The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
Thread Closed  Topic Closed
  The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  Auditing
  Auditor Certification

Post New Topic  
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Auditor Certification
WALLACE.
unregistered
posted 09 November 2000 11:32 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I spoke with Mark recently regarding the standard IRCA/RAB 5 day lead auditor course and exam.
I had a rather bad experience with this course, and since then I have been looking towards the ASQ, CQA designation as being a legitemate and more acceptable form of qualification to have as an independant self employed auditor.
I would seek advice from all of you seasoned auditors out there in quality land.

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 10 November 2000 05:51 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace,

I also took the RAB course and wondered if you would expand upon your bad experience. This sounds like a good topic for discussion!

ASD...

IP: Logged

admin
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 46
From:
Registered: Feb 99

posted 10 November 2000 06:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for admin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would really like to hear the details as well. What were (are) your expectations?

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 10 November 2000 09:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My Lead Auditor course provider was IQuES and it was excellant.

The instructor was well versed and experienced, had a great sense of humor and made himself available after hours.

IP: Logged

WALLACE.
unregistered
posted 14 November 2000 03:25 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My experience with the 5 day lead auditor course and exam was a nightmare from start to finish, not only me but eight out of ten of those who attended the course were very disatisfied with the course content, presentation and personal outcome of the course and testing. Eight of the ten people who attended including me all failed the testing and this caused me and others to question the credibility of the IRCA course presentation. I should say that there was no sour grapes at the failiure of the eight yet, We all believe with conviction that the statistics of eight out of ten fails was a cause for concern to all, as most of those who attended were all seasoned quality auditors. The registrar who is Toronto based gave a fair hearing to any complaints yet the concerns were brushed aside as being of no importance to the general course content and outcome. It was made clear to all who attended the course that, this course was the only way to gain credibility as a quality system auditor, I thought this comment was pretentious to say the least.
The registrar held the opinion that the ASQ, CQA designation was of little or no use as a form of certification and considered all auditors who rely on the ASQ for this designation to be lacking the appropriate certification and credibility to be recognised as an auditor of quality systems in general. Having had time to think of the experience and the negetive outcome, I believe and concur with all who were disatisfied with this course that the course presentation and content had caused our understanding of the IRCA course to be blurred and distorted. I noticed something significant regarding the presentation of the IRCA course that, most of the terminology used was very British and that, the north american equivelants were not provided within the course manual, I originaly hail from the UK and I even had some problems with the termonology presented and, being here in Canada for some years have become accustomed to the north american terminology. I have come to resent the fact that the registrars have in a sense a monopoly on the certification of quality system auditors, I recently viewed the course delegate manual that was provided and, I have come to the conclusion that the IRCA course does not and can't possibly give an auditor the tools and credibility to be an effective and proficient quality system auditor, I continue to be in favour of the ASQ body of knowledge as the foundation to proficient and effective execution of auditing skills. I would appreciate any comments that would be helpful regarding deciding what the best option would be to ana auditor who is seeking a credible and recognized form of certification.

IP: Logged

barb butrym
Forum Contributor

Posts: 637
From:South Central Massachusetts
Registered:

posted 14 November 2000 01:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for barb butrym   Click Here to Email barb butrym     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace...I am sorry to hear of the your disatisfaction. Let me add a bit to what you said.....it sure sounds as if you got a bum deal.

The course material is basically the same in any course...it has to be somewhat standard...thats the whole idea behind it.

The presenter is the rest of the equation...the onus is on he/she to know where each attendee "is", and keep the pass rate in mind and reinforce as required (ie "english") It is suppose to be tough...a boot camp if you will, its designed that way on purpose. It adds in the think under pressure factors. The exercises also add value.... and if done presented properly will ensure an understanding enough for a passing grade....Its odd that so many failed. My classes are typically teh reverse 8pass/2fail....What was the out come of the daily evaluations?

Most failures are well predicted by Tuesday AM....and there is nothing you can do about them. Typically they can't make a decision or cannot remove themselves from past history objectively...or babble on and on all around the answer comparing to their company as the end all expert. You have to be open to other ways and be able to say..."ok, its unconventional...but does it meet the intent of the standard". You cannot teach that....just try to lead them.


The CQA is a different animal altogether..its really not meant to prepare a lead auditor for what they find in the field..real time. the skills are there for the most part...but anyone with good testmanship skills and basic knowledge can pass (been there,,,,,also have submitted questions and taught the CQA refresher)..as a matter of fact the refresher teaches more testing skills than audit skills, in my opinion.....

