATF, ISO 9004-2000, etc.).
Refer to TS2 para. 0.3.1,The guidance document is not auditable nor is it to be for contractural purposes.
Back to the original question concerning issue of an observation for imporovement; should only be issued when the auditior suspects or envisions that a future ncocompliance could possibly occur.
I have always asked auditors to note any opporturnities for improvement they may come across and then when we write up our report for closing meeting (yes we do a closing meeting, and report the nonconformances verbally prior to issuing a written report/audit corrective action requests) we start with a listing of all the items we saw that we thought were working very well, or innovative ideas that have been put into use, etc. After we list the nonconformances found we describe areas that could use improvement. We explain that they are not nonconformances for this audit, but bear looking at to ensure that in another audit they won't become nonconformances.
Remember, audits are a "snapshot", you don't have time to put everything under a microscope. If auditors have bad feelings about something, you can rest assured that it will become a self fulfilling prophecy in the future, if for no other reason than someone in a later audit will decide to dig a little deeper, or the scope will such that an area that was previously only looked at lightly will be focused upon the next time.
Observed opportunities for improvement do not require a "corrective action" at our facility, but I do expect the management team to look into it and provide me with results of their investigation along. i.e. it is an internal issue that may become a corrective action.
Sam, agree with you to some extent. The paragraph does say that, meaning that an internal/external auditor can not pull out the guidance and audit to it, unless you say your system is compliant to it.
Most internal auditors use the OFIs to suggest ways to improve the QMS based on their observations and comments from the organization. External auditors are taught to write OFIs in the instances that you say but usually use this as an avenue for free consulting MO.