When do you say that you are ready for Third-Party Certification?

[samsung]

The whole point of the third part audit scheme is so the customer doesn't have to come and look. They got rid of their supplier auditors and replaced them with this scheme. To make sure you are handling your own quality issues, they put the requirement in their approved supplier requirements and their purchase orders. Their only question is: can you maintain the system? Your certification covers that, and they can go about their real business of making their parts. Fact is, even with such a system they still end up having to come in and point out problems. But, as least it is not systemic.

Now, if the customer really doesn't care, or their customers don't care, then you can feel free to print off your own certificate for your TCE Quality System.

Indeed a pretty good explanation but I didn't get 'TCE Quality System'.

 

[JaneB]

Back to the poster's questions.

a. As the title of my thread says, when do you say that a company is really ready for the Third-Party audit?

Short answer is: when your system meets all the requirements. (But in practice, it can be hard to know without some experience.) But as someone already pointed out, that's why the Stage 1 Assessment is useful.

b. What does the 3-month minimum implementation of the system means?

It means you have your system operating - ie, up and running - for this bare minimum period of time. And yes, that includes records, but records isn't the be-all and end-all. Having the system in operation is.

c. Given a scenario as follows: Our company already have the Quality Manual and Mandatory Procedures in place (approved) last March...then we had our internal audit last April...last May we had our Management Review...then we just had our Operational Procedures approved 2 weeks ago (June)...our OTPs were also approved 2 weeks ago also...sounds funny? It is...with these, can you say that our company is ready for audit this July or even August? Please advice.

These things concern me:

• Most of all, what you call 'our Management Review' happened last May (do you mean over a year ago??). If you do, that's way too long ago to adequately review the system in operation. What's happened in the past 12 months? Also, what were the findings of the review?
• The Review clearly couldn't cover your Operational procedures, since these were only recently approved. Are they functioning well? Are they adequate?
• 'our internal audit' - last April?? again, over a year ago? How could it have looked at your Operational procedures? (it couldn't). Audit isn't a single thing you do just before external audit- you need a program of audit.

It sounds a little strange to me.
Minimum I'd suggest is:

• Make sure you have a program of internal audit - and you need at least 1 more audit before external audit, not least to cover all the elements of your system you didn't have in place before
• Look at how you're doing Management Review - I'd guess you need at least 1 more full review, to cover off the results of your audit, as well as the changes in your system. If you're looking at MR as something you only do once a year, you're taking the wrong view.

 

[Onayt]

Thanks Ms. Jane,

Our MR was conducted last May 2010 while the Internal Audit was done on April 2010.

We are yet to monitor our OTPs as we are still finalizing everything to date.

There are so many things to do and I badly need advice. Im actually the Deputy QMR - our QMR is an AVP and is now very loaded with Projects on his department.

Is it wise that we "back track" our implementation to enable us to have the Third Party Audit this July given that our Operational Procedures were only approved two weeks ago?

Please advice

 

[JaneB]

Onayt,

I see. Your use of the word 'last' confused me - when you said 'last May' I thought you meant May 2009. I'd have been inclined to simply say 'we had an MR in May' and not preface it with 'last'.

Glad that's cleared up.

We are yet to monitor our OTPs as we are still finalizing everything to date.

There are so many things to do and I badly need advice. Im actually the Deputy QMR - our QMR is an AVP and is now very loaded with Projects on his department.

Is it wise that we "back track" our implementation to enable us to have the Third Party Audit this July given that our Operational Procedures were only approved two weeks ago?

Look, most organisations tend to think 'we're not ready yet'... but remember you don't need to have a 'perfect' system, just a functioning system.

Yes of course there will be things you already see that need improving, but improvement is part of the Standard - it starts before even the auditor leaves!

So provided that you've covered off all the minimum requirements, and you can't see any glaring holes, why not go ahead with the Stage 1 Audit?
The absolute worst outcome (and it's not that bad!) is that your CB auditor says 'you're not quite ready yet' but if they do, they'll also give you specific feedback on what has to be done to be ready.

You may perhaps be readier than you think. I don't think Op Procedures only just being approved is a big negative either. Many if not most companies have to scramble a bit toward the end to get 'over the line'.

 

[AndyN]

Thanks Ms. Jane,

Our MR was conducted last May 2010 while the Internal Audit was done on April 2010.

We are yet to monitor our OTPs as we are still finalizing everything to date.

There are so many things to do and I badly need advice. Im actually the Deputy QMR - our QMR is an AVP and is now very loaded with Projects on his department.

Is it wise that we "back track" our implementation to enable us to have the Third Party Audit this July given that our Operational Procedures were only approved two weeks ago?

Please advice

You're going to have to do a lot more than you have done, if I understand what you've written:

If your procedures are only just approved and you haven't yet done any process monitoring/measurement - I need to ask you something. What was the point of doing a management review or internal audits? It seems to me that you've put the 'cart before the horse' and, if you want to be successful in a CB audit (and July isn't looking good from where I am sitting) you're going to have to do things very differently...

 

[Onayt]

I agree with you 100%...you see our Internal Audit was very "raw" since the Operational Procedures are not in place yet...and the Management Review was also "very raw" since there were really "nothing" to discuss. I agree that July is a very impossible sched for the CB Audit. However, our Management believes that this is possible. Being the QA Manager and Deputy QMR, I strongly disagree with this. Its like asking ask to do some magic. We are an Engineering Consulting firm by the way.

Can you please advice me on the proper approach given our situation. Many thanks to all!

 

[Onayt]

Thanks again...i might consider your advice and communicate this with our Management. sorry if I got you confused.

Its quote scary given the amount of pressure being given to me and my team. The problem is that most of the Managers have little or no time in complying with what has been set, i.e, System procedures and their very own Operational Procedures.

Hope to get more response from you. Appreciate it

 

[JaneB]

our Internal Audit was very "raw" since the Operational Procedures are not in place yet...and the Management Review was also "very raw" since there were really "nothing" to discuss.

Ah... that puts a different complexion on it. In that case, it doesn't sound as though you are ready yet. A good review by management (by which I mean an effective one) should have recognised this - perhaps they don't really understand what they're supposed to be reviewing? (I'm being kind here).

I agree that July is a very impossible sched for the CB Audit. However, our Management believes that this is possible. Being the QA Manager and Deputy QMR, I strongly disagree with this.

What is their basis for believing it possible? On what evidence?
And what - specifically - do you think remains to be done?

The problem is that most of the Managers have little or no time in complying with what has been set, i.e, System procedures and their very own Operational Procedures.

This is a BIG problem - if they 'don't have time' to comply, then this suggests the quality management system isn't really functioning properly: it's a theoretical system, not an actual system.

And a system is more than just a set of procedures, albeit authorised ones

 

[Onayt]

See...why don't you come over here and help us out? just kidding, for sure we can't afford you. =)

What then can you advice on how to make our Managers actually "work" for ISO certification? Im always reminding them that our focus is really not on "getting the certificate" but rather establishing a "working" or "functioning" QMS.

Thanks Ms. Jane...all the best

 

[Onayt]

What is their basis for believing it possible? On what evidence?
And what - specifically - do you think remains to be done?

I think that for them, having records is enough - which means that in order to "pass" we need to generate records for activities conducted 2 months ago...which for me is quite hard given the number of project documents and records that we need to produce - not to mention the admin records...OMG:mg: