Coury Ferguson

Moderator here to help
Staff member
Super Moderator
#12
Yes, but I have found out after the fact, that our Quality Manager was aware of the timeline but he didn't relay that information to me. He even met with this CB months before about this transition and other points of interest (they all met in Florida and I'm on the west coast) so that we supposedly be ready when she showed up this month. Fortunately for my defense, our then Quality Manager even completed audits to the old standard right up to the very end of 2017! Why, oh why, did he not bring this to my attention, as the one who creates and assigns the audits, that we should be auditing to the new standard?!

When the audit started for the 9.2 section, she asked our new Quality Manager (previously a Quality Engineer with us) if she remembered that we were to be auditing to the new standard as was discussed in Florida (new QM was there too, see...) and she replied yes. I just sat there stunned - wondering why neither one of them discussed this WITH ME! I was too shocked and respectful to even defend myself at that moment.
So, that's my story and it sucks to be me now.

Imagine the QM and the QE (who is QM now) doing audits to the old standard all through 2017 and then he retires right before our CB audit and I have to answer to it! :bonk:
Audit Coordinator,

The only input here that I have and it is my opinion:

Is that common sense would tell me to perform IAs to the newest standard, knowing that the organization (maybe you) knew that you would be audited by the CB to upgrade to the latest standard.

I don't agree totally with my friend Andy. The RC in my opinion would be a "lack of communication between management." This really isn't a CB issue that I can see. This is an internal issue. It isn't identifying a specific person, it is identifying the organization's failure.
 

Audit Coordinator

Involved In Discussions
#13
Well at some point people have to do their jobs. If they didn't relay the information to you, then you have no way of knowing. But what doesn't make sense is how you where not auditing to the new standard. If your procedures and processes where updated, would you audit to the new standard? Or did the updates occur after the audits?
We audited to the processes and documentation that was on file at the time. These were never updated to the new standard. Why should they be when the QM never required or mentioned that they too, should be updated. We already, in 2017, had established what all our processes were and also were doing process auditing, again to the old standard long before our QM signed us up for transitional training that ended in May 2017. Seems to me the QM should have should have started us in the transitional training before 2017, right? :ca: not covered......
 

Audit Coordinator

Involved In Discussions
#14
Audit Coordinator,

The only input here that I have and it is my opinion:

Is that common sense would tell me to perform IAs to the newest standard, knowing that the organization (maybe you) knew that you would be audited by the CB to upgrade to the latest standard.

I don't agree totally with my friend Andy. The RC in my opinion would be a "lack of communication between management." This really isn't a CB issue that I can see. This is an internal issue. It isn't identifying a specific person, it is identifying the organization's failure.
Coury,
I know, right? But I specifically asked my Quality Manager if I should continue to audit according to the pre-arranged audit schedule which was made out for the entire FY2018 in accordance with AS9100C and he said yes. He said that we could start auditing to the new standard in FY2019 (which started this April). As evidence to that, I have record of process audits that he did up to the end of 2017, all to AS9100C, not AS9100D. He never asked me to do different. Unfortunately, I listened to my boss as he had 40 years experience in manufacturing and much of that in quality!
So is it common sense to not follow his advice when I only have 5-6 years in quality?
I know, I know, hind sight is better than foresight. Clearly, everyone can see the gap now. My dilemma is answering the CA so we can get back on track. I pretty much have assembled a response now, due to all those who have responded before you, which has helped me immensely. I could sleep last night and feel much better about the situation going forward. You can't imagine how much this forum has helped me as I have no one here that can help me.
:bighug:
 
#17
Coury,
I know, right? But I specifically asked my Quality Manager if I should continue to audit according to the pre-arranged audit schedule which was made out for the entire FY2018 in accordance with AS9100C and he said yes. He said that we could start auditing to the new standard in FY2019 (which started this April). As evidence to that, I have record of process audits that he did up to the end of 2017, all to AS9100C, not AS9100D. He never asked me to do different. Unfortunately, I listened to my boss as he had 40 years experience in manufacturing and much of that in quality!
So is it common sense to not follow his advice when I only have 5-6 years in quality?
I know, I know, hind sight is better than foresight. Clearly, everyone can see the gap now. My dilemma is answering the CA so we can get back on track. I pretty much have assembled a response now, due to all those who have responded before you, which has helped me immensely. I could sleep last night and feel much better about the situation going forward. You can't imagine how much this forum has helped me as I have no one here that can help me.
:bighug:
Dude, it's not nearly the end of the world. Don't stress. :) Miscommunications happen. You have a legacy system that seems to be working. It's really is no harm, no foul.
 

Audit Coordinator

Involved In Discussions
#18
Dude, it's not nearly the end of the world. Don't stress. :) Miscommunications happen. You have a legacy system that seems to be working. It's really is no harm, no foul.
I suppose you're right, but I happened to have high standards for myself. This is the first time our audit program wasn't highlighted from a 3rd party auditor as the top highlight of the company and I took it more personal I guess. Overall, it's an ok thing to be stressed a little bit as that's what drives me to make the improvements, among other things, I guess.
But, you're right and it's nice of you to bring it into perspective for me.
:tunnel:
 
#19
Did you consider, "What are the differences between rev. D and rev. C that affect my internal audit program?" When I performed this gap analysis, I found just a few minor changes were needed in my internal audits by rev D. Therefore most of the IA's performed under rev C also meet rev D. requirements. Just a couple audits were performed to support our position that our QMS had been audited to rev. D.

Maybe this explains your previous QM's position, but that should have been shared with you. Which I think leads us back to the root cause of poor communication.
 

Scanton

Wearer of many hats
#20
This thread has been fascinating to me as I am a ISO9001, IATF16949 quality guy and have zero experience in the implementation and maintenance of the AS standard.

Looking as an outsider it seems you know exactly what happened and have the evidence to prove it i.e. your previous QM made the decision to stay with the old standard until the end of the financial year and then transition to the new standard in the next financial year. This was the incorrect decision, as you were going to be audited against the new standard before this transition took place.

So as far as I can see you have two failures here , one in planning and one in communication. I don’t think you have a failure in understanding the requirements as they were known and ignored, so I believe your best route for your non-conformance and corrective action(s) is to go down the planning and communication route. Would you get away with a small amendment to your internal audit procedure to say that they must be conducted to an new standard, to cover all new requirements X months before CB transition?

As always, please feel free to shoot be down in flames if you disagree or I am fundamentally missing something.
 

Top Bottom