International Differences in Third Party Auditing and Auditors

P

potdar

#31
I'm confused. I don't see the relevance of the linked post or thread to this thread. Can you explain the connection you interpret?
:topic:Sorry my weakness with the cove software. I was attempting to attach a link to a single post by Jane - ended up attaching the whole page. Can you separately tell me how to attach single posts?

Now very much back to the topic. Jane here told us that she has the greatest respect for the standard as a leveller - making everything boil down to the criteria and evidence to fulfilment.

I wanted to draw her attention to post 14 on the attached page. I would request her not to take a personal affront. I am only highlighting this as an example.

Jane quit her assignment with a client 'who had a dreadful cumbersome pile of *&^%$ as a certified QMS!' How? heaven knows!!

She helped them turn it into a streamlined & functional, clear system. Great!

This project went on for two years during which the client faced external audits with the system in improving stages of repair (which were basically still disrepair). They continued to be certified? Not clearly stated. Possibly yes. How? heaven knows!!

At the end of the project the relationship evolved into maintenance of the system. Now, during internal audits, she realised that the system was a mess being run by adamant people. She quit when she realised that she couldnt make the people change.

Was it a streamlined & functional, clear system? No.

Was it certified? (Presumably) yes. How? heaven knows!!

Other cases of clients from whom consultants dissociated themselves have also been reported in the thread. Did the clients finally get certified? Once again (presumably) yes. How? heaven knows!!

Am I being too presumptious to state that this is a global pheneomenon?

There definitely will be international cultural differences among auditors and registrars. They are definitely not on this aspect. Here the heavens seem to contribute a lot. And they are the same for all cultures / nationalities and even the 'holier than thou'. This seems to be the great leveller - not the standard.

.....or is it the greenback as Mary suggests?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
J

JaneB

#33
Sorry all - long post follows! :tg:

Now very much back to the topic. Jane here told us that she has the greatest respect for the standard
Correct so far.

... as a leveller - making everything boil down to the criteria and evidence to fulfilment.
That's not quite an accurate summary of what I actually said.

One can (and this one sure does!) simultaneously respect the Standard, while also acknowledging that there are at times some deficiencies in how it is implemented. If you read what I said in this thread as my not having that view, you drew a quite mistaken conclusion.

Why do we continue to pretend?
Pretend? I don't.

Do I think some certifiers are poor? Yes, I do. (There's a couple in this country I'll have nothing to do with). But they are 2 out of 26. That's low numbers.

Are there some poor auditors around? Yes. Yes, these things happen. Nothing and no one is perfect, and I don't expect this. But the majority I come across and work with are OK through to very good. I've seen... oh, golly, at least 70 - 80 different auditors at work. Of those, I was distinctly unimpressed through to very unhappy with perhaps 5 or 6 all up, over a 20-year period. Also low numbers.

If I experience a poor auditor/audit, I complain to the certifier in the first instance. On the (relatively few overall) occasions I've done it, I've usually been impressed with their response and action, from replacing the auditor to reviewing the findings and in one case, retiring an auditor permanently.

Now - in each case, there were circumstances & more going on than I have time/space to write or would divulge, to maintain confidentiality. Judging a single case having only a few bare facts is like the readers of a daily newspaper setting themselves up as judges when they don't know all the circumstances.

ON a couple of other occasions, I've advised the client to switch certifiers. In both cases, the client was very much happier with the new certifier and auditor/s.

Jane quit her assignment with a client 'who had a dreadful cumbersome pile of *&^%$ as a certified QMS!' How? heaven knows!!
Hey, hang on. Their system was dreadful when I started, not when I quit! To write what you have is misreporting what I said and not true.

You're actually pulling stuff I wrote in a thread I started to discuss a quite different topic (when do you fire a client? - a topic incidentally I was keen to discuss, but - talk about cultural differences! it got hijacked by a bunch of guys from a quite foreign culture :) which should have been in the 'water cooler' forum IMO).

