Internal Audit Question - 8.5.1 Continual Improvement

[Ninja]

{snip}...As the quality manager, I have final review and approval responsibility for audit reports prior to submittal to management. {snip}

So you are management...

{snip} , and citing the standard for findings to allow understanding by the auditee and management.

and thus citing the standard then helps you to understand...? Not sure the goal was reached here...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think you're on the right course, questioning "should this really be a finding?". Well done.

IMO this should be a cause for a pat on the back for the guy who started the chart. No finding, no OFI...he is already moving on an OFI under his own initiative...the opportunity to increase right-pick percentage.

What he is doing IS continuous improvement...bend over backwards to help him. Report this to management as an employee worth paying attention to and rewarding. Life is so full of the other kind.

If you want to capture the work into your QMS, meet with him and fill out the forms with him...{read fill out the forms FOR him} then ask him what could be easier about the QMS and the forms so that he wouldn't mind doing it himself next time.
Those not familiar with a QMS find it a burden even if it makes life easier...make yourself the bridge, and be willing to alter the QMS mechanisms to promote his desire to keep up the good work.

...then go looking for the next guy doing a good job, and introduce the two guys to each other...these are the guys you want guidance from for how to improve your QMS mechanics.

 

[BubbaDog56]

So you are management...



and thus citing the standard then helps you to understand...? Not sure the goal was reached here...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think you're on the right course, questioning "should this really be a finding?". Well done.

IMO this should be a cause for a pat on the back for the guy who started the chart. No finding, no OFI...he is already moving on an OFI under his own initiative...the opportunity to increase right-pick percentage.

What he is doing IS continuous improvement...bend over backwards to help him. Report this to management as an employee worth paying attention to and rewarding. Life is so full of the other kind.

If you want to capture the work into your QMS, meet with him and fill out the forms with him...{read fill out the forms FOR him} then ask him what could be easier about the QMS and the forms so that he wouldn't mind doing it himself next time.
Those not familiar with a QMS find it a burden even if it makes life easier...make yourself the bridge, and be willing to alter the QMS mechanisms to promote his desire to keep up the good work.

...then go looking for the next guy doing a good job, and introduce the two guys to each other...these are the guys you want guidance from for how to improve your QMS mechanics.

Touche'

By making it easier to understand by management, I meant top management. Who at this point are not fully familiarized with the standard any more than most of the organization. As I mentioned, we have put the cart before the horse in developing and starting to implement a QMS without laying the awareness and training foundation first. Absolutely wrong, but we had no choice. We're now going back and building the foundation, while still trying to perform some semblance of auditing and reporting to meet the customer's requirements along with making improvements to our processes.

As far as the original issue/question, no question that he's trying to do the right thing. He just doesn't know where to go from here, as you pointed out, and it's our job to help him along. Winning hearts and minds will assure success better and faster than an iron fist any day....

 

[Ninja]

BubbaDog,
Thank you for taking that comment in the spirit intended...After I walked away it occurred to me that it might be taken as an insult...it certainly was not intended as one. Again, thanks.

 

[BubbaDog56]

BubbaDog,
Thank you for taking that comment in the spirit intended...After I walked away it occurred to me that it might be taken as an insult...it certainly was not intended as one. Again, thanks.

No harm, no foul, I speak sarcasm as a second language myself....

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Audit Question - 8.5.1 Continual Improvement

It would be good to know the purpose of the tracking. We're not necessarily seeing a "metric" per se; it might be that information is being gathered in order to evaluate the current state of things. If that's the case, the next step would be to determine whether or not the current state is stable and acceptable and what it would take to change it. At that point a real objective could be set, if necessary.

I also question the need to cite the standard in an internal audit. That's often a sign of a deficiency in the QMS. In the end it's a question of whether or not there's actually a problem.

From what we have in front of us I'm inclined to think that should not be a nonconformance.

What I'm curious about though, is if you don't cite the standard on internal audits, what do you cite for nonconformances?

I know you can cite their procedures if there is one on the topic and they are not living up to it, but many things that are required by the standard may not have a procedure.

Also, how do you reconcile with the requirement in the standard that requires you to confirm that the organization is living up to the requirements of the standard?

"The organization shall conduct internal audits at planned intervals to determine whether the quality management system a) conforms to the planned arrangements (see 7.1), to the requirements of this international standard and to the quality management system established by the organization . . . "

Have I missed something?

 

[kgott]

Re: Audit Question - 8.5.1 Continual Improvement

I cant agree that every metric and thing that management look at must have a target. This is an example of overly simplistic extrapolations getting out of hand becoming set in concrete.

This kind of thinking will ultimately produce 'thou shalt set SMART targets for the minimum number of improvements that each and every audit shall identify.'

Most targets are meaningless anyway as they are simply numbers plucked out of thin air and not based on process capability which is calculated.

As Deming said, if we are going to increase sales by 10% this year why didn't we do it last year, why 10%, why not 20%?.

And as he also said, if we didn't achieve a 10% increase in sales last year how are we going to do it this year? What is management going to do to improve the process so that its capable of achieving 10% more this year than last year.

Management are pretty good at plucking numbers out of thin air, that's easy, anyone can do that, but improving the system so it can deliver that target? well now, don't embarrass management, that not good for ones career.

 

[JaneB]

.. we have put the cart before the horse in developing and starting to implement a QMS without laying the awareness and training foundation first. Absolutely wrong, but we had no choice. We're now going back and building the foundation, while still trying to perform some semblance of auditing and reporting to meet the customer's requirements along with making improvements to our processes.

As far as the original issue/question, no question that he's trying to do the right thing. He just doesn't know where to go from here, as you pointed out, and it's our job to help him along. Winning hearts and minds will assure success better and faster than an iron fist any day....

I think you are entirely on the right track and have exactly the right take on things.
As you say, it's cart before the horse (never ideal!).
Definitely I wouldn't want to slam this as an NC - it's too early in the piece. At most, it's an observation that the area is beginning to track what's going on. Which is in my book at least is something that should be praised, rather than slapping on an NC.
Before one can set reasonable targets, one has to have some kind of handle on what is going on - the current status.
And I wouldn't be whipping out 8.5.1 as a justification for the NC, either. If anything, the fact that the team there is beginning to track is an example of the fact that they are in the early stages of ... guess what? Improvement!
Nip this in the bud, as soon as you can. This kind of 'Kwality Kop everything's an NC' is the fastest way I know to turn everyone OFF quality.

 

[JaneB]

Re: Audit Question - 8.5.1 Continual Improvement

I cant agree that every metric and thing that management look at must have a target.

Agree with you in general, but not in this particular instance. In the instance in question, it probably will need a metric. But at this point, it's too early to set one.

 

[Mike_H]

Re: Audit Question - 8.5.1 Continual Improvement

It may be that your IA personnel are learning on the job as well (see "cart before the horse"). I'd be wanting to discuss all this with the Store and audit team in a 10mins wash-up and agree on the appropriate level of noncompliance that will benefit the business and not whack someone over the back of the head so to speak. It might turn out to be closer to a Doc Control issue if that's where the discussions lead...

 

[AndyN]

I'm a bit concerned that we're debating whether this is a nc, what to call it etc.

Let's NOT lose sight of the fact that, as a store and being responsible for the issue of parts (once received into the organization) as a kit, it is of primary importance that the kit is accurate in terms of quantity and correctness of part description is of paramount importance. How an organization can NOT have established such a metric for this process is beyond me! It doesn't appear to me, at least, to be an internal audit issue (although the auditors shouldn't have "stumbled" over this) but one of what kinds of objectives are established for the various processes etc...