Keeping an External Auditor on because he's "useless"...

[Caster]

Phil,You're in the early stages of your career. Here is some advise from an "older" guy...Stijloor.

Hi Phil

I support Stils advice.

When I was young I wanted to change the World right NOW! And I knew all the benefits of ISO systems. I was pushy and demanding.

All that happens with my approach is you get labeled as "aggressive" or "not a team player" or as someone who "doesn't understand business" and you get sidelined and marginalized.

Now that I am much older and have been down this road several times, I take a more long term view.

Change can only happen when led from the top. All you can do is document the costs, suggest actions to improve and be ready to support "their great idea" if and when they decide to make things happen.

From the CEOs viewpoint ISO is just like buying toilet paper, it is seen as a cost, not a potential benefit.

Is the company profitable? If so there is little driver for any improvement activities. Only exceptional companies have embraced improvement as a strategy, most have a business approach focused on cost containment.

Good luck!

 

[Paul Simpson]

Phil. In general I agree with the advice from the 'great and the good' here on the cove. I do however recommend a little well-judged boat rocking.

My job (process mapping) is intended to be a step in the right direction towards improving the quality system in the company. I spend a few weeks up to a few months in each department documenting processes. Its a mamouth task, progress is good but i'm really up against it. Each department is different and many managers don't understand process maps and if they are they're sometimes not behind the project. The idea is that my process maps will then be used to internal audit process in the future (from next year onwards).

Don't forget the object of process mapping is not just to map existing processes!
For the organization to get any benefit from the work you are doing you and the process owners need to be identifying best practises and improve and standardize where there is a business benefit. It's exactly the same as the old style of documenting c**p procedures - they remain c**p.

Its my understanding that the chairman of this company is against ISO accreditation. He's very much a sales man. Very rarely seen in the office or factory floor (along with the rest of the board). I think my appointment here took a lot of persuassion but I feel like only a drop in an ocean. The director with the idea of bringing in TQM is not someone I have much contact with.

Like other posters I think you have a mountain to climb - been there, done that, have the (very old) T shirt. Without full support from the top it will be too easy for managers to disrupt your work and give you the run around if they don't believe in what you are doing or see themselves as 'too busy.'

A company of our size should have ISO9001 - I think its something customers expect. A nice little symbol to go in the corner of adverts or a certificate that can be scanned and sent to customers who request it. A marketing tool.

As the saying goes ... size isn't important. However, if you are a large organization, you need to have good systems to consistently provide products and services customers want (whether you choose to go for certification or not).

The sad thing is I don't think much of my boss (he's not very well respected within the organisation either) though he is obviously okay with some directors - probably through telling them just what they want to hear. I do fear however the lack of respect for my boss often hinders my own work.

As above for support. I recommend you keep eyes and ears open. Look for people interested in doing a good job (despite the system / culture) and doing their own kicking back against poor practices. These are your potential allies and, if they are in a position to influence, when you can show them a business benefit in one of their areas they will help to champion the 'pilot' for other areas.

I don't want to kick up much of a fuss as (my bottom line) I need a job. My company has not made anyone redundant (staff turnover probably means they'll never need to!) Nationally though, redundancies are being announced everyday here in the UK, these are obviously tough times for changing jobs.

I think I'm being forced into being miserably silent

I know what you mean and I can empathize but there will come a point when you should speak up for the 'better way' because it is expected of you with the job you hold. If you talk sense, use facts and don't commit (company) political suicide your stock will rise.

There may even be a time when if you choose not to say anything your credibility will dip to zero.

 

[Bifften]

Wow. Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to respond.

I have read all the replies, some good advice from all.

Phil. In general I agree with the advice from the 'great and the good' here on the cove. I do however recommend a little well-judged boat rocking.
Don't forget the object of process mapping is not just to map existing processes!
For the organization to get any benefit from the work you are doing you and the process owners need to be identifying best practises and improve and standardize where there is a business benefit. It's exactly the same as the old style of documenting c**p procedures - they remain c**p.