However, it's reasonable to look at what else I've said, and I don't resile from what I wrote. But using it to support your argument here I don't think is a reasonable use. I'll have to explain a bit more.

Yes, it was an awful system. No, I don't know how it passed certification to the 2000 version of 9001 (we're going back a way), but contributing factors included the lead auditor:
- perhaps unfamiliar at the time with the new 'process approach'
- but willing to extend the 'benefit of the doubt' at that point, and had been auditing them for some time.

What I didn't say in that thread (wasn't relevant to the topic!) was that when I first started with them, the auditor had raised some very severe actions in his recertification audit report against the system, its documentation, its workability. It required a lot of change. (If you want to blame anyone, in fact, put the blame where it belongs. With the %^&*^%$ consultant who'd sold them the pile of 'off the shelf' crap documentation close to the worst I've seen. He'd taken that old outdated 1994 model, pasted in all the words from the new version... and trotted it out. Words (almost) fail me.)

Yes, I helped them them turn it into a streamlined & functional, clear system. And why was I there? At least in part because the auditor raised grave concerns in the audit report, and the GM went looking for a better consultant. Enter yours truly.

This project went on for two years during which the client faced external audits with the system in improving stages of repair
Yes, they did. To high commendation from the external auditor - but even more importantly, to the pleasure of the GM and internal staff. Which was deserved. You seem to be equating the total period I worked with total period to fix system, which isn't accurate. We did a lot of improvement.

(which were basically still disrepair).
Leaping to conclusions, there. Not true, and I don't know where you got that idea from.

Allow me to explain.The auditor could see abundant evidence that a/they met requirements and b/were improving. Not as much as you'd expect for the length of time company had been certified, no - but definitely improving.

At the end of the project the relationship evolved into maintenance of the system. Now, during internal audits, she realised that the system was a mess being run by adamant people.
No again. Internal audits were performed throughout the project - simultaneous improve and operate. Plan, do check, act: Identify problems, raise actions, fix, review, etc. I didn't realise at the end 'the system was a mess'. It wasn't.

She quit when she realised that she couldnt make the people change.
I quit because I decided I did not want to work with the particular person in charge, and because I disliked the disconnect between theory and action: stated values, and values in action. A very personal decision, and an ethical conflict. Nothing in ISO 9001, and not really related. You could / can be certified to the Standard and still have bad managers/execs in charge (meaning 'bad' as in bad people wise. They may be OK managers/execs, but have poor people skills).

Was it a streamlined & functional, clear system? No.
I disagree. Where was the dysfunction? With the manager. That's what took me a while to finally realise, and only became possible once the system had been overhauled - fewer places to look

Was it certified? (Presumably) yes.
Yes, it was. And rightly so, IMO.

You're taking one singleexample from something I wrote, where you don't even know all the facts, and then using that to support your argument and turning it into a very widespread generalisation. Stats isn't my strong point (I'm not an engineering type :D ) but even I know that these are very flawed stats.

One white crow does not make all crows white!

That's the thing I disagree with you about, Potdar. A lot.

I am not disagreeing that things go wrong, that some certifiers aren't what they should be, and some auditors ditto. Where I do disagree, as have others in this thread, and what I will continue to disagree absolutely with you, is that this is widespread or normal or the general rule.

In my experience and opinion, it isn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#35
Jell guys......There may be a bit of cultural difference coming out here as well
Which was the point of the thread:D. One of the great things about the Cove and the Internet as a whole is that we can have two experienced people, one in Australia and one in India, compare their experiences. No one should be surprised that they're different, or that conflicts might arise as the discussion continues. We can only see clearly as far as our own experience has taken us, and the purpose of an international standard is to help iron out those differences. My original contention was/is that just throwing the standard out there and saying, "Go at it" isn't enough, and that we need to understand and anticipate the cultural obstacles, and have a plan. We don't have one now.
 
