Just some musings:
The auditor action which triggered this thread really depresses me. We know there are "strong personalities" (like Marc, Randy, Wes Bucey, Rob Nixon, Bill Pflanz, et al) who would have thrown this "would-be auditor" out on his ear if he tried that in our shop.
I would have demanded all fees which had anything to do with such a clown back from the registrar. My fellow executives and stockholders would have backed my play.
What happens, though, when no one screams FOUL! at such an action? I know why they wouldn't -
This thread, though, has caused me to modify my position a little. It may NOT be my job, but perhaps we need a central clearing house which "names names" so that customers and potential auditees have a little stronger information base to search about issues like this one or others which never make it to the Cove. I'd sure like to hear "the rest of the story" including the auditor's reasoning and his point of view.
I don't know about you, but I sure wouldn't want that auditor coming to my shop until he had a "serious attitude adjustment."
The main problem I see with such a clearing house is that many of the complaints would be invalid or improperly documented. I'm definitely reminded of product rejections and CARs sent by customers which proved to be completely unfounded, but which caused a lot of wasted time and motion plus many hurt feelings. The truth is, there are organizations which do not deserve to be registered to an ISO Standard.
So, here's the quandary:
The auditor action which triggered this thread really depresses me. We know there are "strong personalities" (like Marc, Randy, Wes Bucey, Rob Nixon, Bill Pflanz, et al) who would have thrown this "would-be auditor" out on his ear if he tried that in our shop.
I would have demanded all fees which had anything to do with such a clown back from the registrar. My fellow executives and stockholders would have backed my play.
What happens, though, when no one screams FOUL! at such an action? I know why they wouldn't -
- little top management support to begin with;
- customers who DEMAND the registration as the price of doing business;
- the "no big deal" thing (since it didn't result in a nonconformance)
- uncertainty about whether we, the organization, or the auditor is correct
- and so on.
This thread, though, has caused me to modify my position a little. It may NOT be my job, but perhaps we need a central clearing house which "names names" so that customers and potential auditees have a little stronger information base to search about issues like this one or others which never make it to the Cove. I'd sure like to hear "the rest of the story" including the auditor's reasoning and his point of view.
I don't know about you, but I sure wouldn't want that auditor coming to my shop until he had a "serious attitude adjustment."
The main problem I see with such a clearing house is that many of the complaints would be invalid or improperly documented. I'm definitely reminded of product rejections and CARs sent by customers which proved to be completely unfounded, but which caused a lot of wasted time and motion plus many hurt feelings. The truth is, there are organizations which do not deserve to be registered to an ISO Standard.
So, here's the quandary:
- How do we protect ourselves from getting an incompetent auditor?
- What can we do to alert others about "suspicious" characters in the auditing business without leaving ourselves and our organizations open to libel and slander suits?
- What can we do when we are being victimized by an incompetent auditor, but don't have the personality and status within our organizations to get management backing for a protest?
- I don't think the accrediting bodies have an adequate mechanism to deal with and publicize the complaint and the subsequent resolution.





You're absolutely right, Sal, and teasing me about this for two days showed just how much he enjoyed wrestling!