For both the factor of "testing" is an issue, but there are things to be considered that do not appear on the surface to be relevant....

For the CQA the answers are not what we think, but what ASQ thinks is the best answer, quite often its foreign to our experience. Not a lot of written skills taken into effect.

for RAB/IRCA the written and "follow directions" and interpretation skills are more prevelant in the scoring. Also the pressure of the week factors in...'cause that what auditors do. The answers are scored according to a grid of priority answers given by IRCA/RAB...if you interpret the question as asking one thing and it really wants to see another addressed, then you loose massive credit. The review the day before the test should have prepared you for that...especially the essay questions and nonconformances. The lead auditor needs to prepare a report in limited space...saying the most as completely and consisely as possible, make decisions on his feet and when stressed from a week on the road. Hence the rules for staying in the allotted space and no cross outs. This also takes into effect the planning skills of the auditor..SO as you see there is more than meets the eye in the material. The basic "this is an audit" and how to make a checklist stuff is fluff...by the time you get there you should damn well know all that. More time should be spent on the standard, interpretations and activities that will make or break an auditor.

FYI more people fail the QSLA who take the CQA first.......its the mind set of the tests.

IP: Logged

Cari
unregistered
posted 18 January 2001 08:30 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Just to let you know, I took the 5-day Lead Auditor Course through Stat-a-Matrix and had a good experince. Most of our audit team has also used Stat-a-Matriz and also had good experiences. I can imagine it was a long 5 days in your case Wallace! It's long enough when it is a good experience.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 20 January 2001 05:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks Cari,
I have came to the conclusion that the best auditor is the auditor who gets out there and gains some experience from a number of quality audit encounters, the five day course is just a course, the registrar control (oversight) of quality system auditor certification will I am sure diminish to the point of organizations such as ASQ offering the ASQ, CQA designation as the accepted norm for auditor recognition, feedback that I have had from the UK suggests that the registration and certification programs that are now available for quality auditors are rather inadequate, thus I lean towards the ASQ,CQA designation here in North America.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

ISO GUY
Forum Contributor

Posts: 81
From:Rochester, NY
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 27 February 2001 09:38 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for ISO GUY   Click Here to Email ISO GUY     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace it sounds like you had a bad experience. i took the 5 day course from BSI/CEEM and it was wonderful, the instructors were very knowledgable and helpful. You say there is no sour grapes but that is not the impression I get from reading your posts (just my lowly opinion). I currently work with a company I am not a "Manager" I have my RAB Certification. The Quality Manager of one of our other facilities is CQA, she has no idea how to conduct an audit, she knows nothing about Quality Assurance, this person held positions in other companies as Quality Control (much differnt that Quality Assurance). I think ASQ CQA is very good for Quality Control but not very good for Quality Assurance IMHO. I am not saying one is better than the other but that they serve differnt purposes or functions? Does this make sense?

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 27 February 2001 02:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
ISO GUY,
Thanks for your comments, I kinda thought this topic was dead. I certainly believe that my comments regarding my rather negetive experience with the LA course was posted with conviction and as, I did point out in my initial mail on this subject, I do not want to seem as if i am being a moaner, I have very sincere concerns for the qualification process of QMS auditors and, the fact that the QMS registrars and associated trainers have what might be called a monopoly of the registration processes that allow quality auditors to gain credibility within the QMS arena.
The fact that issues such as SPC and SIGMA are not even addressed within the current body of knowledge used and taught by registrars seems IMHO to be a gap in what is currently expected of QMS auditors regarding having a working knowledge of what is important to the QMS arena regarding value added assessments, I firmly believe that the best auditor is the experienced internal auditor and, I have found that the most decorated auditors may be found to be lacking in real time experience and it is a pitty that the qualifications of certain individuals are looked at as being the qualifiers for real time hands on experience.
OH NO WAS THAT ANOTHER MOAN, sorry in advance.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

Carl Keller
unregistered
posted 28 February 2001 03:47 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace,

I don't think it matters which registration you have. Just get one of them.

I took the CQA exam in 1994 before I even witnessed an audit and although I did not pass, I was not far off. I took the BSI/CEEM 5 day course a couple of months later in 1994 and passed. I enjoyed it, but it was tough. My certificate says "This is to Certify....has successfuly completed a Lead Assessor Examination. I have included "Certified Lead Assessor" on my resume' and business cards ever since.

