M
Time for me ask a question. I tried the serach function but didnt locate an answer to this. I want to change our company's method of auditing some procedures. We have always performed procedure based audits, registered for 4 years now, but I think we could gain more if audits were completed differently.
Our current method is to audit each documented procedure we have two times annually. These audits are performed by a group of 8, paired in teams of two for each audit. All auditors have other job functions not usually related to the quality department.
Has anyone tried the approach of supervisors auditing work cells in other areas? What I envision is a supervisor from one cell going into anther cell and looking for evidence of multiple items. This would include training records, id of material, handling of NC product, proper work instructions, and everthing else necessary to meet the standards we have established. Each auditor would be provided with an outline of what to look for and a time frame for completion.
The goal behind it is increased frequency of audits in areas, increasing the number of auditors and increasing the team aproach. The two biggest obstacles we continue to face are consistency (once an audit is over people put less of an empahsis on items they dont feel are improatnt but required in the standard) and team buy-in (the feeling that I'm just a pee-on and what I say or do isnt improtant in the grand scheme of things).
Any one auditng like this? Any thoughts on a method like this? I'll consider any feedback good feedback.
Our current method is to audit each documented procedure we have two times annually. These audits are performed by a group of 8, paired in teams of two for each audit. All auditors have other job functions not usually related to the quality department.
Has anyone tried the approach of supervisors auditing work cells in other areas? What I envision is a supervisor from one cell going into anther cell and looking for evidence of multiple items. This would include training records, id of material, handling of NC product, proper work instructions, and everthing else necessary to meet the standards we have established. Each auditor would be provided with an outline of what to look for and a time frame for completion.
The goal behind it is increased frequency of audits in areas, increasing the number of auditors and increasing the team aproach. The two biggest obstacles we continue to face are consistency (once an audit is over people put less of an empahsis on items they dont feel are improatnt but required in the standard) and team buy-in (the feeling that I'm just a pee-on and what I say or do isnt improtant in the grand scheme of things).
Any one auditng like this? Any thoughts on a method like this? I'll consider any feedback good feedback.

