Thoughts on auditing

Howdy, folks:

Here are a couple of auditing points I'd enjoy hearing everyone's
opinions on. These aren't incredible breakthroughs or anything, but
they seem to come up quite often. Here they are:

1) A nonconformity doesn't exist without a requirement. The best way
to ensure that this isn't forgotten is to insist that auditors (first
party, second party, and third party) clearly write out
nonconformities in a two-part manner: part 1 is the requirement and
part 2 is exactly what the auditor found that contradicts the
requirement. A one-two punch, so to speak. Insisting that auditors
write nonconformities this way removes a lot of "invented"
discrepancies.

2) Auditors (even internal auditors) should never propose fixes,
remedies, or suggestions for corrective action. This short-circuits
the problem solving process and encourages laziness. It also takes
away the ownership for the corrective action. Even when pressed for
ideas, the auditor should defer to the auditee's creativity and
knowledge of their process.

So, anyone want to bite on either of these? The 2nd point is the one I
expect people have stronger opinions on. These notions and others come
from a recent article of mine on auditing in Quality Digest:
http://www.qualitydigest.com/aug03/articles/02_article.shtml. 

Have a nice weekend,
Craig


Confused about measuring customer satisfaction? Get this: 
http://www.patonpress.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=16153

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Craig Cochran
Center for International Standards & Quality
Georgia Institute of Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]