1. Hello and Welcome to The Quality Forum Online...Continuing in the spirit of People Helping People !
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

Internal Audit Observation

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2008 - Quality Management Systems' started by Padym, Apr 26, 2016.

  1. Padym

    Padym Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Hi All,
    During an internal audit of service provision process (deploys and maintains IT products) for Monitoring, measuring of their process/product metrics. It was observed that objectives defined in the business plan but the measures for individual objectives were not readily available. Overall revenue and profit/loss is measured and communicated.
    Issued an internal non-conformance against ISO 9001 8.2.3/8.2.4 - which requires that organization should apply suitable methods for monitoring for process/product to demonstrate the ability of the process to achieve planned results.
    Is this correct?
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    1,041
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    I'm not sure what you are reporting. When you audit strictly against ISO 9001 you end up with this kind of "is/is not" finding. You state
    What does this mean? Are they supposed to be "readily available"? It seems to me that you could have dug a lot deeper than the (apparent) issue you think you've uncovered. Profit/loss isn't a quality objective for starters. In fact, I'd ask why you were even doing this audit? Surely, it doesn't need an audit to determine if a process has objectives established and if it's got a set of measurements applied to it...
     
  3. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    614
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    "Monitoring and measurement of processes" is a requirement mentioned in:
    • 4.1e - The organization shall...monitor, measure where applicable, and analyze these processes
    • 8.2.3 - The organization shall apply suitable methods for monitoring and, where applicable, measurement of the quality management system processes.
    Process quality objectives are considered "planned results". During an audit, if a certain process fails to provide evidence of monitoring and/or measurement to "demonstrate the ability of the process to achieve planned results", then this is a clear nonconformity against the above requirements. If the issue is about not being "readily available", then ask the auditor on where it is specified in 8.2.3 that "measures must be readily available". Nonconformity can only exist if there is a Requirement.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2016
  4. osscertification

    osscertification New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Internal audit report is a formal document prepare to check the performance of the company .The

    administrators can take decisions according to the report .Normally it contains favorable and

    unfavorable things in business , if it is wrong, why it is , how can correct these, suggestions and

    recommendations and comments of auditee etc
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 26, 2016
  5. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    1,041
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    The content has to be objective and factually based...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 26, 2016
  6. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    If the process KPI's is not measurable how can know if the process objectives are met? I have been doing internal audits to TS16949 and when I play "football" with the auditee I find out that the process owner has a notebook which lists all the issues while doing the process and he brings them out to the table everyday when they do their stand up meetings. Correct me, but I find that acceptable.
     
  7. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    1,041
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Hi Maria! I'm not understanding your comment relative to the OP's statement. He says that something isn't "readily available". I'm left wondering what that means.
     
  8. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I did not say that "it is not readily available". It think it was the original post that quoted this.

    From my experience in internal auditing the TS16949, the performance indicators are not always measurable but are documented in a notebook and reported everyday during a stand up meeting. Any problems that is identified is actioned during the meetings. That's how this organization met the "suitable method of monitoring for process/product to demonstrate the ability of the process to achieve planned results". Thanks for the response.
     
  9. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    1,041
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Yes Maria, I wasn't saying you made that statement.
     
  10. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    Thanks Andy. This is one of the weakest point of an internal audit.
     
  11. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    589
    Likes Received:
    663
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Objectives are one thing...measures are something else. Measures are HOW you determine and/or demonstrate if the organization is meeting the defined objectives. They need to be related. For example, if your quality measure is "Fewer customer complaints", but you're tracking profit/loss...there isn't really a direct relationship between those two. One could argue that the higher the complaints, the greater the loss, but there are too many other variables that can impact profit.

    So, returning to the idea of "Few customer complaints", your metric could be something such as "# of complaints per 1,000 products sold"

    As for the comment about 'readily available'...to whom? The auditors who wanted to see how objectives were measured? Or the employees who should know how their activities impact objectives and associated measures?
     
  12. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    589
    Likes Received:
    663
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    It's a nice start, but I don't think a notebook is a good way to (a) record data, (b) identify trends and (c) ensure historical traceability to see if actions taken have had a positive impact on the adverse situation.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  13. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    I have observed from this situation, that statistical tools are not being used to monitor the process. They are used after the fact when things already happens. Fortunately for this facility non of the issues have impacted he external customers. The problems are corrected internally. COPQ is not formally evaluated and reported during management review. Thank you.
     
  14. Padym

    Padym Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Thank you all for your comments. I'm clear on the aspect. "Not readily available" I meant that the auditee was not able to showcase the measurements performed for each objective at the time of audit neither after 2 days of the audit as per the extended time given to auditee.
     
  15. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    614
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    If this is the case:
    Then this is true:
    The NC is against clause 8.2.3
     
  16. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    The standard says "SHOULD" not shall.
     
  17. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    614
    Likes Received:
    393
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    You mean "SHALL" not should.:)
     
  18. MCW8888

    MCW8888 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    42
    You're right. Padym quoted it incorrectly.
     
  19. RoxaneB

    RoxaneB Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    589
    Likes Received:
    663
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    With all due respect, for the purposes of an internal audit, becoming focused on the use of 'should' instead of 'shall' (or 'shall' instead of 'should') adds very little - if any - value to the intent of the finding...and runs the risk of derailing this thread. Padym's question is not about the use of 'should' or 'shall', but is more about creating an actionable finding for the intended recipient(s) to resolve and ensuring it's assigned to the right clause (per his organization's internal audit process, I presume)

    To be honest, if an audit finding is going to reference a clause, I'd rather it was written in as plain-and-simple English (or the language of the organization) as possible. That's what will resonate with the recipient of the finding. If they need to come back to the internal auditor (or audit team) later with questions on what the real issue is, then the internal auditor and/or audit team has failed in their attempt communicate a recognized gap/opportunity within the management system. This can lead to poor engagement within the organization regarding audits, the audit process and the auditors. Leave the formal stuff to the external auditors. Keep your internal audits structured and applicable to the standard, but simple and easy for the organization.

    In Padym's situation, providing the clause number is sufficient and then, instead of repeating the clause statement where the gap has been identified, I would have phrased the finding in such a way that the situation was clearly and succinctly detailed, allowing the recipient(s) to quickly determine actions for resolution. For example (and please keep in mind that we don't have all of the information regarding the situation so there are several possibilities and these are potentially incomplete):

    • The organization has not developed or identified measures/metrics suitable for demonstrating the achievement of quality objectives.
    • The organization is unable to provide evidence on the deployment and achievement of quality objectives.
    • The organization has not developed or identified measures/metrics suitable for demonstrating achievement of planned results (NOTE : This is different than quality objectives. Planned results could also refer to the ability to meet customer requirements and the production controls/measures in place to confirm the ability and capability of meeting those requirements).
    The examples above are just a few possibilities on how to word a finding so that the recipient can really focus on the identified issue instead of having to translate the requirement of the standard and then remember the details of the audit. Focusing on semantics such as 'should vs. shall' or using subjective terms such as 'readily available' distract from what the real issue.
     
  20. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    2,000
    Likes Received:
    1,041
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    It's best to report this in a factual manner, in that case, rather than use subjective language, like "not readily available". Simply report, "There was no evidence of measurement of the process". Of course, you might want to check on what your own management SAY is required for the subject process (rather than what ISO says) since you don't have to set objectives and measurements for ALL processes. For example, there are many more processes going on in your car, but only a few are measured/monitored if you look at the dashboard!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2016
    Martin Draper, MCW8888 and normzone like this.

Share This Page