If I thought there was an advantage to being a CQA, I would have done it by now.

I have since become an ASQ Certified Quality Manager and my feeling is that although sometimes the examinations do not reflect the reality of the workplace, usually the ASQ primer courses do.

I think one thing you will need to do is go into the course/exam as objectively as possible. Forget everything you know about auditing and just focus on the data they give you. After you get the certificate in your hand, you can get back to the way things ACTUALLY work in the audit arena.

Most of the ASQ based primers (like Quality Council of Indiana) are pretty informative.

The ASQ exam offers the added benefit of being able to study at your own pace.

I have no doubt that if you took the 5 day Lead Assessor Course with another firm, you would pass it, but it really comes down choice.

I feel your pain!

Best of luck.

Carl

IP: Logged

outoftown
Forum Contributor

Posts: 15
From:Cary, NC, USA
Registered: Mar 2001

posted 18 March 2001 11:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for outoftown   Click Here to Email outoftown     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As a CQA since 1992 and having taken the lead assessor course the same year, as barb stated, these are two different animals. The CQA is proof of mastering a body of knowledge, but the lead assessor course is the mastering of a standard's terminology. I don't believe Wallace really meant "I firmly believe that the best auditor is the experienced internal auditor". Having been a third party auditor for 8 years, I have met my share of competent and incompetent 1st, 2nd and 3rd party auditors. I believe experience plays a part, but the ability to understand the requirements to which you are auditing to is key. You can do this without mastering ISO terminology if you audit to your own procedures rather than the standard. For internal audit systems set up this way, the lead assessor course may not be very helpful. Wallace, most lead assessor course providers have to be accredited by the RAB. I would recommend complaining directly to the RAB, even at this late date. I would have demanded a refund. Hopefully you will give it another chance with another provider. Ask for references first! For internal auditors, I am steering my clients toward newer value-added auditing courses instead of the lead assessor or internal auditing courses. Good luck.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 19 March 2001 07:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Outoftown,
Thanks for your comments, I don't want to be misunderstood so, I will say that auditors of quality systems who assess 1st, 2nd and 3rd party areas have a common goal of obtaining objective evidence of compliance and evidence of improvements that, may be required by the respective standard of compliance. You are very right though when you state that you have found these auditors to be good and bad at what they practice yet, I have come to believe that the most proficient auditor is the one who has had his or her beginings within the first party arena.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 19 March 2001 07:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Outoftown,
Thanks for your comments, I don't want to be misunderstood so, I will say that auditors of quality systems who assess 1st, 2nd and 3rd party areas have a common goal of obtaining objective evidence of compliance and evidence of improvements that, may be required by the respective standard of compliance. You are very right though when you state that you have found these auditors to be good and bad at what they practice yet, I have come to believe that the most proficient auditor is the one who has had his or her beginings within the first party arena.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

lou hannigan
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 5
From:wayne nj usa
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 20 March 2001 09:30 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for lou hannigan   Click Here to Email lou hannigan     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Carl Keller:
Wallace,

I don't think it matters which registration you have. Just get one of them.

I took the CQA exam in 1994 before I even witnessed an audit and although I did not pass, I was not far off. I took the BSI/CEEM 5 day course a couple of months later in 1994 and passed. I enjoyed it, but it was tough. My certificate says "This is to Certify....has successfuly completed a Lead Assessor Examination. I have included "Certified Lead Assessor" on my resume' and business cards ever since.


Carl,

You are unbelievable!!! You are not a Certified Lead Assessor just because you took a five day course. The RAB has established rigorous and comprehensive requirements to become a Certified Lead Assessor. Only individuals who have proven themselves to pre-existing Lead Assessors, employers, and clients can obtain this level.

Do you also exaggerate about your other credentials?


Lou

If I thought there was an advantage to being a CQA, I would have done it by now.

I have since become an ASQ Certified Quality Manager and my feeling is that although sometimes the examinations do not reflect the reality of the workplace, usually the ASQ primer courses do.

I think one thing you will need to do is go into the course/exam as objectively as possible. Forget everything you know about auditing and just focus on the data they give you. After you get the certificate in your hand, you can get back to the way things ACTUALLY work in the audit arena.

Most of the ASQ based primers (like Quality Council of Indiana) are pretty informative.

