What to do when Auditee refuses to sign Audit Report

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#71
In review of this thread, I'd suggest that anyone who wouldn't 'sign off' an audit findings is displaying a symptom. Sure, they may be a single individual who is (in their minds at least) "embattled", but I wonder what language was used in the audit finding/CAR/NC (ISO speak?) and whether the auditors enlisted the help of this person in the planning and preparation of the audit. If the answers are 'yes' and 'no', then I for one am not surprised that someone would push back. Changing the procedure to delete the need for a signature is only delaying the same response, but to a later point in the process - that of corrective action!
Although it might not apply to the present case, in situations where trade unions are involved, the rank-and-file are often advised not to sign anything that might reflect unfavorably on the person asked to sign something and to err on the side of caution if in doubt. In such cases there are usually requirements in place to have the matter discussed in the presence of a union representative, if the person so chooses.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#72
One of my favorite books on auditing is How to Audit the Process-Based QMS by Dennis R. Arter, Charles A. Cianfrani, and John E. (Jack) West
This book states:
"A finding statement can take one of three forms:
1. An objective statement of the deficiency,
2. A Subjective statement of the problem, in business language,
3. A Subjective cause and effect statement, showing the problem and its business consequences."

Because we chose to have our findings written as form #3, we have incorporated a space on the finding form that allows the audited process owner to place their comments on the form in case they disagree with the problem or impact statement written by the auditor.
We do this because the problem statement developed by the auditor is a subjective opinion supported by the facts. Our procedure explains that the signature on the finding record is acknowledgement of the facts supporting the finding. Rarely do we encounter a situation where the audited process owner suffers indigestion due to a finding statement. In either case, our process owners are given time to construct and record their opinion of the facts before the audit report is written for our top management. Both opinions are then considered in constructing the written audit report.

Our audit finding records are inputs into our Corrective and Preventive Action Processes and our audit reports are inputs for top management's review. We have not had any issues in getting Corrective Actions initiated from our findings, and quite often we see Preventive Actions produced from our audit efforts. (e.g. a finding can either indicate conformity or nonconformity with audit criteria or opportunities for improvement - ISO 9000 3.9.5's Note)

By constructing our audit program in this way, we believe we foster constructive partnership between auditor and auditee and top management has the added assurance that at the end of the audit everyone is on the same page.

So, I can't exactly agree that requiring signatures on findings is a bad thing because we have experienced quite the opposite. :2cents:
I'm having trouble understanding some of this, especially where it relates to objectivity. You say that "... the problem statement developed by the auditor is a subjective opinion supported by the facts." I don't see why a finding supported by facts is characterized as a subjective opinion. One way to recognize an objective finding is by the presence of supporting facts.

You go on to say, "...our process owners are given time to construct and record their opinion of the facts ..." Facts aren't subject to conflicting opinions; that's how we know they're facts. There is certainly the possibility that an audit participant could mischaracterize evidence as factual either by error or by design, but evidence shouldn't be described as "fact" if there's doubt and "fact" shouldn't be characterized as "subjective" if there is no doubt.
 
K

Ka Pilo

#73
Yes! You see the set up for conflict all based on distrust of employees by management, evidenced by requiring signatures. The process seems to say, "If there is something wrong, we are looking for someone to blame, because we refuse to believe our system could be wrong." Echoes of Red Beads!
Some people resort to trust susbtitutes (http://changingminds.org/explanations/trust/trust_substitutes.htm)
in order to continue their involvement with audits and QMS.
 
D

ddchhaya

#75
One of our Moderators, Mr. Steve Prevette has a demonstration on YouTube of the Red Bead Experiment.

Stijloor.
Thanks Stijloor!
I saw all six parts of Steve Prevette's video on you tube. I also saw a similar video on the site www.redbead.com. I would like to know about the 14 management obligations that Dr Deming taught. We request those who had opportunity to attend the four day seminar to talk about these 14 obligations. Any help?
 
B

Brunetta

#78
I'm having trouble understanding some of this, especially where it relates to objectivity. You say that "... the problem statement developed by the auditor is a subjective opinion supported by the facts." I don't see why a finding supported by facts is characterized as a subjective opinion. One way to recognize an objective finding is by the presence of supporting facts.

You go on to say, "...our process owners are given time to construct and record their opinion of the facts ..." Facts aren't subject to conflicting opinions; that's how we know they're facts. There is certainly the possibility that an audit participant could mischaracterize evidence as factual either by error or by design, but evidence shouldn't be described as "fact" if there's doubt and "fact" shouldn't be characterized as "subjective" if there is no doubt.
It is not in the supporting evidence (the listing of facts) where there may be a difference of opinion it may be in the conclusion when you choose to use the third form (#3) of a finding statement proposed in the book... A subjective cause and effect statement, showing the problem and its business consequences.

Previously I listed three forms of finding statements proposed by the source I cited to include an Objective Finding Statement. The source I cited states that this type of form of finding statement is generally used when management decides it wants more of an inspection/compliance audit and they will determine the severity and if the situation warrants attention/action. We decided that our CB already provides this service for us and if we were required to perform internal audits we would audit for continual improvement as well as compliance.

