ISO 9001:2000 - Transition Audit time? A full additional audit day will be required

J

Jim Biz

We have recieved a notification from our registrar - informing us that a full additional audit day will be required when we make the transition from 9002 to the 2000 standards version.

My management has asked me to explain "why" the extra day is needed - and what we recieve for the additional costs.


1) "IS this unique" to our registrar or is it showing up eleswhere?

2) What paragraphs/areas of the new version do you feel have been changed to the point that a full day of auditing would need to be used?

Opinions?/ Comments?

Regards
Jim
 
D

Doug Stimson

I deal with two registrars and both have indicated one additional day. There is also a "disclaimer" depending on the size and nature of the business. I have talked to both and they admittedly don't have enough data (actual audits) know for sure.
 
A

awk

Adding days for auditing appears to be the standard, this from the registrars I am in contact with. There is a required number of audit days that are mandated by RAB or SCC (Canada), dependent upon the number of employees. The lowest structure is 1 - 15 employees. There are new areas such as Customer Focus, Customer Satisfaction, Communications, etc.

I am advising my clients to enter the new requirements for their surveillance audits, where agreed upon with their registrar of choice.

awk
 

barb butrym

Quite Involved in Discussions
The 2 registrars I deal with are not adding days...they are auditing to the new standard now, with findings only as "opportunities' so that when the transition period is over, they will have covered the ground.
 
R

Ron Byrge

For what it's worth, we're not planning to increase the time required for the transition to the new revision, unless the folks wait until the last day to get started. We will look at the new items as they're ready over the next 2.8 years (whatever) and go forward from there. There really isn't a need to increase the time spent, in our opinion. This is our policy, barring any contrarian "guidance" we receive from the RAB.

------------------
Ron Byrge

https://www.cwcregistrar.com
 
G

Graham R O'Geran

Speaking from a UKAS accredited certification body,we were told that the 9000/2000 should not be a money making exercise.
Our view is that we have quoted our clients for a three year term, even if there is additional time required for the transition we have to honour the original quote.
We all new the new standard was coming, surely all certification bodies took appropiate measures???

I ahve only just subsribed to this service and all ready found it very interesting.



------------------
Business Development Director
 
J

John C

Jim,
Here in Ireland, my client and myself are planning an audit to '2000 in about two months. The registrar, NSAI, did not mention any extra fee and, far from taking advantage, they seem to be very supportive in our bid to upgrade.
I don't see any reason why an audit against '2000 should take extra time, unless the auditor is not proficient in carrying out such and audit. There will be an extra cost to your registrar, just as there is to all of us, in getting through the learning curve and becoming proficient. Is your registrar expecting you to finance this learning stage? I suggest you ask him, copying your management. And, if not, then ask what is pushing the time up? Logically, if it isn't due to the registrar auditor's lack of proficiency, then it can only be a reocurring charge and will apply again next time. I suggest you ask about that as well.
If you don't get satisfaction, you have an alternative, ie; NSAI, Barb's registrars, etc.
rgds John C
 
Top Bottom