ISO 9001 certified by second party

[AndyN]

If a CB auditor is wrong, you can't bundle him up and send him back along with a debit memo, even figuratively. There's no accounting for the time wasted in trying to get an auditor to retract a finding, and then escalating the issue if the auditor refuses to listen to reason.

Jim, isn't this more to do with 'dispositioning' the non-conforming service, rather than documenting it and notifying those concerned......? In such a case, the analogy is apt, IMHO!

In running the Receiving function many years ago, the company may have even chosen to 'eat' the non-conforming product, so delivered, but it never prevented us from clearly reporting it (and our displeasure) to the offending supplier.......

It's that which I wish more CB clients would do.......document the non-conforming service and communicate it - not stick a 'Reject' sticker on the auditor

 

[Jim Wynne]

Jim, isn't this more to do with 'dispositioning' the non-conforming service, rather than documenting it and nofiying those concerned......? In such a case, Sidney's analogy is apt, IMHO!

It was your analogy, Andy.

 

[Vic de Beer]

I found this a very interesting "back-and-forth" discussion, I must admit, I have become quite addicted to the "Cove".
My "penny's worth" is:
If I audit my own company = First party... but tread carefully here (Internal)
If, in the capacity as consultant, I audit the company that I am supplying my services to = First party (Internal audit)
If the company I am supplying my services to, is audited by one of their clients = 2nd party
If the company I am supplying my services to is audited by a registrar = 3 party
If I am contracted by a registrar to audit a company, other than the one I am supplying my services to = 3rd party for the company being audited.
I cannot, if contracted by the registrar, audit the company I am supplying my services to (conflict of interest).
Vic de Beer

 

[howste]

Nonetheless, CBs really don't have a good way of telling when auditors are incompetent unless their clients tell them so.

Unfortunately, many of the auditees don't have the competence to tell when their auditor is incompetent either.

 

[Polly Pure Bread]

Unfortunately, many of the auditees don't have the competence to tell when their auditor is incompetent either.

Auditee will not tell their auditors because they are supposed to know the requirement better than the auditing organization. If auditing organization is more knowledgeable than CB auditors, then they don’t need the third-party audit. rember implementation comes after knowing the applicable requirements.

 

[howste]

The audited organization doesn't have to know the standard better than the auditor to have enough knowledge to determine the auditor's competence.

 

[AndyN]

Auditee will not tell their auditors because they are supposed to know the requirement better than the auditing organization. If auditing organization is more knowledgeable than CB auditors, then they don’t need the third-party audit. rember implementation comes after knowing the applicable requirements.

How can you suggest such a thing?

That's like having the QC department know more about a product spec. than the people who set up and run the manufacturing process! How long would a business last if the QC people kept rejecting the product for features which the Production people didn't even know they were supposed to make!

Crazy..........

 

[Jim Wynne]

How can you suggest such a thing?

That's like having the QC department know more about a product spec. than the people who set up and run the manufacturing process! How long would a business last if the QC people kept rejecting the product for features which the Production people didn't even know they were supposed to make!

Crazy..........

This is an international forum, and we should keep in mind that there are times when cultural imperatives control or significantly influence business and social relationships.

 

[Polly Pure Bread]

How can you suggest such a thing?

That's like having the QC department know more about a product spec. than the people who set up and run the manufacturing process! How long would a business last if the QC people kept rejecting the product for features which the Production people didn't even know they were supposed to make!

Crazy..........

Yes, organization knew more about product specs and how they run the business. What I am trying to convey is that let say CB auditor told the auditee that this is the finding and this is the clause violated, even if there will be a wash-up meeting (at the end of the audit) before auditor left the auditing organization, audit reports (clauses) are too technical and they still need enough time to provide appropriate answers. They (auditee) usually realized after a day or two that it’s not actually nonconformity and there is a better justification for those findings but failed to provide during the actual audit.

Just a clarification on my previous post, Auditees presumption is that CB Auditors knew the minimum requirements (ISO 9001 standards) better than what they knew, not the organization’s unique processes.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Unfortunately, many of the auditees don't have the competence to tell when their auditor is incompetent either.

Yes, and in addition to that, let's remember the ANAB Heads Up # 153. Certification Client Bill of Rights and Responsibilities also.