Paul,
Thanks for your input. I've not lost sight of that one myself.

My remit (at this stage) (and the reason I am employed) is to map processes as they currently stand. (The concept behind it being that noone knows what anyone else does in the organisation - or how they do it). With the high staff turnover there is a constant drain of knowledge which obviously leads to further problems. All processes are drafted and reviewed by process user and then approved by process owner. Once approved and 'live' there will be a system of change control in place for updating process maps.

For me the interesting part comes not with the admisitration of process maps but with the analysis of the processes and the change / development and improvement which should follow. The problem is given the size of the organisation and the resource to do it (me!) - I think to get to this point will take years. (By which time early approved maps are out of date and process users have moved on )

I do get invited to meetings by directors and senior managers about specific process development (at a higher level - usually sporadic problems which somehow get to board level) which is a good part of this job. Unfortunetly as my boss is often not invited (he's health and safety manager - I do all the process mapping but just report to him) he often interferes and trys to pull me out of these meetings.

I'm not out to change the world but I need to make sure I'm doing the right thing, both short term and long term for my career.

 

[Jen Kirley]

We are here for you Bifften. Just look at how many popped up already to say:

1) You aren't imagining it
2) It isn't your fault

I've been in this business for about 20 years +/-, and have learned that change crawls at times, bumps along in other times, and whops us nearly flat with its force in yet other times. Sometimes we get bounced around by luck, and other times we can manipulate events to our favor - very seldom either all the time.

Sometimes we can give change a nudge if we can convince, or allow someone else to think he/she thought of it. When people in power can find reasons to congratulate themselves, they are more apt to repeat the process than doing something because an underling suggested it. Try it sometime...and ask yourself if that person even noticed what really went on. Then ask yourself if that matters to you. If it really does matter to you - that the other person's ego is so powerful a force and it bothers you - then you definitely have a clock running on your endurance there. Your job at that point it to intelligently keep an eye on that clock and get the blink out before you get burned out.

You are in good company. Please stay in touch, let us know how it goes.

 

[Icy Mountain]

I don't know the UKAS rules/guidance as well as some but I thought there was something in there about changing the auditor every 3 years or so because the 'go native' after a while.

It is not in the ISO9000 rules, but is in the TS16949 rules. Most of the registrars treat this as a requirement, but it is only a strong suggestion.

I support Stils advice.

Change can only happen when led from the top. All you can do is document the costs, suggest actions to improve and be ready to support "their great idea" if and when they decide to make things happen.

I support this as well. I was with my current company for 6 years before they saw the benefits of a formal quality system certified by a third party. I had been ready for years. I was the real hero when we went from nothing to TS169149 registered in a year.

 

[Stijloor]

I was the real hero when we went from nothing to TS169149 registered in a year.

Aaaah, we remember your adventure very well.

Stijloor.

 

[Wes Bucey]

Middle management contains a lot of passengers - an awkward mix of people who've lost the will to leave and those who have only recently started.

If I take away nothing else from this thread, I want to thank you for introducing this term (passengers) to my business lexicon. I absolutely love it! It is so much more apt and true than my previous term drones.

In terms of the essential problem lying beneath the thread title - making the management, and thus the organization culture, care whether the audit is worthwhile - we've discussed Change Management on a number of occasions here in the Cove.

My main thesis about Change Management in my writing and in my public presentations has been
"Change cannot begin unless and until the concerned parties are dissatisfied with the status quo."

Evolution and even mutation [change] cannot exist and continue in a vacuum; it must have a receptive environment, else it is just another blind alley among many other blind alleys in the history of evolution.

In a business environment, many factors must be considered in initiating and implementing change. Change managers must consider and plan for influence by employees, investors, customers, suppliers, regulators, competitors, even the general public, who may be concerned with the environmental footprint of the business.

