Recently in one of the audits, the auditor raised a Non-conformance as follows:
'No evidence of a full 5 why-why analysis for the customer complaint received ..................
The analysis stops at 2 whys and proposes a corrective action.'
(the action initiated is acceptable to the customer)
We tried to debate the issue with the auditor. But he was firm in raising the NC.
Is he justified?
Is it always a must that a 5 whys- have to be gone thro' without breaking the number of whys?
'No evidence of a full 5 why-why analysis for the customer complaint received ..................
The analysis stops at 2 whys and proposes a corrective action.'
(the action initiated is acceptable to the customer)
We tried to debate the issue with the auditor. But he was firm in raising the NC.
Is he justified?
Is it always a must that a 5 whys- have to be gone thro' without breaking the number of whys?