H

HSSE Auditor

#36
Which was the point of the thread:D. One of the great things about the Cove and the Internet as a whole is that we can have two experienced people, one in Australia and one in India, compare their experiences. No one should be surprised that they're different, or that conflicts might arise as the discussion continues. We can only see clearly as far as our own experience has taken us, and the purpose of an international standard is to help iron out those differences. My original contention was/is that just throwing the standard out there and saying, "Go at it" isn't enough, and that we need to understand and anticipate the cultural obstacles, and have a plan. We don't have one now.
I think gender can also sometimes play a big role when we have cultural clashes.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#37
My perusal of the news this morning produced a lovely example of the types of cultural issues I had in mind when I started this thread. Keep in mind, this is not a comment on anyone's religious beliefs, but just an example of how international differences might come into play in doing our work.

From Reuters:
KATHMANDU (Reuters) - Officials at Nepal's state-run airline have sacrificed two goats to appease Akash Bhairab, the Hindu sky god, following technical problems with one of its Boeing 757 aircraft, the carrier said Tuesday.
Nepal Airlines, which has two Boeing aircraft, has had to suspend some services in recent weeks due the problem.
The goats were sacrificed in front of the troublesome aircraft Sunday at Nepal's only international airport in Kathmandu in accordance with Hindu traditions, an official said.
"The snag in the plane has now been fixed and the aircraft has resumed its flights," said Raju K.C., a senior airline official, without explaining what the problem had been.
Local media last week blamed the company's woes on an electrical fault. The carrier runs international flights to five cities in Asia.
It is common in Nepal to sacrifice animals like goats and buffaloes to appease different Hindu deities.
Now one assumes that the ritual was accompanied by normal maintenance and repair procedures, but nonetheless we obviously have to make room for a lot of different beliefs and viewpoints under the ISO Big Tent.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#38
I think gender can also sometimes play a big role when we have cultural clashes.
I don't think that's the case in the present instance, but I certainly agree. I've personally run into instances where men from a different culture had difficulties with the idea of a female supervisor. I've also seen times when immigrants to the U.S. believed that supervisors, male or female, were supposed to know everything about the job at hand, and were not to be questioned, ever. Sometimes it's hard to get those people to contribute to problem solving because they believe (A) that the bosses should know all the answers, and (B) the bosses will somehow lose face if a worker has a better idea.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#39
Jane couldn't audit in many countries because of culture. Potdar may not be allowed to audit in his neighboring country to the West. Howard probably couldn't audit in Saudi or Syria. I'm pretty sure there are places that I can't audit.

Culture is very important, it exists and there is no changing it. Differences in culture lead to misundertstanding and mis-interpretation.

What's the difference in these 2 words? It's cultural.......

Naked?

Nekkid?
 
J

JaneB

#40
Jell guys......There may be a bit of cultural difference coming out here as well
Jell??? Sorry, Randy, don't understand. Does that mean 'take it easy,... cool down'? I'm not annoyed, just debating.

It's such a large topic, 'cultural difference', isn't it? Also one I've had quite a bit to do with, as in a previous life I taught English as a second (not a foreign) language to migrants and refugees to Australia. Which involved the need to understand and appreciate cultural differences in the students, and at least an equal need to be explain and interpret those in Australia that could cause difficulties for them.


Just found this - cultural dimensions - interesting website:

http://www.geert-hofstede.com/
Valeri, thanks very much for this, very interesting website with some seriously interesting things to say. Not least in categorizing 'cultural difference' in some specific dimensions.

I haven't come across his work before but found it extremely interesting, the dimensions that Hofstede came up with: Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance and Long Term Orientation.

Seems to me that the dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) (he says it deals with a 'society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity... and indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to feel either uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations') would have a lot of relevance to this topic of auditing & international differences therein.

Do you think that's a possibility here, potdar?

:topic:As for gender difference... yes, that is real, though I don't think it's an issue here. I recall once a student of English asked me about something a co-worker on the factory line had said to him, which he didn't understand. You can ask me anything, I'd said. He did. Oops! I went immediately red. Hmm, 'I think that would be best explained to you by Roy (co-teacher)'.