The ASQ exam offers the added benefit of being able to study at your own pace.

I have no doubt that if you took the 5 day Lead Assessor Course with another firm, you would pass it, but it really comes down choice.

I feel your pain!

Best of luck.

Carl

------------------

IP: Logged

Carl Keller
unregistered
posted 21 March 2001 01:28 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Lou, Take it easy, Take a prozac or something.
Let me get this right, if I study the primer and pass the ASQ CQA exam, I get a certificate that states I am a "Certified Quality Auditor" even if I never performed an audit, and you are OK with making that claim, but if I take the 5 day CEEM/BSI course and pass the exam, I can't claim that I am a "Certified Lead Assessor", even though the Certificate states "this is to certify I have succesfully passed the exam that is recognized by the Management Board of the Registration scheme for Lead Assessors?

Sorry "I HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT STATES I SUCCESSFULY COMPLETED THE LEAD ASSESSOR EXAMINATION RECOGNIZED BY THE MANAGEMENT BOARD OF THE REGISTRATION SCHEME FOR LEAD ASSESSORS" would not fit on my business card or I would have used it to keep from offending you. Make no mention of the fact that the RAB was started by the ASQ, but the CQA certification seems to fall outside the RAB "Rigorous and Comprehensive requirements" you mention. Come on, I have never mis-represented myself in anything. I make no claim to be an RAB Provisional Auditor, ASQ CQA or be RAB "Registered". I am well respected in my profession and my auditing technique. I can and have put my credentials to the test on numerous occasions. For you to suggest that I am exaggerating my credentials is less than professional and arrogant.

IP: Logged

steveski
unregistered
posted 21 March 2001 03:16 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
in ref to the remark from Lou Hannigan to Carl Keller "you are unbelievable" ... you have to be kidding me Lou. CQA, ASG, RAB, blah, blah, blah... they are all one & the same... the PRICE of working in the Quality field. I think the quality industry is working overtime trying to create courses & certifications ONLY to get more money out of me! I just attended a RAB, IRCA, IATCA process auditing class (statamatrix)& didn't learn anything! What a TOTAL waste of time! But... I DID get a CERTIFICATE!! No test, no nothing, but I'm a "certified ISO 9001:2000 process auditor" .. damn, that would look GOOD on my business card!! I also attended a CEEM/BSI ISO 14001 Lead Assessor class last year. In the class were numerous RAB, BLAH BLAH, certified 9000 Lead Assessor's already working for registrars ..... some of these guys could not balance a checkbook let alone audit to the standard (either standard!) Now let me ask you Lou, WHO certified these guys?? Other "certified lead assessors", that's who! Face it Lou, quite a number of "quality" organizations a-la ASQ, RAB, BSI, etc... are FOR PROFIT businesses, in it for the money $$, REGARDLESS of the flowery mission statement, or quality policy. What you should be complaining about is the "true" cost of your "RAB" certification. You did the 5 day course & then fulfilled all of the rab criteria... how much did your piece of paper cost you Lou? And do you really think you are a more competent auditor than me or Carl? It sounds like you are angry because you paid & we didn't! From where I sit, the ONLY benefit of RAB certification is to be able to work for a registrar. If you were not RAB certified, the registrar would get you the cert! Don't you think it's obvious that there is collusion among all these international groups to make more & more money not only from us, the quality professional, but from business as well. There oughta be an investigation!!!!!

IP: Logged

David Mullins
Forum Contributor

Posts: 248
From:Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 21 March 2001 06:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for David Mullins   Click Here to Email David Mullins     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I've been tempted to say this before, and this time I'm going to. This thread emanates from a guy who obviously has a problem with his power supply, CPU or RAM. The course clearly questioned his perspective and understanding, so he questions the course. Looks like human nature to me.

Let's not get hung up with a testosterone contest about whose course is bigger.

People are different, perceptions are different.
Viva la difference.

