As this was an "internal audit", I want to write that you may be escaping with a relative easy observation. It sounds like the
FMEA simply has a mis-alignment between the work as required (per work instruction) and the process as assessed/analyzed in the FMEA. I can imagine many reason (both from a Quality perspective and a Business perspective) why your corporate masters want to see more explicit alignment.
If I was a probing, professorial auditor... that is, someone with the attitude of wanting the process owner to think more
comprehensively about the work (as directed, as performed)... I would be asking questions about
this:
It is part of a general inspection taught to all associates as a general catch all.
There are natural questions about the
teaching (is it consistent? is it effective?) and questions about the
method (is it effective? is it comprehensive?). Personally: I am a big believer in building user competency so that operators can be trusted to recognize when something looks wrong without explicitly being given strict directions (think "headlights" as opposed to "guardrails"), but if I were in your position I would add these "general checks" to your
PFMEA but not claim that they are really doing anything (in the absence of Objective Evidence appropriate to particular failure modes).