The trying to get "buy-in" or "involvement" of management with the internal audits is as bogus a thought as trying to find 3 wise men in the US Congress.......The audit serves a need of management, it's "managements" property and nobody else's........It clearly says that in 9-14-18-9100-13485 and everything else.
If you have to work to get "buy-in" or "involvement" you're on the down-side of the power curve and will remain so.
It's management that has to mandate the creation of an audit program and provide reason for its existance
It's management that has to supply the resources for an audit program
And it's management that has to use the results of the audit program for decison making
You want the perfect internal audit program? Then use you internal communication process and communicate to management its responsibilities relevant to the management system.........USE THE STANDARD!
Randy, I do agree this is what 'should be'.
But in some cases management hasn't had any/enough experience with good models and good systems including useful audits, and in consequence may have been turned off to a greater or lesser degree. If all you've seen is bad models, that's what you probably think is par. They may believe (because that's all they've seen) that audit is 'just something you hafta do' that produces a lotta paperwork and little useful info. I'm sure you've seen examples of tedious, detail-heavy auditing of very dubious value.
You know and I know and a whole lot of other good auditors and consultants and quality folks know that's not how it's supposed to be.
I've had various clients who'd had crappo systems - that's a technical term

imposed on them, document-heavy, overly bureaucratic, not really attuned to the business and not terribly useful all round, but they did get them 'over the line of certification'. But management had also had 'BECAUSE THE STANDARD SAYS' rammed down their throats all the way as the definitive reason why it 'had to be done this way' (usually not true). And thus they had never had the experience of good audits/good systems.
Where they have, they know the value. Or if they get it from the get-go - eg, a new system - they similarly see the value.
In some cases it took quite a while to get management turned around and seeing that a Standard is just good business sense, and that audits are theirs (management's) and it's up to them to get value out of them. But sometimes they need a bit of help to see that. And having their crappo system streamlined, and sorted, and tuned to align with the business so it really is 'how we do things here' as well as meeting the intent and requirements of the relevant Standard.
C'mon, I know we can all criticise 'management' lots, but let's occasionally cut some of them a bit of slack and give them the benefit of the doubt.
