|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums 
|
|
|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums
|
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
|
 The New Elsmar Cove Forums
 Auditing
 Auditing to the ISO 9001:2000 Standard
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Auditing to the ISO 9001:2000 Standard |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 21 May 2001 01:01 AM
   
Has anyone gone through a course for lead auditors focused on auditing to the 2000 standard? IP: Logged |
|
ISO GUY Forum Contributor Posts: 81 |
posted 21 May 2001 07:59 AM
Marc, I have taken the course on auditing to 9K2K for lead auditors. What would you like to know about it. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 21 May 2001 08:14 AM
Just generally curious. Who gave the 'course'? Can you give us a synopsis? IP: Logged |
|
goose Forum Contributor Posts: 17 |
posted 21 May 2001 10:45 AM
I took two day Transitioning to ISO 9001:2000 by Pathway/Sunrise Consulting. Basically compared/contrasted '94 rev with new and what would be required to meet new std. A 50 question exam was available for those LAs who were "upgrading". IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 21 May 2001 01:29 PM
It only dealt with the differences in the new standards? Did they talk about differences in auditing techniques or anything other than "...the old standard said....and the new standard says..."? IP: Logged |
|
goose Forum Contributor Posts: 17 |
posted 21 May 2001 02:07 PM
Course was somewhat weak about auditing approach. Seems each registrar developing their own approach according to instructor. IP: Logged |
|
ISO GUY Forum Contributor Posts: 81 |
posted 21 May 2001 02:33 PM
The course I took was very informative. Yes it did talk about auditing techniques, and to tell you the truth I think the new standard is going to make an auditors life miserable, the way the standard is written it is almost as if they expect the auditor to be an expert on everything (regulatory issues included). That was the impression I got. Another thing I found interesting was the fact that yes there are only "6" procedures required in the new standard you still need the documentation to prove what you are doing. In my experience when companies get away from SOP's and WI's they also tend to get very lax on the supporting documentation. IP: Logged |
|
Froggy Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 2 |
posted 21 May 2001 03:26 PM
I took the Internal Auditor Training Course in Feb. of this year. The course was provided by AQS (Applied Quality Systems, Inc.). This was a 3-day course with 12 hour days and lots of homework and studying!!! The entire course was based on the 2000 standard-the 1994 standard was not addressed or compared-it was a whole new ballgame. I was the only student out of the 20 people there who even had a copy of the new standard prior to attending this class. Everyone did receive a copy of the new standard with the course materials. The instructor was extremely well-versed on the 2000 standard and moved very quickly through all of the material. The classwork was extremely rigorous as was the student participation. We worked in teams and as individuals and were evaluated on our performance. The stress-level among the class was very high, and by the last day, 2 had dropped out. The exam was not easy by any means. We did have an additional student who failed the exam. I will say one thing, though, I really learned this material inside and out! IP: Logged |
|
Dan Larsen Forum Contributor Posts: 137 |
posted 21 May 2001 03:40 PM
I think ISO Guy's last paragrah says a lot. There's been so much hype about "only six" procedure requirements that I think a lot of companies are going to get lead down the wrong path. (And/or this is going to make the auditors life a problem!) If auditing was a bit subjective before, wait...I think it's going to get even more subjective. This from one who hasn't had training yet (just reading the standard and some of the transition books that are out). I'm looking at a couple of training classes in early June through Statamatrix. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 21 May 2001 03:58 PM
-> (just reading the standard and some of the transition -> books that are out). What are the books saying? I have 2 clients which went through an 'upgrade'. Both of them basically revised their manuals and added a few clarifications here and there but there were no new systems or anything like that. Nor did they change any of their systems. I have the standard and have read it thoroughly. I guess I think the changes are very minor and that there are a lot of garbage courses being sold. It appears little different to me than the Y2K scare. -> If auditing was a bit subjective before, wait...I think This is my concern. This is why I'm interested in what registrars are telling their auditors. So, ISO Guy, can you give us any specifics? IP: Logged |
|
Jim Biz Forum Wizard Posts: 275 |
posted 22 May 2001 07:18 AM
In these "courses" how much attention is placed on the wording in 9004 guidelines? Is the consistant pair issue a "justification" to intrepret into the standard itself what should be done or is 9004 viewed as a "Framework" and suggestion information only? Regards IP: Logged |
|
PecosPete unregistered |
posted 22 May 2001 04:27 PM
Where is the criteria for pass-fail? The 1994 standard was audited to pass or fail, which is what 99% of auditees want. ISO 19011, the official auditing document, is "currently under development". The 9004-2000 document has a 1 to 5 scale -- can I assume "3" is accepted by most authorities as passing? Please tell me if I missed something obvious, because I've really been looking. IP: Logged |
|
Dan Larsen Forum Contributor Posts: 137 |
posted 22 May 2001 10:41 PM
Marc, I tend to agree with you. After reading through the standard and some of the transition books (I particularly liked ISO 9000:2000 New Requirements by Jack Kanholm [found it thru ASQ]), I don't know that there are a lot of changes really necessary for an effective ISO system. Based on some of the posts, though, it seems the hype is overtaking the standard and there seem to be more than a few auditors "forcing" interpretations. An editorial comment >> Personally, I think it's time for quality professionals to stop simply "rolling over and playing dead" for demanding auditors. Have faith in your system and SELL it against YOUR interpretation of the standard. You may not win all the battles, but I think the war will be won. [This message has been edited by Dan Larsen (edited 22 May 2001).] IP: Logged |
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
Hop to: |
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!
Main Site Search 