------------------

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 21 March 2001 06:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Now Now Guys,
I hoped that this topic would bring out the best in us so called quality auditors, lets not argue and insult each other.
I agree with Steveski when it was said that The only benefit derived from having the Registrar offered 5 day LA course and exam (passed) is to be able to be employable to a registrar for 3rd party registration audits.
I am of the opinion that there should be some form of recognized and universaly accepted form of quality auditor certification other than the registrar controlled certification process, the fact that the 5 day LA course and exam does in no way offer any prospective quality auditor the credentials that may be needed to get a leg up on their jouney to offer confidence to any future clients or employers that they indeed have the credentials of recognition and competence.
Hands on experience seems to be a real problem for prospective quality auditors, I decided to offer my time free of charge to potential auditees for the purpose of gaining experience of auditing a quality system, with the agreement that my audit time would be recorded and verified to identify my audit time and experience to future auditees and employers.
I do however continue to lean towards the ASQ CQA certification here in North America, the ASQ seems to have an excellent support system for potential and experienced auditors of quality.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 21 March 2001 07:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I figured I would just jump on in here somewhere. I kinda liked what steveski said about the 14K LA course he went to. It supports what I have stated elsewhere in the Forum about most 14K LA's I've become aware of, and that most of them don't know diddly about environmental anything. There must be a scam going on because Registrars are begging for certified EMS-LA's and here I sit on my butt with my EMS-LA credentials from the RAB with no responses from those folks. Maybe they're playing the good buddy system waiting for the 9K guys.

Hey, I've nothing against you quality guys at all but quality and environmental are 2 different fields that demand special skills and understanding beyond the "Standard". I'm an Environmental Professional who just happens to have some neat abbreviations at the end of his name. My environmental training and background go a little beyond the 5-day LA course, and to someone that should mean something.....but apparently not to Registrars.

Am I getting bitter....you bet. My recommendation to business folks would be to self declare conformance (if acceptable by the stakeholders and customers), and use a 3rd party auditor like me to verify the conformance, and screw the registrars until the very end. If folks don't absolutely need to register, they can save their money, and I'll help them.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 21 March 2001 08:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Randy,
Extremely well put, I concur with your sentiments. I note that ther were the days when military organizations self certified quality systems before the existence of BSI/ANSI and,It was common for organizations to perform compliance audits upon each other based on contractural agreements, it worked extremely well without registrar involvement.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 25 March 2001 12:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would like some feedback from all of the contributors to this forum who are more qualified than me to comment on the possibility in the future that, registrar control of the certification process for quality system auditors may diminish and become less of a focus for respective regstrars and, I would be interested in knowing what you believe the options for auditor certification may be if this scenario becomes reality, I recently gained registration through a registrar for the sake of the credentials only to come to the conclusion that I may probably not maintain certification according to the criteria of IATCA within the 3 year period of re-certification opportunity.
I have been praising the ASQ, CQA designation for a while yet, I do understand the flaws even in this peer recognition process, I would value the professional feedback from all of you quality practitioners out there.
Wallace.

IP: Logged

ISO GUY
Forum Contributor

Posts: 81
From:Rochester, NY
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 25 March 2001 06:51 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ISO GUY   Click Here to Email ISO GUY     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wow, I think we are all getting a little out of hand here! The Lead Auditor Course and ASQ Certification are both good for your careers. I took the Lead Auditor Course and passed, I would like to take the CQA exam but they said I can't because I have not been in the field long enough? What does that have to do with anything. It is not the certification you have the makes you qualified (try telling that to employeers LOL), it should depend on your knowledge, and willingness to do the job right. I have run into many people who are Six Sigma, CQE, CQA, CQM, RAB certified, some are very good at what they do and some have no clue what they are doing, all auditors are different as are all people some are book smart and can pass a test but when you put them in the field they can't perform. So, lets not bash the RAB course or the ASQ certifications, they are both good. However, in closing like I said in a earlier post, they both serve different purposes! Have a good one guys.

IP: Logged

WALLACE
Forum Contributor

Posts: 46
From:Ontario, Canada.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 25 March 2001 10:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for WALLACE   Click Here to Email WALLACE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would like to appologize to all forum users for this topic draging on and becoming a point of contention to me and some other users, maybe we should let this topic die and move on to other constructive topics.
Regards
Wallace.

