Handling External Audits with Internal Vacations

N

noboost4you

#61
Would you also like to know how many pages our quality manual is?

I can't read your minds as to what information you'd like to have. If something is unclear, perhaps you should ask additional questions to clear everything up before making rash decisions. I don't know, maybe thats to much to ask?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
S

somerqc

#62
Icy,

The two facilities that I have registered and a third location that reached compliance but didn't want the registration costs were very different. I think the approach taken in regards to this are reflection of this.

1st place - everyone was very well crossed trained. Had a program that each manager would move to another department for 3 months each year so that they could help during vacation time. To be honest, we could have passed with only 3 people there due to the effectiveness of this system. (over 10000 employees NA wide)

2nd place - very empowering where managers could make decisions and not be worried about being "given a new one". Great training in management techniques with good leadership. Over 500 employees.

3rd place - at the very early stages of quality development where many people have never been trained in the basics of quality systems or quality techniques. Initially very old school, therefore, to ensure an understanding the step was taken to ensure the top people were there (i.e. Ops Man, myself, Prod Man, Controller). 60 people.

Bottom line - culture and maturity of company are major factors in how this situation would be handled. I much prefer situation 1 and 2 since this is the most welcoming and satisfying situation.
 
#63
A truly well implemented, maintained and effective management system would be able to be audited at any time by anybody and show itself to be doing what it is supposed to do. Being "un-prepared" or not having the "right people" available are such bogus excuses for a poor systems ability to pass an audit the best thing that could be done for everyone involved would be to pull the chain and flush it.
I can always count on Randy to cut through the BS and say exactly what I meant. I kind of got caught up in my own pet peeve against demanding people do things when and where you want in order to make up for your lack of preparation and implementation. I'll say it again, I have not and will not demand or even request that people not take vacations during a given time because my system is robust enough to tolerate your absence.
 
S

somerqc

#64
Icy,

It isn't that I don't agree with you. As my last post said, I prefer the culture where is won't matter who is there the system still works.

Unfortunately, my current situation required that certain individuals realized that we are serious about a new direction for the company. We faced a great deal of resistance due to people not willing to change how they conducted business (they were very "word-of-mouth" and no formal monitoring of processes).

In fact, the implementation and subsequent registration of the system has led to the departure of some of the people that weren't willing to move forward with the company.

To be honest, any audits going forward I have no concerns about at all about who is here.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#68
Randy, read your response and gave it a little thought, however, I beg to differ. Last week our consultant came back in after 8 weeks since his first visit. What was supposed to be a 2-day "desktop" audit and wrapping up any help with documentation turned out to be a little more than a 1-day visit. He said we were the most prepared organization at this stage that he has ever seen. He said we made his job easy. He also went on to say we could have had the registration audit the following day and would have passed with flying colors. Again, your response is another premature "attack" not knowing all the information. We know our situation and where we stand, I just wanted to know if having the Engineering manager out on vacation and replacing him with a trainee of the Engineering department would suffice. And after all this discussion, we know we'll be just fine with him out for the week.
That's not what you said in your original post there Homer. My response was driven by the evidence I was presented and it stands. It wasn't premature, it was thought out and honest. A question was asked that had some conditions attached to it and an answer was provided taking those conditions into consideration, now the conditions change with "a new revelation, a replacement"....the original response stands, with this added to it...the rookie engineer hopefully has achieved a level of competence with respect to his/her RRA's within your system (of course that is giving you the benefit of the doubt that you guys understand what competence is and how it can be achieved and verified...probably not)

As for your consultant, he should have made your job easy, not the reverse.
 
#69
In fact, the implementation and subsequent registration of the system has led to the departure of some of the people that weren't willing to move forward with the company.
Now that's a different kettle of fish. The Engineering Manager comes to you, apprehensive and apologetic, to explain that it will cause him greater grief to reschedule his vacation than to miss your registration audit. He wants to know how big a problem that creates and offers two of his top project managers as backup; people who have been involved in implementation of your Product Realization procedures during the registration project. The Materials Manager comes to you, whiney and defiant, to inform you that she has just scheduled to attend an APICs seminar that week and can't help you. She stalks off with no offer of backup and it wouldn't help anyway since she has held a death grip on all of the procedures related to her empire of Purchasing, Receiving, Shipping, etc. since the beginning of the registration project. None of her people have a clue other than the training that you have managed to deliver to them (with great scheduling drama to to her reluctance to let anyone do anything other than their "job").

Now, which one is going to get a rude awakening after you have a talk with their boss about attitude and cooperation?
As for your consultant, he should have made your job easy, not the reverse.
:lmao: You're a killer, Randy!
 