OK, I could have translated what the man had probably referred to (a common phrase to indicate a portion of male anatomy - you can guess which), but I didn't, because I was pretty certain it was something he'd prefer not to hear from me, and better from someone of the same gender.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Differences between international and regional standards (EN, AAMI, CSA...) Other Medical Device Related Standards 6
S What are the International Forging Requirements for Nitrogen Strengthened Stainless Steel? EU Medical Device Regulations 3
D ISO 9001 certificate issued by QMS International for 10 years - legit? Registrars and Notified Bodies 17
J Leveraging FDA 510k Clearance for International Registrations Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2
Sidney Vianna Informational IAF and ILAC Seek Contractor for Establishment of a Single International Organization for Accreditation ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 2
M Class I - International Registrations EU Medical Device Regulations 3
E Packaging Specifications Mercedes-Benz U.S. International IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
F Mig Welded Components - IMDS International Material Data System RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 1
M Informational Publication of Draft Health Canada Implementation Guidance for the International Medical Device Regulators Forum Table of Contents Format Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational RIVM – Summary International Expert Meeting on breast implant-associated lymphoma Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
Sidney Vianna Medical Device News International exposé of the harm caused by poorly tested medical devices. Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 12
Wes Bucey International Manufacturing Technology Show - 10 September 2018 - Chicago (meet up?) Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 6
Sidney Vianna Optimizing Standards for Regulatory Use - International Medical Dev. Regulators Forum Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
qualprod Which standard to follow, local or international? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
S Referencing International Standards as Design Input Design and Development of Products and Processes 5
N International / Traceable Standards - Procedures for Calipers, Micrometers, Etc. ISO 17025 related Discussions 2
B ISO 17100 (Requirements for Translation Services) International Translations Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 4
S Where is a good place to get IMDS (International Material Data System) Training? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Marc IAF (international accreditation forum) - Mandatory Documents (MD Series) ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 0
Marc "Elsmar 90" International Quality Standard anyone? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 33
F Future Plan for IMDS (International Material Data System) RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 5
J International Standards governing Test Method Validations ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
R Determination of IP (International Protection Marking) Rating IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
U ISO 9001 Certification for Highly Distributed International Company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
M Calibration Procedure Traceable to National/International Standards (API Q1 9th Ed) Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
M Basic International Standards required for a Manufacturing Industry (Optical Media) Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 4
D International Standards (ISO or MIL) for MTBV Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 4
automoto International Problem Solving Guide Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 2
AnaMariaVR2 The International Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Int.) WHO US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
I International Sales Legal/Regulatory Gray Area? CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
M FDA Acceptance of ISO 13485 Reports from a Recognized International Program Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
I International Accreditation Board of Bristol, UK ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 11
Jen Kirley This international consultant thing sure is a ride! Career and Occupation Discussions 13
S IATF (International Automotive Task Force) Rules 4th edition changes IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
P IMDRF (International Medical Devices Regulators Forum)guidance on standalone software Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 1
J Rayong Thailand - Best Hotel and closest international Airport Travel - Hotels, Motels, Planes and Trains 3
J Domestic and International Medical Device IFU (Instructions for Use) Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
E Are non-SI units International? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 7
S The days before International Standards - Has ISO done what it was supposed to? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
D RABQSA International (SUSPENDED) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
Icy Mountain Combining ISO9001 and ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
M Measurement Standards Traceable to International or National Measurement Standards AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
B What a mess!!! Nebula Glass International (d.b.a. Glasslam) vs. Wacker Chemicals Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 1
T International Medical Data Storage Requirements Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 4
H Painting Quality Requirement International Standard Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
D FDA Cease to Manufacture Order in USA and our International Interests 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 11
T Are there any International Conferences related to ISO/IEC 27000 series standards IEC 27001 - Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) 1
A Instructions for Use - Best Practice to meet all International Regulations ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
Y NEBOSH International General Diploma Professional Certifications and Degrees 3
A Plaster of Paris Medical Immobilization Cast - International Standards? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom