Audit Non-Conformance

You're right. 15 years of an "easy ride." Those other 4-5 auditors where all clueless.

It is readily apparent to me that something has changed regarding interpretation/enforcement, and not for the better. It has now become all about auditor satisfaction and CYA.

 

Andy's advise is right. There is an appeal process which your auditor should make you aware. We are on the same boat. Unfortunately the TS auditors are being pressed to find non-conformances. May I suggest that during the closing meeting, if you are not satisfied with the nonconformance, please ask the auditor the read the standard verbatim and the objective evidence of the nonconformance? This way you will know how to fix it. Regarding effectiveness, did the auditor gathered enough facts to show effectiveness? If you are afraid to appeal, then ask the CB for a Customer Satisfaction Survey form and evaluate your auditor's competency.

 

Just a question. What level of experience do you have with TS in the past 12-14 months?

 

I did appeal and it was worthless. But I basically found out that just about every NC I received was the result of a corrective action the CB had to do. So if they got something on supplier monitoring, so did I. If we didn't have the specific "document" they needed, we were dinged. We where actually told during the audit, if you had this piece of paper it would only take 5 minutes.

Unfortunately, it is a little late in the game to get a new CB. But I will be looking for next time.

 

Just out of curiosity: I presume this is an on-site audit? If so, is it not standard procedure to have a closing meeting with the auditor in which findings are discussed?
...did you have such a closing discussion? Wouldn't this have been the first checkpoint for clarifying clauses/findings/evidence?

...don't we all...
I find myself often regretting not saving some of those threads for future reference...

 

Very interesting and just PROVES the point that if your organization's CB is under heightened scrutiny by their oversight agencies (AB's, IATF, IAQG, Quest Forum, etc...) YOU might end up "paying the price", as well for their alleged poor performance. Most organizations are clueless and utterly oblivious about their respective CB's performance, until their accreditation gets suspended and/or revoked.It would behoove certificate holders to do a better job of doing due diligence on their respective registrars.

 

Yes, but for the fact that he had to race out for a plane. The problem is that the clarifications are questionable at best. It's a lot of "because I said so."

 

Unfortunately, I think this is not all that uncommon (at least in my experience).
Auditors allocate specific tight schedules, then end up going on ranting tangents in the midst of the audit that throws the whole schedule off...so by the end they are super pressed for time. ...in their defense, I could see it being difficult to stick to a strict 4-day schedule and still accommodate the invariable discussions/tangents/difficulties that arise.
...that being said, there should be some leeway for closing discussions. To me these are critical. If the auditor leaves without you having a clear picture of what'll be in his/her report, and why, this is a problem...

 

Very wide credential and highly recommended.

 

$0.02 - Nothing is better than a professionally run CB that has high standards for their auditors; and they are out there. However, with that said, you are still relying on the requirements, the interpretations, and the evidence available to prove the shall is met. There are many ways to audit, I recently had two separate TS audits in the same week, one in one facility and a different auditor in the second facility. The auditors approach could not have been more different, and their interpretations were slightly skewed however the audits were both productive and effective. One was laid back and felt "easy" because of the auditors demeanor and approach, the other audit felt difficult and combative; yet the same system was being looked at.

Point being, the CB can control the methodology and make every attempt to have high standards for their auditors, but they are not clones of each other and being able to satisfy the requirements with your system while at the same time balancing value added effort should lend itself to a successful audit. In the event the findings raised are not agreed to, as offered already, use the system to appeal and go from there. 90% of the audits I have been involved in have been extremely productive because of the "debates" I have been in on interpretations and have helped me learn a lot; while at the same time adding value for the most part to the system and organization.

In the end though there is always the fact that "sometimes the dancing monkey has to dance - even when he does not like it." Waiteism #25