N

noboost4you

#70
That's not what you said in your original post there Homer. My response was driven by the evidence I was presented and it stands. It wasn't premature, it was thought out and honest. A question was asked that had some conditions attached to it and an answer was provided taking those conditions into consideration, now the conditions change with "a new revelation, a replacement"....the original response stands, with this added to it...the rookie engineer hopefully has achieved a level of competence with respect to his/her RRA's within your system (of course that is giving you the benefit of the doubt that you guys understand what competence is and how it can be achieved and verified...probably not)

As for your consultant, he should have made your job easy, not the reverse.
Yea, that assumption can be made quite easily over a forum. You're good...:rolleyes:

Going back to your first response and my original question, you stated that it's the system that is audited and not the people, correct? Now, if there's only one Engineer who is the only one who knows the ins and outs of that department, you're telling me that he or a trainee doesn't need to be around? You basically said in not so many words that nobody needs to be around to pass the audit if the "system" is in place.

It's not the responsibility of every employee to know the entire standard and what each clause means. Like I said before, Customer Service isn't going to know and understand the Design and development section and vice versa. So tell me how it doesn't matter if the proper people are around for an audit? I'm sitting at the edge of my seat waiting in anticipation :notme:

As for your consultant, he should have made your job easy, not the reverse.
Only because I went well over the duties and expectations required of me to get everything in place.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Douglas E. Purdy Handling of ISO Interpretations - Are you controlling them as External Documents? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 32
S Advice on how to reduce overhead of handling non-conforming material Nonconformance and Corrective Action 7
B Handling lower detection limits for SPC and process performance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 1
A ISO 10002:2018 Checklist Needed (Complaints Handling) Customer Complaints 5
G Handling Unpacked (Additive Chemical) Product For Automotive Applications IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
A Handling of contaminated medical equipment Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 0
B Procedures for Complaint Handling and Post Market Surveillance EU Medical Device Regulations 7
J KPIs or Metrics to Measure a New Complaint Handling Process 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 9
shimonv Rigid rules for handling supplier audit findings ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 11
Jimmy123 Handling nonfunctional requirements in DFMEA FMEA and Control Plans 5
F Component Molding and Over-molding - Handling Resin Inventory Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
Q Handling Off-the-Shelf Components 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
V Handling open points in design reviews 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
L AS9100 D- Handling Nonconformance Documentation for an organization that outsources most of the work. AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 11
P HVAC System vs Air Handling Unit (AHU) - Differences Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 1
L GMDN code wanted - Software for handling records Service Industry Specific Topics 9
L Handling Sort/Return Requests Customer Complaints 8
S Document Handling during an Audit General Auditing Discussions 6
S Handling Cost of Sales requests for Customer Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 2
Q AS9100/AS1180-1 - Handling of Equipment and Calibration Records AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 12
M Complaint Handling Responsibilities for a Design Partner - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
S Merging Post Market Surveillance and Complaint Handling ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
A ISO 9001 Ergonomics and Manual Handling Requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
C Suggestions requested on handling batch record papers exposed to hormonal products Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 1
A Production and Post-Production and Complaint Handling ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 2
C What's Your Process for handling rush jobs, urgent or priority orders ? Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
A Medical Device Handling AFTER the device's specified lifetime has expired 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
T Handling of Obsolete Material Work Instruction ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
A Risk Management, complaint handling and CAPA system ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 5
W Aerospace Materials Handling Training AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 9
V Handling decomissioned line/equipment during 1st time product-based inspection US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
D Complaint Handling Call Centers ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
W Contract Initial Importer and Order Handling for a Class I Medical Device Service Industry Specific Topics 2
W SOP on Handling of HCl (Hydrochloric Acid) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5
A Handling Normal Capacitor Production Fallout AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
K Procedure for Handling of Customer Supplied Material (AS9100 Requirements) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
M Procedure for Handling Customer Return Part (Defective Part Return) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
M Manufacturer's handling of Distributor's Historical Complaint Records US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
C Anyone have experience handling Feed Safety Management System (GMP+B2)? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
V ISO10002:2004 (Guidelines for Handling Customer Complaints) Self Assessment Checklist Customer Complaints 5
V Ensuring Improvement and Handling Change FMEA and Control Plans 4
S Handling Out-of-Specification Results: FDA's guidance for the industry Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 12
M Internal Warehouse Handling - A Reverse Logistic Case! Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 6
C Corrective Action and Preventive Action for Operator Error (Cosmetic - Handling) Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 15
S PCB Handling Requirements - What to do if we drop a PCB during the assembly Manufacturing and Related Processes 4
M Raw Material Handling & Mixing in Plastic Injection Moulding Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
C Safe Handling of Non-Device Refurbished Medical Equipment US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
Y Handling of Potentially Biohazard Material - Alcohol Cleaning Procedure ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 12
R Use of Automated Liquid Handling Robot for a PCR based Assay CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
R Storage Procedure per NQA 1 Storage and Handling Requirements Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom