How well did the transition auditors understand your organisation?

[Paul Simpson]

Non Conformity

Now that all the transition work is ongoing I would like some feedback from Cove members on the transition process. Please post your answers to the poll.

 

[edward.gibbs]

Paul,

I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you asking about a specific case, and if so, where are the details of the case posted? Or are you asing for personal experiences with our own transitions?

Ed Gibbs

 

[Paul Simpson]

My mistake

Sorry Ed. I should have explained the poll better. My question is ... how well do the transition auditors understand the organisation you work for and your managment systems?

The poll options are for cove members to give their opinion on how well the non conformities raised actually reflect their own assessment of how well systems are implemented at your organisation. I have some experience of transition audits and have had a mixed bag where auditors are raising a whole host of minor N/Cs (similar to the 1994 standard) when there are none really there and another example when there was a clean bill of health when in reality there were significant failings in the system (and the process approach) which were not picked up.

 

[MandOS]

Sorry Ed. I should have explained the poll better. My question is ... how well do the transition auditors understand the organisation you work for and your managment systems?

The poll options are for cove members to give their opinion on how well the non conformities raised actually reflect their own assessment of how well systems are implemented at your organisation. I have some experience of transition audits and have had a mixed bag where auditors are raising a whole host of minor N/Cs (similar to the 1994 standard) when there are none really there and another example when there was a clean bill of health when in reality there were significant failings in the system (and the process approach) which were not picked up.

Paul

Our recent experience suggests that a number of assessors do not understand a process-based management system, or even business processes and their management, and that they cannot cope with a system which is not built around the sections of the standard - even though it reflects how the organisation works and is used (and liked) by the staff.

Some will not even look in detail at the published system, and prefer to ask a few questions about how "continuous improvement" and "preventive action" are covered. They need to understand the processes and how they are managed to know whether these requirements are addressed adequately. Is the need to "enhance customer satisfaction" lacking on the part of some of these "suppliers"?

Regards

Peter Fraser

 

[edward.gibbs]

I answered that they did not find NCs that existed in the system, but I don't feel that is a problem. Auditing is by nature a sampling activity, and there is no way in a couple days that an auditor is going to find every NC in a company. It would be totally unrealistic to expect them to do so.

Internal audits should find more NCs if they are done correctly, and that is why registrars always check internal audits on every visit. But even a thorough internal audit program will miss some NCs.

I don't think it is necessary to find every single NC at the moment it occurs. The important thing to to keep getting better, keep uncovering and fixing problems, and never assume that an audit with no NCs means there were none to be found.

FWIW - I did an internal audit about a week after our final 9001:2000 transition audit and I found a glaring omission in our QSM - something that has to be there but was not. We fixed it, of course, and it was an easy fix. But it could have held up our certificate if our registrar had noticed it.

Nothing is ever perfect.

Ed Gibbs

 

[Paul Simpson]

Is the sample effective?

Thanks Peter / Ed.

I understand that an auditor cannot be expected to find all NCs that exist but as purchasers of a service I would hope that at the end of the assessment we could make a judgement as to whether they found a "reasonable" proportion of the NCs they came across in the audit.

As I mentioned I have been on an assessment where the auditor raised a number of NCs that was far in excess of what a process approach audit should record - mainly by reverting (to type) to document control issues and by requireing procedures be documented when there is no need.

I have also seen audits where the company does not have a process based system, awareness of a system cobbled together a week before the audit was incedibly low and there were no records to support implementation - yet the company had one minor NC raised on the wording of a policy!

 

[db]

I once read of a story of an accident described by several different people. One was a cop, one was a doctor, one was an engineer and one was a teacher. Each described the accident from the aspect of their own experience and bias. At times it was hard to tell if they were talking about the same accident.

Auditor tend to audit the same way. If your auditor has an engineering background, they tend to focus on that aspect. If they belong to MENSA, then you have a real problem (just kidding Randy ). This can lead to confusion at times.

I do have a question, however, if you know there are nonconformances, why did you not address them prior to the audit? Are you leaving "low hanging fruit" for the auditor (Randy will see right through that ploy)? Are you lazy? I find this whole thing interesting.

 

[Randy]

If you're conducting your internal audit correctly you should be finding opportunities for improvement (preventive actions) before they become N/C's. If your not, you're on the wrong end of the power curve and you should identify your internal audit as an N/C in need of correction.

db...how did you know I'd read this thread?

 

[Greg B]

Paul,

I don't really understand this thread or the Poll....but...I do agree with what db abd Randy said.

Are you really asking that the Registrar find enough NCs to let you know how you are travelling in regards to transition? because if they don't alert you to the NCs then you won't know what to fix? OR are you highlighting a bad registrar? If you want to know how you are progressing put some evidence up on the Cove and we can discuss it.

The only real thing we changed in our transition was our Quality Manual the rest pretty much stayed the same with a bit of a spring clean. During our Transition Audit our Registrar concentrated on our Documentation (New Policy and QM mainly). It was not complete but he could see the work progressing and minutes etc from meetings stating what we were going to do. The Quality System is fluid and continually changing and improving. It CANNOT be 100% correct ALL of the time and therefore if you wanted to be picky you could have NCs appearing on a very regular basis.

We have had the same Registrar for 12 years. He understands our business well and has grown his knowledge as our company has grown.

IMHO
Greg B