Is it recommended to use the new terms in ISO 9001:2015?

[Cari Spears]

While going through the 2015 upgrade audit, our CB suggested we change everything to the new terms to "clear things up". I refused and he wasn't happy. But then again, this was a witness audit by ANAB so he was a bit more nit picky. That being said, I was not impressed by the ANAB auditor, who spent most of his day online shopping and playing games on Google.

You'd think the auditor would be more careful to not pull requirements out of his bum or make silly suggestions in front of an ANAB witness. To "clear things up"? So, so, silly.

We don't use "suppliers" or "external parties" - we use "vendors", lol.

 

[Marc]

<snip> Very likely it is a misguided auditor who might not have understood the implications of emphasizing the aspect of "ISO 9000 as a NORMATIVE reference to ISO 9001". <snip>

Dealing with auditors has long been an issue and the answer is to have at least one person in the company who knows the relevant standard(s) and can discuss each requirement.

I remember back in 1994 I was working with a company and they decided to do their main procedures in flow chart form. The auditor was very upset telling them a flow chart wasn't a procedure. The auditor was adamant that a procedure had to be a text document. He couldn't point to anything that said that and he backed off, but it was a quite spirited "discussion". I have also gone through the "...it's not documented but it's our way of doing <what ever> so it's technically an undocumented procedure, but it is a procedure none the less..." argument. Having worked with ISO 9001 in companies since 1990 I've pretty much seen it all in those 25+ years.

 

[ABRSPLY]

We do what is best for our business. As long as everyone is on the same page, we're sticking with our method. The ANAB auditor tried to question me about a couple of things, as well. I asked where in the standard it required me to do that and he referred to an auditor standard. I told him I wasn't working toward the auditor standard and when he could point out the requirements in 9001:2015 I would comply. My understanding is that a witness auditor should have no involvement in our process. I was not happy.

 

[Marc]

<snip> My understanding is that a witness auditor should have no involvement in our process. <snip>

I thought they were just supposed to be observers as well.

 

[howste]

When I've been witnessed as an auditor the only thing the witness auditor would ever do with the client was ask for copies of things that I had asked for or ask for clarification on a point. During the opening meeting they explained what their purpose was in the audit, which was to observe the audit team and stay out of the way. After I had the closing meeting with the client, then the witness auditor would have a closing meeting with me and the audit team. They never gave an opinion during the audit on audit findings or interpretations. These were only discussed in their closing meeting.