Morning KidPaddy - I have our sureillance audit tomorrow (19/9/7) a timely question, my audits of management have been based on the attached file, as always it not only what you say, it's the evidence the audit reviews.
Were a small company 30 - 40 people
Good luck
Hi, KidPaddy have just had our sureillance audit and a strategic review, the main audit focused on top management, the auditor reviewed the Management Review Reports, then proceeded to review documented evidence, focusing on the responsibilities of personel within the company - methods of defining responsibilities, approved signatures, operators endorsements, endorsement through training records of the "management representative".
There were simple interviews with personel to ensure alignment and communication between top management and employee's.
He confirmed our stated objectives were measurable and consistent with a planned revised Quality Policy and the method of obtaining the results were understood and communicated to all employees' (current Quality Policy was also confirmed acceptable, controlled and understood)
On the audit we have a continuation of registration, however one issue requiring attention - currently due to planned changes in our objectives we stated the current measured results, and not a "goal" within a time frame (time frame is listed but not filled in)- the auditor did accept these were presented and dicussed at the last MRM, the current measured result being quoted to enable the "defining of an achievable goal".
One objective was at 60% (for the year), therefore a goal 90% in a short timescale could result in a negative message to employees, would rather state 70% in 3 months and achieve 72%, than 95% in 3 months and achieve 72%.
Hope this helps
although I don't mind hearing about other areas of the business if s / he wants to talk about them.
)
