"Simplified" AS9100 and ISO 9001 Internal Audit Checklists

[Coury Ferguson]

Sorry .... CB = ???

Yes a few .....

CB= Certification Body or Registrar. The third party that reviews the organization.

As for the checklist...avoid it. If you want to look at a checklist, buy and review AS9101. This is what the Certification/Registrar Body will use for compliance to AS9100.

Everyone that has mentioned about the "checklist" is right on. Use the process approach, a Turtle Diagram would be useful.

Just my opinion

 

[AndyN]

Our QMS was design around the ISO9001 standard, section by section, paragraph by paragraph from start to finish. The QPs and QWIs follow the exact same pattern, we have 23 QPs and 14 QWIs.


The checklist that we currently have is 25 pages and follows the standard section by section. IMO it's just TMI ..... So far everyone has been happy with it, we just completed and passed our audit and have been certified
to AS9100 RevC / ISO 9001:2008 with zero findings for the last 3 years.

I think I may be the problem here ....

Indeed, Scott, there's a problem which Houston needs to know about!

I'd be very worried about zero findings! Apart from anything else, it's just very unlikely that could happen. While the CB isn't paid to find fault, you have to ask, are you really THAT good?

On the checklist side, what you have done is OK to get you going, but at some point, you need to shift gears to move your whole QMS and audits along. Sadly your CB auditor doesn't have a clue, or they would have made some comment, I'm sure...

If you are auditing to the standards, you aren't auditing to processes. Take a look at this here for some help.

Also, how many times do you do an audit? Have a look here too for some more guidance.

Also, dump the checklist. Audit to your processes, their objectives and also the results you get (internal or with customers). You'll help management see the error of their current ways.

BTW did you have any auditor training? If yes, and the trainer didn't help you to understand this, you may wish to get someone in to coach you with your audit program. (and avoid that trainer...)

 

[dsh205]

I mis-spoke when I said "ZERO" findings, I should have included "major" in there ....

In three years we have had a total for two minor findings and a few observations.


Sorry for the confusion .....

 

[AndyN]

I mis-spoke when I said "ZERO" findings, I should have included "major" in there ....

In three years we have had a total for two minor findings and a few observations.


Sorry for the confusion .....

No confusion! The 'score' isn't much better, IMHO!

 

[Marc]

Checklists

I<snip> dump the checklist. <snip>

Tell that to the pilot of the airplane next time you fly.

Checklists are valuable when used correctly. They are one tool in a box of tools.

 

[dsh205]

CB= Certification Body or Registrar. The third party that reviews the organization.

As for the checklist...avoid it. If you want to look at a checklist, buy and review AS9101. This is what the Certification/Registrar Body will use for compliance to AS9100.

Everyone that has mentioned about the "checklist" is right on. Use the process approach, a Turtle Diagram would be useful.

Just my opinion

Thanks ... I've reviewed AS9101RevD

I'll approach this just I did when I was mapping the processes for my SixSigma projects.

I'm still confused a bit, if everyone is leaning towards process based auditing why then is there still a "checklist" and instructions on how to use it??

Sounds to me like the "bigger & better" mouse trap ....


Thanks to everyone that helped push me in the right direction.


Scott

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Thanks ... I've reviewed AS9101RevD

I'll approach this just I did when I was mapping the processes for my SixSigma projects.

I'm still confused a bit, if everyone is leaning towards process based auditing why then is there still a "checklist" and instructions on how to use it??

Sounds to me like the "bigger & better" mouse trap ....


Thanks to everyone that helped push me in the right direction.


Scott

Scott,

Aerospace is a different animal and has more requirements than ISO9001. The AIG which is mainly the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) like the Boeings, Airbus, and the aircraft builders and major suppliers of main parts (engines and so forth) have determined that these extra requirements are needed, based upon the criticality of the Aircraft and risks.

Just my opinion.

 

[AndyN]

I'm still confused a bit, if everyone is leaning towards process based auditing why then is there still a "checklist" and instructions on how to use it??
Scott

Well, in part it's because AS9104 is for 3rd party auditors. We can't forget, that at the most basic level, the CB auditor has to demonstrate compliance has been covered during the audit. It's a complex task and given the minimal time available, this approach helps to keep that compliance requirement in place - at least, that's the theory.

For internal audits, such an approach as a pre-printed, comprehensive set of questions, based on the standard is only appropriate in a few instances. Each audit is likely to have a different focus and criterion being used for that specific audit. The audit should go where the audit program has determined is the need, based on status and importance. The auditor should produce their own 'shopping list' - the task isn't quite like the pre-flights checks each and every time. Sure there are common things which can be verified each and every time, (document controls, product id. etc.) but in the main, using a standards based, format checklist isn't going to work!

 

[dsh205]

Well, in part it's because AS9104 is for 3rd party auditors. We can't forget, that at the most basic level, the CB auditor has to demonstrate compliance has been covered during the audit. It's a complex task and given the minimal time available, this approach helps to keep that compliance requirement in place - at least, that's the theory.

For internal audits, such an approach as a pre-printed, comprehensive set of questions, based on the standard is only appropriate in a few instances. Each audit is likely to have a different focus and criterion being used for that specific audit. The audit should go where the audit program has determined is the need, based on status and importance. The auditor should produce their own 'shopping list' - the task isn't quite like the pre-flights checks each and every time. Sure there are common things which can be verified each and every time, (document controls, product id. etc.) but in the main, using a standards based, format checklist isn't going to work!

Thanks for explanation.

I will "follow the process" and see what happens.

Scott

 

[dsh205]

Ok guys, I decided to use a SIPOC diagram to indentify what I should be auditing for the given process.

I decided to look at the PRODUCT REALIZATION PROCESS.

Attached is what I've come up with so far ....


What do you think ???? FIRE AWAY !!!

Thanks for your input !!!!

Scott