Has an Implementation by a Consultant EVER Failed?

We used (or I am) a consultant and at the registration audit:

  • Company - Passed 1st time - Registrar was our choice.

    Votes: 6 20.0%
  • Company - Passed 1st time - Registrar was chosen by our consultant.

    Votes: 1 3.3%
  • Company - Passed 1st time - Did not use a consultant.

    Votes: 10 33.3%
  • Company - Failed 1st time - Registrar was our choice.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Company - Failed 1st time - Registrar was chosen by our consultant.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Company - Failed 1st time - Did not use a consultant.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Consultant - Have never had a client fail - I choose registrar.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Consultant - Have never had a client fail - I do NOT choose registrar.

    Votes: 5 16.7%
  • Consultant - Have had a client fail - I choose registrar.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Consultant - Have had a client fail - I do NOT choose registrar.

    Votes: 1 3.3%
  • Doesn't apply to me.

    Votes: 7 23.3%

  • Total voters
    30
Q

qualitytrec

#21
I voted that the poll did not apply to us. I use a consultant for consulting and have not used them to take us through the registration process. In fact I have not had them implement any part of our system ever. I do use them for an audit if it is a new system and to get juices flowing on areas that we may be a little rusty in. I also, use them to help convince management of the necessity and usefulness of things like management review, training records, quality objectives(measurables), etc...
I am the one that helps makes the decisions for the QMS and I evaluate the input of the consultant. I take any choices or decisions to management. I am the one who heads up any issues in the QMS at registration and insures that the QMS meets the standard. I know my companies needs and practices better than any consultant. A consultant is just an outside professional opinion nothing more for me, and I choose if we will use the opinions or not.

Mark
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
M

Matt_M

#22
Wow, I can't resist a reply here, not that I have a vote but because I have a comment about consultants. Here is my issue/observation; most consultants for ISO, CMM, CMMI, etc. tend to drive the documentation / process to be easy for the auditor/appraiser – not for the user. A consistent battle in my organization is to make sure were are developing and documenting processes to make them easier for the user community, not auditors, assessors, etc. Eventually people catch on that saving the user time for their everyday operation usually results in more cost savings/avoidance than the extra time some of us need to spend to find the objective evidence that we are meeting the requirements.

Not sure where the original saying came from, but it holds true today – “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.” If “quality professionals” would remember this as they develop or assess processes, acceptance of doing things right and being perceived as a team player would surely follow.
 
L

Laura M

#23
Aaack

Well, I see you just registered, so I will try and be nice. But please see this thread:

http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?p=97781#post97781


I won't go into tons of detail and repeat myself here, but when a consultant does the 'right' thing for an organization, and gets an auditor that 'thinks its hard to audit' the organization is left wondering if they hired the 'right' consultant. Don't get me wrong, I haven't been run out of any companies yet, but I definately DO NOT write manuals and procedures to fit the auditor, and found an auditor that said "Do me a favor, renumber this manual and procedures to meet the standard" so I know where to find everything. The client was so scared, they were ready to do it. In the end they didn't, but I guess my final comment is I'm not sure who is driving the behavior you refer to, the consultant or the auditor...or maybe someone who is a contract auditor, and play consultant too. I don't know, but I know all consultants aren't the same, and you do too, because you said "most" consultants.
 
M

MikeL

#24
Onwards and Upwards

I have been a consultant for twelve years now.

I haven't had a failure, mainly because of the good work methods our company uses. We are certified ourselves by the way.

The only times I have ever come close to having a major nc is when I have come in towards the end of the process, that is, where the company decided to go it alone (or with someone else) and finally called me in out of frustration.

I have usually urged them to choose an assessor and set the audit date. Companies will often not go to audit because they believe they are not "perfect" yet.

I put a lot of effort into continual improvement methodology, NC's CAR's Internal Auditing, management review and so on and this often sways the auditor whose perception will change from "they're not ready" to "they've started the journey".

Admittedly my contract with my clients is based on getting the certificate nailed to the wall but my emphasis is always on that being just the first milestone.
 
#25
Matt_M said:
Here is my issue/observation; most consultants for ISO, CMM, CMMI, etc. tend to drive the documentation / process to be easy for the auditor/appraiser – not for the user.
Although I kinda agree with this statement, I've also noticed a dramatic shift the opposite direction over the last few years. "Make it work for you" is the new mantra for ISO consultants. I think the 2K revision did a lot to begin the transition.
 
C

Craig H.

#26
db said:
Although I kinda agree with this statement, I've also noticed a dramatic shift the opposite direction over the last few years. "Make it work for you" is the new mantra for ISO consultants. I think the 2K revision did a lot to begin the transition.

db, I agree completely. I have not counted, but the word "effectiive" and "effectiveness" appear very often in the 2000 revision, and I believe that has gone a long way towards changing the spirit of the standard. Changing it very much for the better, I might add.

Is it perfect? Nope, but it sure is an improvement over what we had before, IMHO. As far as being a roadmap to become a better company, the 2000 version is indeed itself more effective.
 
L

Laura M

#27
I agree with db and Craig. I guess the same as the orignally post was about 'most consultants' I can say that 'most auditors' have started to turn around. I would appear that consultants, and probably some registrars are driving the change. I just took on a new client, and when we were discussing something regarding numbering and procedures, the client said "Wow, that's interesting, because, quite frankly, another consultant that we interviewed said we needed to change that to make it easier to audit...."

I guess the fact that I got the job settles the question - eh?