Therefore our findings are of the latter option (#3) a subjective cause and effect statement, showing the problem and its business consequences...followed by supporting evidence uncovered during the audit.

Our auditors and audittees construct and record their conclusion of the facts (problem/finding statement) and that conclusion illustrating the problem and its business consequences may or may not differ from the auditor. In both cases those conclusions must be supported by factual evidence. In our experience, when the rare occassions of process owner indigestion have occurred we find that they pertain to the degree of business consequences. Since in our program the recording of findings is not at the end of our audit it engenders a discussion between our auditors and audittees.

We have found that by constructing our internal audit program this way we have a partnership based audit environment rather than a qwality cop environment. This is why our findings are presented during the audit not at the conclusion of the audit. By allowing the audittees to submit their evidence supported conclusions and having an dialogue everyone benefits.

Our internal audit program has been highlighted by our CB as "in-depth and thorough" and we have had quite a few breakthrough improvements in efficiencies so the consensus, from our organization, is that this works for us.

Your mileage may vary.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
GStough Auditing Against Criteria Unfamiliar to Auditee - Yea or Nay? General Auditing Discussions 11
K Tips for Auditee Training ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
S Experiences as a female auditor / auditee Career and Occupation Discussions 36
S Why auditee names are not mentioned in Audit Report? General Auditing Discussions 2
L How to deal with resistance from auditee(s) Internal Auditing 20
somashekar Internal Audit without a person as auditee Internal Auditing 6
S Internal Audit Findings Summary Rewrite by an Auditee ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
F How to Calm a Nervous Auditee Internal Auditing 14
K Sending Audit Questions to the Auditee in Advance Internal Auditing 20
Howard Atkins What you as an auditee should know about your CB (Certification Body) Registrars and Notified Bodies 0
Jen Kirley What do you do when an auditee says "No thank you" Internal Auditing 86
P What to do when an Auditee Falsifies or Cheated on Records Internal Auditing 6
A What do you do if you have the feeling that your auditee could be lying? Internal Auditing 58
J Auditee offered help with anything in nonconformities Internal Auditing 16
P Internal Audit Finding - Root Cause Analysis: Auditor or an Auditee Responsibility? Internal Auditing 24
B Could ISO 22000 auditee hold Auditor Responsible for subsequent safety breaches? Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 16
V Can the Management Representative represent top management as the sole auditee? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
L Corrective action following a wrong answer of the auditee ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 19
B Providing Auditee with Checklist prior to Audit General Auditing Discussions 48
M Auditee Evaluation of Auditors Example, Form or Template General Auditing Discussions 6
E Being IQA Team Leader and auditee - Auditor Independence General Auditing Discussions 9
Claes Gefvenberg The Ideal Auditee General Auditing Discussions 22
J Can I issue a NCR if the auditee did not comply what he is suppose to do? General Auditing Discussions 6
A When someone refuses to follow a process.... Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 21
L Client that refuses to help - How to handle ? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 5
P A Supplier refuses to share information on his suppliers/sources Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 16
E Management refuses to answer Corrective Action request Nonconformance and Corrective Action 43
Wes Bucey How times have changed! My wife refuses to use "disposables." After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 14
D Minitab refuses to run saying the Design is Not Balanced - Gage R&R Using Minitab Software 14
C End of Life Vehicle - ELV 2000/53/EC - Supplier refuses to provide information Miscellaneous Environmental Standards and EMS Related Discussions 5
D No response to CAR's - Supplier refuses to answer a corrective action Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 12
I Do I need to sign off my annual audit calendar? Internal Auditing 2
S Study sign off question / responsibilities ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Q Experience with Adobe Sign Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
Y When to Sign up as a Foreign Exporter US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 9
O Inventory control ideas - I have an open stock room with a "sign out" book Manufacturing and Related Processes 9
E Why is the (theoretical) pH slope sometimes cited without the negative sign? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
S How to make Single Sign On (SSO) Comply e-sig requirements? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
S Is Adobe Sign - E-signature for QMS documents - 21 cfr part 11 compliant? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
W Job Card/Router sign off - Want to go paperless AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
T Stamps vs Signatures - Stamps as inspection/approval sign-off vs. Initials Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 18
T Document Review And Sign Off Second Person Review - FDA Requirements ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
M Opportunity For Improvement - Customer to sign off or approve a new design ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
M Chrysler PSW Sign Off when your product is rated low risk in CQMS IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
drgnrider Is there a specific OHSAS 18001 sign format? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 4
J A Euro sign on a print tolerance? Manufacturing and Related Processes 8
V Documents and Records - To sign or not to sign Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 6
Q Effective 1st Piece Inspection Sign Off Procedure Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 8
C Who in the supplier organization has to sign the PSW (Part Submission Warranty)? APQP and PPAP 6
C EN 60601-1:2012 - Requirement to use an Electrical Safety Sign on Products ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom