The audit team leader
Should a leader take total control or should it be up to team members to help lead the way? examines the people problems that can emerge within a team audit
Any specification or control limit, even when standardized or agreed, can be vague. So what about specifications on people?
The process of carrying out a group audit starts in the following manner. A certification body issues an audit job and each auditor is given the lead auditor’s email address and phone number. If he or she is lucky, the auditor knows the leader and has an idea of her/his audit criteria or, more operationally, vision of the world.
However, often an auditor may not know his team leader. If he or she is lucky, he/she is given the audit plan, very often written to meet the accreditation body’s requirements, therefore operatively almost useless. When no audit plan is received, the auditor has no idea of what to audit, when and for how long.
When meeting the client company, the audit team leader calls for a review of the audit plan. After the first verbal agreement with the organisation there are frequently changes, usually every couple of hours.
The first thing to be carried out during an audit is an interview of the top management concerning management system review, performance, comparison with targets, corrective action, improvement planning and the business plan. The team leader asks questions and takes notes; the audit team only listen and rarely speak.
Problem: when this happens, do the client company representatives think that the non-team leaders are idiotic and wonder what they are being paid for?
During stage two of a team audit, a cunning customer succeeds in keeping an audit team of up to three people (especially for ISO/TS 16949 audits) for four hours in a meeting room, keeping them looking at (and drowsing through) computer presentations, tables and charts. Then there will be a coffee break lasting 30 minutes before the leader hurries the audit team onwards, looking forward to the lunch break.
After lunch – a sly client organisation chooses a good restaurant, far away, where good food and drinks are served – back to the company. How efficient is it to audit manufacturing processes after a heavy lunch, when the internal and external temperature, humidity and noise become close to unbearable?
Problem: why does the team leader – when defining the audit plan – not consider environmental conditions that may influence the audit's effectiveness?
Another problem is that team leaders keep nobler processes for themselves – such as sales and design, laboratory, audit and corrective action – leaving the poorer processes to the audit team – documentation control, management of human resources, production (especially if carried out under unpleasant environmental condition), purchasing and so on.
Audit team leaders hunting for nonconformities also often plan audits so that he/she catches the majority of nonconformities. Are there any bonuses involved?
There are different types of leaders.
- the bull team leader - the company’s certification is to be maintained, with no criticism accepted from the audit team
- the sheep team leader - a team leader certifies the company, but a colleague auditor is overly powerful, which frequently results in inconsistencies in the audit team’s findings
- the Cain and Abel relationship - there is personal dislike within the team, which makes it impossible to solve issues, even when the team leader is not involved
- the sheep and wolf - an auditor is a former consultant of the company, but the team leader is there for first time with poor knowledge and poor understanding. Who guides the audit?
Some say leadership is an art; where there is leadership there should also be authority and responsibility. These are not absolute concepts –if you have authority, you also have the responsibility to pay for deeds and damages.
It seems a pity that auditors’ requirements usually focus on personal characteristics and performance, while auditor exams often reward the memory and knowledge of standards.
About the author
Umberto Tunesi studied industrial chemistry and university, before spending four years in a development laboratory and 17 years with a product inspection company. He has been a management system auditor since 1994, focusing on automotive audits since 1996, as well as a consultant on technical methodologies.
 |
 Have an issue to raise? A question to ask? Give us your opinions now in the Online Forums. |