Laura
 
#28
Thought in passing. Many of the same issues that make a process hard to follow, also make it hard to audit. Ideally, as we make our documentation more “user-friendly”, we should also be making it more “audit-friendly”. So perhaps, and just perhaps, making the system “easier to audit” and “making it work for you” might kinda head in the same direction.

Of course, I've just walked out of teaching a TS internal auditor class, and I am very tired!
 
B

betterlife

#29
I am working as a conslultant for last eight years and given consultancy to 150 plus companies. So far, my success rate is 100% first time.

My working in India's National Standards Body has helped me prepare system documentation and getting the same implemented by the client organization. While preparing the documentation, the underlying principle has been to prepare user-friendly documentation for the lowest level of working personnel. Most of the documents are translated in to local language. It has also been the endeavour to ensure that external auditors find it friendly and need to ask minimum questions, so that they can devote more time for auditing system implementation to determine its effectiveness and ability to affect continual improvement in business performance of the client company. My systems have always been appreciated by certification/accreditation body auditors.

One most important thing which I learnt in my 25 years association with NSB is to read the standards as a text book. I have tried to pass on the benefit of this experience to my clients.
 
C

cochranemurray

#30
Perhaps we need another poll......did you fail the next surveillance audit once the consultant had gone ? Incidentally, in Great Britain the word "fail" is frowned upon. The politically correct prefer "deferred success"
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
R TL9000 Implementation - Has anyone out there been through TL9000 Implementation? TL 9000 Telecommunications Standard and QuEST 6
J How to keep MDD certificate valid when legal manufacturer has liquidity problem EU Medical Device Regulations 0
K Should APQP/PPAP has its own section in a QM? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 1
G Special 510K possible? Only the packaging has changed Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
Louddogsbark When your 13485:2016 certificate has been pulled ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
lanley liao What shoud i do if our company top management has been changed. Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 8
S PSW - Requirements for "off-the shelf" component that has multiply manufacturing locations Off the Shelf Item Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
L GRR for a tolerance that has changed Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 6
D Partial FAI - AS9102 - One single drawing has 10 part numbers AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
BeaBea ISO 9001 Customer Feedback Methods - What has worked for your company? Service Industry Specific Topics 17
S Has anybody done IMS - Management Review Meeting ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 8
M Has anyone has been through an MDR audit? (3/2020) EU Medical Device Regulations 1
M Has anyone heard of Run at Risk? Manufacturing and Related Processes 15
B ASA Aviation Supply Association - Has anyone heard of ASA? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
B Has anyone done an IEC 60601-1 gap analysis to IEC 60335? Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
Z 510(k) usage - Company has 2 physically similar products Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
D Has anyone had sudden challenges from Korea-MFDS? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
Sidney Vianna IAQG News IAQG has a new website - December 2019 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
Richard Regalado ISO 22301:2019 has been published - Nov 2019 Business Continuity & Resiliency Planning (BCRP) 0
S FAIR - If we have not produced a part in over 2 years, but nothing has changed AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
Nicole Desouza Who has to be compliant with REACH Declarations? REACH and RoHS Conversations 11
CycleMike GD&T - Hole pattern - Print (attached) has a single Datum Reference Frame Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
A Would an MRP system that has been in use for over 10 years require validation? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
W Informational VDI 2017 - Medical Grade Plastics - German VDI has published a "Richtlinie" Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
D FDA Biomarker Qualification Program - Has anyone prepared an application? Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
U Hand-Held dosing device has no PATIENT - Interpretation of the PATIENT definition IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 6
L Has anyone heard of the 2 pan system? Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
N Technical File Reviewer has requested more testing to ISO 10993 Other Medical Device Related Standards 10
I Who has had to move from ISO 9001:2015 to ISO 13485 and what were the challenges? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
M Informational Health Canada has launched an e-Learning tool to aid in understanding the premarket regulatory requirements for medical devices in Canada Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Has anyone here assessed the latest Abbreviated 510(K) guidance document? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
M Does anyone has a good verification and validation plan template? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Sidney Vianna Informational UTC ASQR Rev.11 has a mistake; certification of distributors to IATF 16949 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
lilybef FDA and Biocompatability Testing - Reviewer has requested implantation testing Other Medical Device Related Standards 11
D Has anyone undergone a BARDA (HHS) audit as part of their grant process? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
Sidney Vianna LinkedIn bug - Anyone has any idea of how to fix this? Posts not showing for me in a Group feed. Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 2
M FDA News FDA Report - FDA Has Taken Steps to Strengthen The 510(k) Program Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
C Has an amended version of IEC 60601-1-6 TRF been released for use in conjunction with IEC62366-1:2015? Human Factors and Ergonomics in Engineering 0
planB ISO 10993-1:2018 has just been published Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
S ISO 13485 Consultant Question - The company has 5 part time employees ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
K Has anyone used QAI for training? Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 7
Q MHRA has released a new guidance document related to 'GXP' Data Integrity EU Medical Device Regulations 3
B FDA Philippines has no check or balance outside the health department Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 3
S Doubts about SPC taken in Machining - Part has +-0.01 Tolerance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 5
D Has anyone here had any experience with PQ-FMEA software? FMEA and Control Plans 1
P NPR Metric - What if Customer has relaxed measure? TL 9000 Telecommunications Standard and QuEST 1
D EU Harmonized Standards to which a company has declared compliance EU Medical Device Regulations 13
N Customer Survey Question Has Me Stumped - Compliance with Laws and Regulations Customer and Company Specific Requirements 4
B Records Destroyed - Hurricane Harvey has likely destroyed our Quality Systems Records Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 10
S Has anyone completed IATF 16949 Certification - Share your Audit Experience? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom