IATF 16949:2016 Internal Auditor & 2nd Party Auditor Qualifications & Competency

[anneliesehuss]

It sounds like your company is using same registrar as mine. lol
last year we had a similar nonconformance. I was the only certified auditor at my facility and training someone to audit.

I put together a very nice training plan complete with tests and practical application. Which he completed and was documented on our skill matrix and his training plan

Our skill matrix rates competency as
0= none
1= basic understanding
2= can do with supervision
3= can perform independently
4= can train others

At the time, I showed this matrix to the auditor as evidence of competency and had each core tool listed, and the trainee was rated at a 3 for each item.

The auditor argued he should be at a 4 to perform audits or be 3rd part certified.

I showed in the standard that it states auditor must be "competent" and have an "understanding" of core tools. Additionally I showed the sanctioned interpretation that says we can train them internally but trainers certification must be on record.(mine was)... and the auditor got a little flustered and changed his mind from a major NC to a minor NC.

Our countermeasure was same as yours. The trainee took the free (to members) AIAG elearning core tools course which is about a half hour of PowerPoint slides and about 2 questions which don't matter if you get it correct. You still get the certificate of completion and the auditor was happy with that. A total joke really.

Now, as an added measure, I've added a routine retaking of the core tools self assessment which is also free (to members) to assess my auditors understanding and skill them up in the core tools they score a bit lower on. (I also use questions from this assessment for my own quizzes for internal auditor training)

 

[Crimpshrine13]

It sounds like your company is using same registrar as mine. lol
last year we had a similar nonconformance. I was the only certified auditor at my facility and training someone to audit.

I put together a very nice training plan complete with tests and practical application. Which he completed and was documented on our skill matrix and his training plan

Our skill matrix rates competency as
0= none
1= basic understanding
2= can do with supervision
3= can perform independently
4= can train others

At the time, I showed this matrix to the auditor as evidence of competency and had each core tool listed, and the trainee was rated at a 3 for each item.

The auditor argued he should be at a 4 to perform audits or be 3rd part certified.

I showed in the standard that it states auditor must be "competent" and have an "understanding" of core tools. Additionally I showed the sanctioned interpretation that says we can train them internally but trainers certification must be on record.(mine was)... and the auditor got a little flustered and changed his mind from a major NC to a minor NC.

Our countermeasure was same as yours. The trainee took the free (to members) AIAG elearning core tools course which is about a half hour of PowerPoint slides and about 2 questions which don't matter if you get it correct. You still get the certificate of completion and the auditor was happy with that. A total joke really.

Now, as an added measure, I've added a routine retaking of the core tools self assessment which is also free (to members) to assess my auditors understanding and skill them up in the core tools they score a bit lower on. (I also use questions from this assessment for my own quizzes for internal auditor training)

Thanks for your feedback. Your skill matrix system is actually the same as ours (in 4 ranks).

That was exactly what I was thinking about the training. Do AIAG free (for members) eLearning core tools courses, then do the free self-assessment (for verification of the competency). I just thought these $295 ea. core tools exams were an overkill for internal auditors because they are mainly meant for the 3rd party auditors (which is required every 3 years to be a certified 3rd party auditors). I assume you keep track of the core tools self-assessment scores somewhere as periodical verifications and auditor maintenance?

Some of the opinions and comments that come from some auditors are not to the specifications, only their opinions, but they make it sound like as if we're not complying to the standards. I've seen plenty of 3rd party auditors do this. And many companies end up spending $$$ just to satisfy these auditors. I get it that maybe some of the external trainings are good, but these certificates does not automatically make them competent, but some auditors like to see the certificates rather than hands on training in your practical work environment...

You are lucky that you got the major to a minor. In our case, the auditor cited 11 major nonconformances (a few were overlapping to each other and I do not know why she did it that way because she said she eliminated a few because one is solved the other is also solved). I've never seen this many and in the classification of major in the past ever. And going 0 nonconformances last year to 11 major nonconformances suddenly? They always say that they audit the same way and they audit to the standard, but that is always the bogus statement because they don't!

We were also cited for not closing out the corrective actions for our parent company over a year (very embarrassing), and our response was that we could not close out because our parent company is not willing to do thorough corrective actions, only making superficial corrections, so we have to keep rejecting them and remain open - the next thing she said was that we should teach them (our parent company) - after the fact she decided that we were incompetent internal auditors...so it is okay in her eyes that incompetent employees teach our parent company's employees, yet completely denying on the legitimacy of our internal auditor competency at the same time...

 

[anneliesehuss]

I assume you keep track of the core tools self-assessment scores somewhere as periodical verifications and auditor maintenance?

I don't have it all documented out just yet, but yes, I had them take the self-assessment and send me their results. Helps to know what they each need to work on.

 

[UncleFester]

I'd love to read the actual N/C for this - there are differences between training, qualification and competence.

 

[Andy04]

Some of the opinions and comments that come from some auditors are not to the specifications, only their opinions, but they make it sound like as if we're not complying to the standards. I've seen plenty of 3rd party auditors do this. And many companies end up spending $$$ just to satisfy these auditors. I get it that maybe some of the external trainings are good, but these certificates does not automatically make them competent, but some auditors like to see the certificates rather than hands on training in your practical work environment...

It is year after year more "all about the money"... Sad.