Surveillance Audits - Annual or Semi Annual?

[SteelWoman]

I'm toying with the idea of going to annual surveillance audits with my registrar rather than semi-annual. We recently sold a large part of our operation to a competitor and are now about 1/4th the size of what we used to be. As part of that process we merged ISO14001 into our TS program and I now have responsibility for both.

I can see pros and cons of both semi-annual and annual, but I wonder what your folks experience has been with this issue?

 

[Mike Smith]

My thoughts

We recently had this same discussion at management review. As you said, there are pros and cons for both sides. Our ultimate decision was to keep doing semi-annual audits for one reason. It ensures everyone stays on top of things. If we were to go to annual audits, people tend to slack off. We are also ISO-14001 and TS16949. We do not combine our audits. We have a surveillance audit every three months for one or the other. This ensures we do not have time to slack off.

 

[SteelWoman]

Yeah, I'm planning to present it to our MRT as an option. If we do it, I'm thinking :

Internal Audit to both programs
3 months later Surveillance Audit to ISO14
3 months later Internal Audit to both programs
3 months later Surveillance Audit to TS

Like you said, it'd keep us auditing SOMETHING every 3 months, which I like, and auditing BOTH programs every 6 months.

 

[gpainter]

I would stick to semi-annual. Check with your registrar, it will more than likely end up being the same number of days or even more if you go yearly. The culture of your organization will also make the difference.

 

[howste]

If you are looking at it for cost savings, the only place you might save is with auditor airfare (1 trip vs. 2). The number of audit days is mandated in the "rules" document anyway. I personally lean toward the more frequent audits for the same reasons mentioned above.

 

[SteelWoman]

Nope, not looking at cost savings - I'm aware that audit day requirements don't change. There's just a lot of turmoil in this industry right now, and lots of change, and I'm looking to give us a little more time to react to those changes.

So far I've heard from Covers who do semi-annuals, like me. Anyone out there who does Annuals? I'd like to hear from your side, your experience.

 

[mshell]

I am trying to decide whether do do annual or semi-annual as well. I am with a new company and we are scheduled to go through our certification audit in February of 05'.

Past experience tells me to go with semi-annual as the last company that I worked was on an annual schedule and they were not committed to ISO (we became certified because the corporate office said so). So every time an auditor was scheduled to come in, the majority of the employees (other managers) spent the month prior to the visit running around like chickens with their heads cut off trying to get ready.
The company that I work for now is a lot different as all of the employees are committed to ISO and doing things the right way and we could probably go to an annual schedule with little or no problem.

 

[Viki N.]

Good Morning,

I'm very interested in this thread subject. We currently have 2 plants. Both are ISO 9001-2000 certified and the one is also ISO 13488-1996 (working to ISO 13485-2003).

We have been seriously thinking about going with yearly audits for ISO 9001-2000 as that system seems to be going well, and we have been ISO certified since 1995. We do, however, have the same concerns regarding slacking off by the group that would handle the internal audits/non-conformances, etc.

I will be following all the comments/point of views closely. Thanks much.

Viki

 

[howste]

A few weeks ago I was asked to do a contract internal audit for a company that is certified to 13485:1996. They have been doing annual internal audits, followed by their annual 3rd party audits about a month later. My impression was that they don't really live the requirements for most of the year, then they get overwhelmed with a large laundry list of things to take action on once a year.

I suspect that they may have trouble with their surveillance audit next week, since many of the corrective actions initiated last year had not been satisfactorily addressed.

 

[C Emmons]

If you are looking at it for cost savings, the only place you might save is with auditor airfare (1 trip vs. 2). The number of audit days is mandated in the "rules" document anyway. I personally lean toward the more frequent audits for the same reasons mentioned above.

I agree with Howste. We actually went from semi-annual to quarterly. (19 facilities) 3 per quarter are audited. It seems to be working very well with respect to keeping Managers on track and system alive.