Re: Thoughts on auditing

"Wayne Lundberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
: "Craig Cochran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
: > Howdy, folks:
: >
: >
: > 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.
: ---snip---
:
: Here is the prefect example of just why a cumbersome
quality assurance
: system can end up costing much more than the payback. The
system itself
: prevents the right medicine. My success in manufacturing,
including systems
: development, marketing and business management, is in
three steps. One is
: observation - people observe and make tick marks every
time they see a
: problem/opportunity. Few organizations have the resources
to tackle every
: problem/opportunity when first observed. By everybody
taking notes and
: ticking repeats, everybody is developing an on-the-fly
Pareto which at
: week's end will show clearly which problem/opportunity
should be tackled
: before it becomes a major problem.

One application of my Internal Quality Auditing experience
is simple:
the system non-compliance (as opposed to a regular product
non-conformance, a completely different event needing
corrective action) is assigned to the department supervisor
for action.
A corrective action.
A 7-step or 8-D process is employed with the supervisor
owning the resolution, but the team is open to participation
by any of an organization's staff.
It's one way where my responsibilities as a Quality Manager
does not force me to effect the solution. Guide, perhaps,
but implement, rarely.

R. Tompkins,
Illinois USA