Auditing to ISO 9001:2008 - How do we qualify ourselves?

[samsung]

But I have seen NC reports from external auditors in which 'not citing the relevant ISO 9001 clause number in the NC reports of internal auditor', has been given as a 'nonconformity'!!!

Yes, for last 3 consecutive visits, my external auditors has been reminding me of the clause numbers that our internal Auditors have not been putting on the reports. So far he has not raised an NC, but seems to give away one if next time he happens to encounter such a report. It is simply silly of him.

Only thing one can pray for them; "father, forgive them, they don't know what they are doing"

Regards,

 

[AndyN]

Yes, for last 3 consecutive visits, my external auditors has been reminding me of the clause numbers that our internal Auditors have not been putting on the reports. So far he has not raised an NC, but seems to give away one if next time he happens to encounter such a report. It is simply silly of him.

Only thing one can pray for them; "father, forgive them, they don't know what they are doing"

Regards,

I agree! sometimes, we dig a hole for ourselves, by setting up our internal audit programs around a third party system, which does make this sort of finding 'obvious'. I had one client who had their IA reports mimic the CB's that they used! Of course, there were never any findings on the IA program, but for sure it wasn't impressing any of their management!

Unfortunately, many training courses have the third party process as a foundation, so it's often ingrained in the 'student' from the start! I believe it's time for a big change in the content and philosophy of internal auditor training - we'd avoid people 'clinging to' ISO requirements like this.

 

[Randy]

Yes, for last 3 consecutive visits, my external auditors has been reminding me of the clause numbers that our internal Auditors have not been putting on the reports. So far he has not raised an NC, but seems to give away one if next time he happens to encounter such a report.

Regards,

Have him to either show you the requirement in ISO 9001 or in your contract with your CB that states you must show clause numbers in your report. When he can't and issues you a nonconformance file an official complaint. That should stop everyone from sucking eggs.

 

[JaneB]

Unfortunately, many training courses have the third party process as a foundation, so it's often ingrained in the 'student' from the start! I believe it's time for a big change in the content and philosophy of internal auditor training - we'd avoid people 'clinging to' ISO requirements like this.

Yes, me too.

 

[Raffy]

I agree! sometimes, we dig a hole for ourselves, by setting up our internal audit programs around a third party system, which does make this sort of finding 'obvious'. I had one client who had their IA reports mimic the CB's that they used! Of course, there were never any findings on the IA program, but for sure it wasn't impressing any of their management!

Some CB's do really dictated and sometimes they even required that you have to do something for them, even though it does not have an add value in the part of the organization.
Raffy

 

[Colin]

Whilst I agree with a lot of what is being said about not turning internal audits into external audits, there is a requirement to address ISO 9001 within the internal audit process.

Clause 8.2.2 refers: 'The organisation shall conduct internal audits at planned intervals to determine whether the quality management system

a) conforms to the planned arrangements, to the requirements of this International Standard and to the .....'

So whilst I don't care whether I see clauses on audit reports or checklists (or procedures come to that), I think the auditor can legitimately ask how the organisation are checking to see that the standard is being met.

 

[Phiobi]

Last month I was audited with 2008 in mind..... my auditor laughed when I send it took me 1 hour to bring my QMS into line (that was reading the new doc to see if there was anything hidden)

He also commented that he, working for LRQA, was being made to attend a 1 day course to anable him to audit to the 2008 version. Although he found it all very funny at our closing meeting he did also try and sell me a 1 day course.....

Does anybody know of any truth in a 2009 or 2010 version that will have huge changes in principle not just content? I know AS9100 is changing this 2009/2010.

 

[Colin]

ISO 9004 is due to be re-issued 2009/2010 and is a huge change from the current version (2000) but ISO 9001 will not be re-issued until 2013/2014 ish.

 

[AndyN]

So whilst I don't care whether I see clauses on audit reports or checklists (or procedures come to that), I think the auditor can legitimately ask how the organisation are checking to see that the standard is being met.

Colin, I have a different idea about this.

There's another way to go about this requirement - if the internal auditor comes back with a report that says, let's say, that a number of gauges are no longer available at a maching center and parts aren't being gauged according to the control plan, what requirement of ISO 9001 is being affected here?

You see, I wouldn't suggest that the internal auditor go 'armed to the teeth' with the ISO 9001 reqirements or a checklist based on them. By evaluating findings - and it may not be just one audit, the audit program can show if the ISO stuff is still in place and effective.......My concern is that too many well intentioned auditors rush off, using their external auditor training and get all caught up in finding stuff that doesn't really exist, because they 'interpreted' the standard differently.

 

[Colin]

You're right Andy, internal auditors can get into a tangle over the clauses but I think they should know the basic clauses such as doc control, records, training, etc plus they can bring in the main one(s) for the area they are auditing e.g. 7.2 for sales, 7.4 for purchasing.

I find that it doesn't take long for auditors to pick up the gist of the clauses and if they have problems, they can always ask for help from the QA manager - cos they always know don't they?