Hi, I am currently having difference of opinion with regard to closing a non-conformance. I am being told that a non-conformance can be closed with "correction".
My understanding is as follows -
Results of audit include Non-conformances / Observations (potential non-conformances). Action required could be corrections, corrective actions and/ or preventive actions. The focus of action on non-conformances is to eliminate the cause nonconformance or prevent occurrence
Just correction, could result in the non-conformance being identified somewhere else – and this does not satisfy the requirement of ‘eliminate detected nonconformities and their causes’. Therefore you can close an NC only after CA has been taken and found to be effective.
Why else, would our external auditor provides us with 13 weeks within which we need to identify CA’s and where possible close the non-conformances identified in that time?
Is my understanding flawed? Please help.
It really depends on the nature of the audit finding. To expect corrective actions to be taken when the reported issue can be corrected is often why management don't fully support internal audit programs. So, to give full guidance, we'd have to know more, perhaps with some examples of audit findings so we can see which might be corrected, which might need systemic actions.
It is a practical impossibility, IMO - and a legacy of auditor training (which is based on external audit techniques) - to suggest that all audit findings require corrective action. The risks must be considered and the audit finding must be worthy of a corrective action in the first place. Too many auditors find issues which could be corrected, but they, and the audit process, demand corrective action.......
