Making ISO 9000 work: the role of auditing

Citation

Barthelemy, J.L. and Zairi, M. (2000), "Making ISO 9000 work: the role of auditing", Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 4 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/mbe.2000.26704caa.004

Making ISO 9000 work: the role of auditing

Making ISO 9000 work: the role of auditing

The evolution of quality auditing

This article describes the progression of quality audits so that they cease to be solely tools used for non-conformance detection but also become instruments towards continuous improvement. From non-conformance detection to the global audit is a long way.

The non-conformance audit

There is little doubt that, when a company first sets up its quality systems, the initial work to be done will be concentrated on the reduction of the gap between the situation in-company and the standards. The three main reasons for this are:

1. 1.

   the lack of maturity in the management of quality systems;

2. 2.

   the tendency to act rather than document;

3. 3.

   the limited amount of available resources.

Quality audits represent a unique opportunity to work towards excellence. It then becomes obvious that non-conformance auditing is not, under any circumstances, a goal in itself. It is the first step in a long process leading to the optimization of the use of quality audits.

The continuous improvement audit

The continuous improvement audit differs from the previous one in two ways:

1. 1.

   the attitude of auditors and auditees; and

2. 2.

   the method.

The attitude adopted in non-conformance audits is more police- and control-oriented than information sharing and best practice spreading throughout the company. The continuous improvement audit concept is based on the understanding by auditors and auditees of the importance of team work. Audits must be perceived by the auditees as a unique occasion to receive advice, new ideas and help from the outside. The auditees are obviously best placed to manage the processes they own on a day-to-day basis. However, when involved in the daily routine, time to think ahead is scarce. Auditors should intervene at this level and share their own experience acquired through visits to other departments. The understanding by both parties that co-operation is preferable to antagonism will lead to a quicker and better implementation of the proposed solutions.

We can define three main types of audit:

1. 1.

   functional;

2. 2.

   conformance to requirements;

3. 3.

   processes or products.

Other types of audits also exist, such as systems, theme and time. It is then possible to define the concept of the n dimensions audit matrix where n represents the number of dimensions on which the company can be audited. This concept of matricial auditing reflects the need to leave maximum freedom of action to the auditors, who could follow tracks across divisions, procedures, processes, products, time etc. (see Figures 1 and 2). This is the most complex and challenging form of audit but logically the most rewarding for the auditor as well as for the audited cell.

Figure 1 The three dimensional audit matrix

Figure 2 - Examining all customer supplier interfaces

The thriving audit

At equivalent levels, the difference in performance between auditors is mostly due to a difference in preparation time, but most important is the amount of information available, collected and used.

The amount of information commonly used and collected is generally limited to the reading of the reports and corrective action requests issued at the end of the previous audit. This is obviously not enough for a thriving audit where the scope and scale of information collected should be much larger, acquired not only through internal data gathering, but also externally, about the micro and macro environment (see Figure 3).

Micro-environment is defined here at company level: relationship with customers, suppliers and other companies (benchmarking).

Figure 3 - The thriving audit

Macro environment is used to define social, demographic, legal and other influences at a macro-economic level. The scale and scope of information collected will increase the opportunities for continuous improvement as it will be possible to apply, internally, ideas from external sources.

The ultimate audit

The argument which can be submitted regarding the previous cases is that the presented methods are not systematic. Each process, each function in the company has its own suppliers and customers.

It is possible to transfer one of the self-assessing models, European Quality Award or Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, from a company level to a micro level. For most of the criteria in Figure 4 the marking method is applicable.

Figure 4 - The ultimate audit

The global audit

During the last few years, we have become conscious of the proliferation of standards requiring internal audits, in fields such as health and safety, environment, etc. The final stage of integration is to assemble all requirements and to examine enablers and results at each level and throughout the entire organization. Set-up teams will have to be multidisciplinary with specialists in all fields to be inspected. This will prevent unnecessary work being done, as all these audit methods and requirements are similar.

Figure 5 - The total audit

Figure 6 - The evolution of qaulity auditing

Experience in the management of quality systems will allow companies to improve the use made of quality audits, from non-conformance detection to the ultimate or total audit see Figure 5. As each step requires larger skills, training will be necessary. The use of the combination of the main points described here will lead to the optimization of the use of internal audits and transform the non-conformance audit into a total audit involving (see Figure 6):

• •

  an increase in the motivation of auditors and auditees;

• •

  multi-dimensional audits;

• •

  a global collection of information;

• •

  a better structuring of the parameters to be audited;

• •

  generalization.

Conclusions

Auditing is an important function for the effective deployment of quality systems such as ISO 9000. It is not only supposed to ensure that there is total compliance with set procedures and agreed standards all the time and at all stages of the productive/organizational process, but also meant to develop organizations through continuous improvement, innovation and a problem-solving culture.

Essentially there are two major approaches to the management of quality systems such as ISO 9000:

1. 1.

   Internal auditing (static auditing) – auditing geared for certification and approval.

2. 2.

   Proactive auditing which questions the way procedures are arrived at, their economic viability and their viability as best solutions under the changing organizational circumstances.

Table I illustrates a comparison between the two approaches (Wilborn, 1990; Zairi, 1991). Static auditing needs to be conducted to make sure that organizations are responding to their customers' needs and requirements on an everyday basis. Dynamic auditing, on the other hand, has to be conducted so that companies are positively pursuing improvement in their competitive aspirations.

Static auditing	Dynamic auditing
Reduces the scope of audits	Enhances acceptance of audits and redces fear
Enhances cost effectivness	Informs management and staff more adequately
Simplifies auditing and auditr qualification	Indentifies opportunities for quality improvement
Allows for employing less qualified staff	Disseminates new knowledge and experience in quality assurance
Confirms meeting standards	Induces innovation
Recognizes adequate performances	Enhances "cultural change" in the company
Suffices for quality progamme registration	Encourages delegated decision making, integration, and co-operation
	Reviews all procedures and standards
	Provides greater challenge and recognition for auditors and auditees
	Enhances the role and status of quality assurance

Table I - A comparison of static and dynamic auditing

The evolutionary process of conducting audits as recommended in this article is designed to drive organizations to move away from "doing the bare minimum" to embarking on a culture of probing, challenging, innovation and best practice implementation. The total audit approach is meant to encourage openness, acceptance that auditing is "positive" and important, the development of teamwork and a spirit of co-operation.

Jean Louis Barthelemy, Mohamed ZairiBradford University, Bradford, UK

Action points

There is much more to quality audit than non-conformance. In fact, this can be counter-productive.

The attitude of those doing the audit – and those being audited – is all important.Do not neglect preparation!Develop the audit:

• •

  it should deal with all legal requirements; and

• •

  it should be rolled out to teams throughout the organization.