Thanks for the reply John. So, in the context of auditing then what evidence (documented / objective) could be sought in order to ascertain the application of these 2 principles?
duthie,
The quality management principles are not audit criteria. So, I'm unsure why you would ask.
But when auditing is is relatively plain to see the results of leaders of the organization and its processes doing what I suggested you may find, for example:
1. Leaders can explain how their organization interacts as a system with its customers and suppliers to create more successful customers.
2. Leaders can explain their organization's opportunities and risks.
3. Processes necessary fulfill their system's mission have been determined and the process owners or leaders named and authorized to analyze their cross-functional processes and interactions. You can see no evidence of department or function managers interfering with this.
4. Process leaders have analyzed each of their system's processes to understand how they work and interact to fulfill their criteria for success - the result usually comprise deployment flowcharts but other formats (such as
SIPOC or turtle diagrams) may show the processes and their interaction.
5. Leaders engage their followers by
monitoring to ensure their system's processes and management system's procedures are understood, used and improved. In fact, you may ask to audit their process monitoring.
6. Consequently, you see evidence of preventive action and corrective action arising from the planning, operation and monitoring of processes. They are not waiting for the auditor to report weaknesses and nonconformity.
7. The top manager leads the review of the performance of their organization as a system and targets investment decisions to secure current and future improvements.
In fact, the management system works well without relying on audit.
John
