Customer Audit Finding against ?where appropriate? of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

[dbzman]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

I agree, this is a contractually issue. I got the feeling that they were performing an old style QS/ISO audit. They were really working hard on their checklist!

If the customer wants this to be in our PO’s to our suppliers then that is OK, but they wrote it against ISO section 7.4.2. The standard does not say that our customer makes the determination. The organization does this. If they had previously made the request then it would be a finding.

This would lead me to believe that this would be a customer requirement, and not a violation of 7.4.2. I believe that this should not have been a finding but a request from the customer to start adding this on our PO’s.
Am I thinking about this in the wrong way?


Thanks for the input. It really helps the thought process when I can put my thoughts on paper (electronic paper anyway).

 

[AndyN]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

Jane and Howard - IMHO the absolutely correct responses!

It sounds to me the auditor is 'flexing their muscles', without the benefit of knowledge of this requirement and its application.

And the only place to address this is through the commercial channels - 'We can do this to please your auditor, but the part price will have to go up as a result'.......

Clearly discussing with/questioning this particular audit will gain no ground - if they wrote it, they won't see the error of their ways and, indeed, may become aggressive in defending themselves over the perceived 'attack' on their position....

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

I believe you are correct, but don't let your feeling of how this should have been written interfere with your relationship with your customer.

 

[dbzman]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

Another question…

If we are going to let the finding stand what would be my reply?

Root Cause: The customer did not tell us of this requirement…

This one may be a little hard to write.

Thanks!

 

[AndyN]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

Another question…

If we are going to let the finding stand what would be my reply?

Root Cause: The customer did not tell us of this requirement…

This one may be a little hard to write.

Thanks!

The infamous "Retrain the auditor"........

 

[JaneB]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

I agree, this is a contractually issue. I got the feeling that they were performing an old style QS/ISO audit. They were really working hard on their checklist!

It certainly sounds like a problem with their auditor - but it also highlights the importance of being very clear with audits from anyone (and particularly a second party) about the:

• scope
• criteria
• process
• auditor qualifications/experience (if possible!)

There's good reason why 9001 specifies requirements for Audit. I've seen some tremendous damage and time-wasting being done with very ill-equipped second party auditors, no defined audit scope, no/unclear criteria & process, resulting in audit reports full of dubious findings and alleged nonconformities! (As this one for example).

If the customer wants this to be in our PO’s to our suppliers then that is OK, but they wrote it against ISO section 7.4.2. The standard does not say that our customer makes the determination. The organization does this. If they had previously made the request then it would be a finding.
This would lead me to believe that this would be a customer requirement, and not a violation of 7.4.2. .

I agree with you.

I believe that this should not have been a finding but a request from the customer to start adding this on our PO’s.

Yes, I agree with this also.

I think you are thinking about this the right way, definitely not the wrong way.

The trick, though, will be to respond politely (rather than defensively) - as you know, one can be 100% right, but still lose a battle with a customer. And presumably you want to keep the customer.

It sounds to me the auditor is 'flexing their muscles', without the benefit of knowledge of this requirement and its application....

Clearly discussing with/questioning this particular audit will gain no ground - if they wrote it, they won't see the error of their ways and, indeed, may become aggressive in defending themselves over the perceived 'attack' on their position....

Yes, I agree.

Another question…

If we are going to let the finding stand what would be my reply?

A tactful one!

I would keep focussed on the outcome you want - eg, solution - rather than who's wrong/right. That said, you can still (gently but tactfully) disagree with the finding, something along the lines of
"Our interpretation is as follows. ISO 9001 says XYX (quote the actual clause).

We believe we are meeting that requirement because of (eg, we ensure our staff are suitably qualified via doing this and that) and our company policy is therefore not to include it on purchase documents. However, if you wish this wording to be specifically included in future purchase documents, we would be willing to meet this new requirement, but will treat it as a specific customer requirement to be met. Our Contracts Manager will be in touch with your Purchasing Manager to discuss this. "

PS: also, treat it as a learning experience, and look at what you can do in future to clarify the points I listed above from any future 2nd party audits.

 

[aminequality]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

helo, I think that before this take a look on chap 6 of the standard 9001. If y have a Q System is obviously that yr staff must be trained and qualified if it affects the Quality of the product/sevice

 

[Randy]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

This falls right in line with customer requirements....apparently neither specified or determined in this case (7.2.1) and it's no different than a customer saying put in place a certified QMS in order to be our supplier.

 

[dbzman]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

This falls right in line with customer requirements....apparently neither specified or determined in this case (7.2.1) and it's no different than a customer saying put in place a certified QMS in order to be our supplier.

I agree, but I put the responsibility on the customer for this one. The customer should inform us of their requirements for specific PO wording during the quoting process. If we ask and they do not tell us, we cannot be responsible. We make every effort to meet customer requirements, when known, but something that is not normally put on a PO would be very hard to foresee as a customer requirement.

Remember, we have very few suppliers on our listing since we are a service industry (Heat Treating). We do put on the PO our requirements for certification to a specific requirement that (if I am not mistaken) spells out the training qualifications.

I want to thank everyone for their input. It is very helpful!

 

[meongroup]

Re: Customer Audit Finding against “where appropriate” of ISO 9001, Clause 7.4.2

I agree totally that a requirement to 'do something' has to be a contract change, and that normally involves a cost. So, the issue must be dealt with by those with the authority to negotiate the contract amendment.

Sorry to see that auditor arrogance is still rife in some parts of the world.