Typically, when we talk about the "tail wagging the dog" (a lower level employee initiating and influencing change within the organization), it takes an extraordinary human to have the knowledge, persuasive power, and intestinal fortitude to seek out and influence a receptive "champion" among the executives in the organization and to help the executive, in turn, seek out and influence other executives with the right, power, and authority to implement those changes.

Often, in lieu of being such a "fire starter," most folks find it easier to change organizations or, in your word, become passengers, not always a bad thing to be if one is not heroic!

I don't mean to sound pessimistic, only realistic. Even extraordinary people aren't extraordinary 100% of the time - many idols have been found to have feet of clay, crumbling as the tide rises around them.

For your sake and the sake of your organization, I hope you can be the change agent who succeeds.

 

[vanputten]

This is NOT directed a Bifften but is a general sarcastic comment towards the entire industry of management system standards and certification......


Make sure you slam the standard itself for not providing any value. This is an important step for a disfunctional organiztion working on management systems.

Then, when you are done criticizing the standard, conformity assessment, and systems, get your resume out in the world asap. Run, Forest, run!

 

[Icy Mountain]

Often, in lieu of being such a "fire starter," most folks find it easier to change organizations or, in your word, become passengers, not always a bad thing to be if one is not heroic!

And thank you, Wes, for the term "fire starter". I will incorporate this into an old Icy Mountain parable (cue background music).

In many organizations, people are too busy "putting out fires" to realize true change. They are working on containment of or fixes to the visible symptoms. They say they do not have the time for the analysis required to find the root cause and/or implement the systemic measures required to keep such problems from happening in the future. Thus, they are doomed to a constant firefight as the same problems come up again and again, much like a smoldering forest fire that bursts back into flame every time the wind blows.

In an organization like this, you need a fire starter. This is the person that will absolutely give up on pi$$ing on every little fire that crops up, drop the immediate concerns that keep them from fixing problems permanently, and run ahead to create a lasting solution. They start a fire to create a fire break. This might be Deming Circle training for a precious few, a formal corrective and preventive action and continual improvement system, or even a fully compliant ISO9001 quality system. The rest of the firefighters curse them for running away from the battle. They become enraged at the traitor that has started yet another fire.

At some point, the beleaguered firefighters back themselves up to the firebreak, realize that there are no more fires to put out, and step out into the lovely, green forest that is their new work environment. The now celebrated and respected fire starter can then organize them to plant the trees of new and growing business.

And that is how the one who started forest fires became a hero.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

backfire?

In many organizations, people are too busy "putting out fires" to realize true change. They are working on containment of or fixes to the visible symptoms. They say they do not have the time for the analysis required to find the root cause and/or implement the systemic measures required to keep such problems from happening in the future. Thus, they are doomed to a constant firefight as the same problems come up again and again, much like a smoldering forest fire that bursts back into flame every time the wind blows.

True. That is primarily because organizations have management but no REAL leadership. Real leadership is rarer than red kryptonite, I guess.

In an organization like this, you need a fire starter. This is the person that will absolutely give up on pi$$ing on every little fire that crops up, drop the immediate concerns that keep them from fixing problems permanently, and run ahead to create a lasting solution. They start a fire to create a fire break. This might be Deming Circle training for a precious few, a formal corrective and preventive action and continual improvement system, or even a fully compliant ISO9001 quality system. The rest of the firefighters curse them for running away from the battle. They become enraged at the traitor that has started yet another fire.

At some point, the beleaguered firefighters back themselves up to the firebreak, realize that there are no more fires to put out, and step out into the lovely, green forest that is their new work environment. The now celebrated and respected fire starter can then organize them to plant the trees of new and growing business.

And that is how the one who started forest fires became a hero.

Very metaphoric. But one must be very careful. Living in So Cal, we have serious problems with wild fires. There are numerous cases of "control fires" getting out of control and destroying life, property and the environment. Don't play with fire is always a wise advice. Especially, if the landscape is dry....