IP: Logged

D.Scott
Forum Contributor

Posts: 37
From:Wellington, OH USA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 26 March 2001 08:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for D.Scott   Click Here to Email D.Scott     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace - I don't think you need to appologize. If I am not mistaken, you have brought up a good discussion topic. I for one would like to see what some of the others have to say. I would be very interested in hearing some comments on Randy's self certification comment too - especially in light of the current ecconomy.
Keep up the good work Wallace - I enjoy your posts.
Dave

IP: Logged

energy
Forum Contributor

Posts: 228
From:New Britain, CT
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 26 March 2001 11:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for energy   Click Here to Email energy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Randy says:
"Hey, I've nothing against you quality guys at all but quality and environmental are 2 different fields that demand special skills and understanding beyond the "Standard". I'm an Environmental Professional who just happens to have some neat abbreviations at the end of his name."
IMHO-There are a lot of Quality Managers who have "Environmental Compliance" Titles as co-assignments because they both require attention to requirements and procedures. I have run into "Environmental Compliance" professionals and do not find their field that daunting. In fact, for 19 years I have done both and avoided citations from DEP, OSHA and other agencies. And we have been audited. Maintaining a Quality Management System is more difficult to accomplish. (IMHO, again). While these "environmental professionals" demonstrate proficiency with (Safety) and environmental issues, they always seem to have a problem grasping what's going on in the Quality arena. In fact, they don't have a clue. At the same time, I have a complete understanding of what is required on the Safety & Environmental front. So, to me, "Quality" type auditors are suited to audit environmental issues because they both require the same disciplines. Finally, I would rather have an Environmental Professional audit out Quality Management System than a "Quality" oriented auditor. It would make for an easier day, except for explaining the basics of a Quality System.

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 26 March 2001 03:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Nicely put Energy except for a small issue. You don't go to prison for not managing quality as fast as you can go to prison for not managing environmental. It's the little nuances that bite you in the butt with environmental programs. If I had to depend on my environmental audit to help keep me and my company out of dutch with a regulator I would definitely want more than a fly-by-nite EMS Auditor who's major experience in the field is an EMS-LA Course.

Apparently managing Env/Safety in CT is a lot easier and safer than in California. Don't plan on relocating from that safe life there.

IP: Logged

Carl Keller
unregistered
posted 26 March 2001 03:54 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallace,

I agree with many of the contributors. I don't think the thread is a point of contention. We can all learn from each others point of view. It is kind of like "Benchmarking". I agree that most of the RAB certifications and the CQA are beneficial in some way. Some are exploited by consultants and get rich quick trainers that don't know diddley and give the rest a bad image. The point ISO guy brings up is an interesting one, He can't take the CQA because he has not been in the "Field" long enough. I was in the quality arena for a number of years and was allowed to sit for the exam, however, I had not even seen an audit performed. I am not sure if that is good or bad, it is just interesting. I guess the expectation is that you have had exposure to auditing after a certain amount of time in the quality arena.

I agree that it seems as though the RAB is manipulating the system to it's own benefit. In some ways this turns out to be win-win, however I firmly beleive that you should not be held hostage to receive a certification because you do not have an RAB certified mentor and x amount of audit hours. You get a drivers liscence when you know the rules of the road, that does not make you the most proficient at it. Experience is what makes us good at what we do. Most employers worth their salt look for the experience, not just the certification.

I think self certification is the way to go for many companies, especially small ones which may have a sharp, industrious quality team that can handle the challenge, however they don't have the budget to call in a consultant. Let's face it guys, this stuff isn't rocket science. It just takes some savvy and a little out-of-the-box thinking once in a while. I have conducted at least 100 internal audits, about 10 vendor audits and have been through 9001 and 9002 registration 4 times. Twice with a consultant and once without and once as a consultant. All 4 times were successful on the first attempt so I feel I am as qualified as anyone to say that the key to becoming a good auditor is to do audits. RAB certification, whether the 5 day or going for the gold of RAB provisional auditor status as well as the CQA Certification can identify you as an auditor, lead assessor, Provisional auditor, etc. the rest is up to your experience.

Good luck to all.

Carl-

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 26 March 2001 08:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Self declaration is allowed according to the "Standard". I think GM is even accepting it to meet their 14K requirement for the Tier 1 folks. If someone just wanted a 3rd party verification of conformance they could hire me (or any body else for that matter) to put together an audit team to do it. Prior arrangements would need to be made as to any corrective actions necessary. But the bottom line is...if an organization could prove to me that they conformed to the standard (14K in my case) I would not feel uncomfortable in saying so in some form of documentation (not a certificate of course). A letter written and signed by me (or anyone else) with my RAB number would show 3rd party verification. The main question I can see coming up is: Who verifies the veracity of the Auditor? At some point honesty and integrity have to be accepted.

Maybe it may not be this simple, but I'd be willing to give it a shot. There are tons of Provisional and Auditor (non-LA types) that need verified audit experience and I'd be glad to help them by using them on my audit teams, thus bypassing the Registrar crap they get.

