Internal Audit Process Flow Chart - Please Review Mine and Comment!

Internal Audit Flowcharts?

We started talking about I.A. flowcharts a while back, but the discussion never really took off, so I'm trying again. This is our version. (To the member who mailed me for a copy of this map the other week: I replied but got the message "mailbox full"). Anyway comments and other charts are welcome..

/Claes
Internal Audit Process Flow Chart - Please Review Mine and Comment!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

M Greenaway

More of a 'process map' than a 'flowchart' - but we wont go there again !
 
R

Randy Stewart

Not as detailed as Martins, but here is our IA Turtle
 

Attachments

  • Internal Audit Map.pdf
    41.9 KB · Views: 4,644
Last edited by a moderator:
I

ISO Cheesy

I have not completed one yet, but will post as soon as I do. I think all the above Process maps/flow look great. I just have one question on follow up effectiveness. If my internal audit findings are an input to the corrective action process, do I need to show follow up action on my IA map/flow?
I think I just answered my own question. As long as I show the output of IA as an Input to the CA Process I should be ok…right? :bonk: Still on my first cup of coffee.

Randy: I really like your process map. You can never go wrong with the “Who, what, how and when”.
 

Cari Spears

Super Moderator
Leader
Super Moderator
These are great you guys. I'm working my way through our procedures in order to determine which ones to change to diagrams, or add diagrams or leave text. You've given me some good ideas - thanks for sharing. I've attached my text procedure.
 
M

M Greenaway

Cheesy

You are correct.

My map is the lowest level map (so far). If you click up a level (possible in the real thing) you will see internal audit as a single process box, similar to Randy's, and you will see the audit report as an input to the CA/PA process.

I will post it tomorrow so you get the picture.

The turtle diagram approach used by Randy is very very similar to the IDEF0 approach I try to use.

Again I would suggest people stick to the guidelines that an input is only an input if it is changed by the process, and an output is only something that is produced by the process (admittedly it is difficult to stick to these rules). Hence although continuous improvement is the goal of internal audit (as well as other tools) it is not really an output of the process.
 
R

Randy Stewart

Look Out

I had to change the title to include "audit". This map became the basis for our Process Reviews and we did away with the "formal" internal audit program. Our process owners are responsible to keep their processes in compliance, it is policed through our Hoshin Objectives and Process Reviews. Much simpler than the audits :smokin:
 
I

ISO Cheesy

M Greenaway said:
Again I would suggest people stick to the guidelines that an input is only an input if it is changed by the process, and an output is only something that is produced by the process (admittedly it is difficult to stick to these rules). Hence although continuous improvement is the goal of internal audit (as well as other tools) it is not really an output of the process.

M Greenaway,

Thanks you for the clarification on input and outputs. I just realized I’ve been getting wrapped around the axle on this whole thing. I’ve been trying to develop my flowcharts based on the idea that inputs to a process are “sometimes” outputs of other processes.
Example: Competencies can be an output from the training process, so I thought that would make it an input to another processes (internal audits). But (correct me if I’m wrong) training (auditor selection) is more like a method similar to the audit checklist because it's not being changed by the process itself (added value). Just like repeating what you said to make sure I understand. :bonk:

It’s a good thing I didn’t spend too much time (20min.) on my overly complicated flow chart. I’ll attach for your amusement (It's not-and now never will be completed). I thought I was on to something, but I think I’ll go back to the KISS concept. *As the light comes on over my head*

Thanks Again, this came JIT :bigwave:
 
R

Randy Stewart

ISO Cheese,
If and when you get a chance, take a look at the turtle diagram. It can be an eye opening exercise and here's why. We took these diagrams to different departments and let them fill them out. They were to list "DESIRED" input and "REQUIRED" outputs. We would go over what the internal customers and suppliers listed as DESIRED and REQUIRED. You would not believe the difference, even on an offline program for the laser or NC Mill!

There are numerous operations/processes where the output of one is the input to another, you are not wrong. However, to simplify matters you may want to keep to the "hard" output (document, product, email, etc.).
 
M

M Greenaway

Cheesy

Sorry I may have sent a confused message.

Outputs from processes do form inputs to other processes.

I get over the complication of trying to fit it all on one page by creating levels of process maps.

The attached is the higher level process map up from the auditing map posted earlier.

You can see the shadow box around the auditing process, which means if you double click it (in the real thing) you get the lower level dissemination given in the auditing map.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.

PS note how I break my own rules and show continuous improvement as an output !!
 
Top Bottom