IP: Logged

energy
Forum Contributor

Posts: 228
From:New Britain, CT
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 27 March 2001 09:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for energy   Click Here to Email energy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Randy,
You can go to prison for environmental misconduct in Connecticut, too. It has to be willful misconduct. The CT-DEP and CT-OSHA groups are reputed to be, in many ways, stricter than the FEDS. So, while a certain amount of paranoia is a good thing, a prison term isn't what drives our compliance efforts. We also don't rob banks and shoot people for that reason. I'm just trying to make the point that environmental and safety regulations are like contract requirements and compliance to Standards. Here's what you have to do, now do it. Air and water discharge permits have strict limits, and they are listed in the permit applications and associated documents. These have to be read and interpreted just like quality requirements. They do go hand-in-hand.
energy

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 28 March 2001 12:19 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
OK..........I was just trying to say that a good solid environmental background seems to me to be more preferable for an EMS auditor than a quality one. I've been involved in what I consider to be quality and I know a little about it. I was a aircraft (helicopter mainly) QC Inspector for Lockheed (a rather small outfit). I did all the in-process maintenance inspections and the 1st Test-flight as a crew-member. I could guarantee that everything was right before I put my butt in the left seat of a copter.

A quality guy may believe the story that an organization has no significant environmental impacts with green smoke, black smelly water and 2 headed ducks around a facility, but I would really question it, as I would regulatory compliance.

As a side note, I shot a bank robber (I was a copper) in'74 (no prison term was required for him).

[This message has been edited by Randy (edited 28 March 2001).]

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 28 March 2001 09:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
From Wallace:

"I have came to the conclusion that the best auditor is the auditor who gets out there and gains some experience from a number of quality audit encounters ......."

Does the title matter? No
Does experience matter? Yes
Does the process have holes? Yes
Has there been any corrective actions? I don't know, interpretations can be as confusing as the standards.
Will the system improve itself? Yes, over time with our input.
Do we have free will to decide our path? Yes
Should we keep trying to improve? Yes

Come on, let's get real and decide as individual companies what our directions are and work with our targeted customers to develop a relationship that is beneficial ($$$) to all involved, this includes the relationship between a registrar/auditor that is in tune with business functions.

If a requirement is quantified who cares if it is ASQ RAB ITF ABC XQO YUI etc..., the evidence is there for the customer.

If not evident I agree with Wallace!

ASD... (waiting patiently alternate views)

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 28 March 2001 09:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
One thing I rarely hear any more is that an auditor should have work experience in the field they are auditing. This is often not the case any more and many times it causes a lot of problems.

IP: Logged

Randy
Forum Wizard

Posts: 228
From:Barstow, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 1999

posted 28 March 2001 10:16 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randy   Click Here to Email Randy     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc is right on.....As Harry Callahan said many years ago "A man's got to know his limitations".

IP: Logged

Dilshiya
unregistered
posted 29 March 2001 03:40 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am beginning the lead auditors course from 2nd to 6th of next month and I am worried about the test which I am told is very tough. I was wondering if anyone could send me some past papers or whatever so that I can at least get an idea as to what sort of questions will be asked. We are allowed to take the delegage manual for the test, that's what worries me. Any help?

IP: Logged

Business.Partners
unregistered
posted 29 March 2001 04:04 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I read with interest your comments about auditor training. I am an independent consultant from UK who also works globally as a Lead assessor for TS16949, QS9000 and ISO9000:2000. It is my understanding that IRCA accredits auditor training courses for ISO9000. There are some rules on content but much flexibility on how the course is put together and presented. IRCA does not design the courses, the course provider does. If you get a bum deal its the course providers fault not IRCAs. Incidentally there is no specific ISO9000 requirement for internal auditors to be trained using a registered course, so long as they have suitable training. On the subject of bum courses, I would be interested to hear comments from any assessors who have gone thro QS or TS certification exam or re-cert exam. Ten out of ten of our assessors failed QS re-cert exam first time. I passed 2nd time but my performance at the re-take was inferior to my original sitting. I spoke recently with MD of another international assessment body, he submitted 26 assessors for QS re-cert all failed first time. Is someone making big bucks out of exam re-sits at $1000+ a time ?? In the end the cost will be passed on to the client one way or another. There's now a global shortage of QS and TS assessors who have re-qualified.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 29 March 2001 04:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Continued on https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000148.html

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Open Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic   Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!