Ethics, social
responsibility
and auditing
How honest are you? questions how successfully we consider ethics
The classic audit approach is built around and within a world of absolutes. Regulations or standards include key words that beg to be investigated and tested; ‘should, shall and where appropriate’ fuels a series of objectively phrased questions. Of course, it’s easier when auditing the ‘shalls.’ They are comfort food in the auditor’s recipe book of best-tasting dishes; satisfying, easy on the pallet and reliable.
But how reliable are we in regard to most of the unlisted ‘shalls’ within our profession? How should we act and interact with clients? What is appropriate behavior, especially in situations where the client is clearly operating unethically?
Those who would cite ISO 19011 or ISO 17021 might arrive at several sections regarding competency and professionalism, but the real-world experiences of most auditors are far removed from either standard’s content or guidance. Perhaps the final draft of 17021-2 will contain new sections, such as ‘8.1 How to conduct yourself on the road,’ or ‘9.2 Deciding if it’s a major or minor nonconformity,’ but I sincerely doubt this will be the case.
Ethics
 |
It’s been said that ethics come under consideration primarily when they are inconvenient. In most cases, it’s not all that pleasant to report the truth, especially when the auditee prefers otherwise. Perhaps you take notice of an exceptionally high turnover of minority workers. Some would argue that if there is no impact on overall product quality, the issue is unworthy of deeper investigation. But is that truly an ethical approach? |
Ethical relativism also has its place at the table. In the above example, it may be standard practice within the industry or even the country, to offer the least attractive work to the disadvantaged. Who are you to apply the ethics of a developed society to those of other cultures whose sensitivities are less distinct? In one example, a quality manager was shocked to find a group of workers whose only task was to unload products from large bins and place them on a conveyer. When he explained that any number of machines could accomplish the same task at minimal cost, the plant superintendant simply pointed at the workers and said, ‘Yes, but what would they do then?’
Something to think about
The following stories are taken from personal experiences and are all common challenges to an auditor’s ethics.
- When auditing the work environment, you come across an area that’s clearly unsafe. As huge industrial transmissions are disassembled using hoists and cranes, operators are forced to walk on oil-soaked mats. Your audit schedule indicates that you’re to move to another area in five minutes, but explaining the unacknowledged consequences of the disassembly area will require a major investment in time. The ethical auditor will abandon the schedule and work through the process output with the client. Would you stop or accept the client’s position and write an ‘opportunity for improvement’ in the belief that time and inspiration will somehow prevail?
- You’ve just begun auditing the production floor of a plant and you notice a technician has adorned his work area with centerfold pictures from a popular men’s magazine. Would you ask your guide to accompany you to human resources to enquire about possible complaints from staff or is discretion a more appropriate route?
- Two workers join you in the smoking area during your break. They know you’re the auditor, but they’ve just been through a highly uncomfortable experience with their supervisor and can’t hold back their resentment and disgust. Their story has the ring of truth; in fact, you’ve been wondering about the situation they’ve described as certain records indirectly indicated problems in this area. Do you act on the situation and enquire further?
- Tomorrow is the closing meeting and thus far all has gone well. You’re tired, especially as this is the last in a series of audits requiring two weeks of non-stop travel. The next day, you observe a set of work instructions in the production area that are clearly not controlled. You normally generate a minor nonconformity in such instances, but to do so will require additional reporting and subsequent follow-up with the client. What do you do?
Social responsibility
The standards against which we audit offer insight into our personal behaviour as auditors. Continual improvement, effectiveness and objective evidence of behavioural excellence as a professional auditor are foundational expectations of our clients. The golden rule asks that we treat others as we would be treated and this includes recognizing that auditors are inherently in a position of power and must exercise that power carefully.
A responsible person understands the importance of keeping the following three words in proper order: feel, think, act. When this sequence is violated, socially irresponsible behaviors often follow. We are standards keepers and our responsibilities are as significant, often more so, than those we audit. All standards offer a window to socially responsible systems, what remains is an auditor’s dedication to feel, think and act accordingly.
About the author
A senior member of American Society for Quality, Paul Palmes is president of Business Standards Architects in Fargo, North Dakota, US. A certified quality manager and lead auditor, he serves as vice chair and membership chair of the US technical advisory group to ISO/TC 176 and was the US lead delegate and working group secretary during the development of ISO 10014.
He was recently named head of the US delegation to ISO/TC 176/SC3. He’s the international ISO TC 176 representative to the International Accreditation Forum, co-convener of the ISO 9000 Assessment Group and member of the Auditing Practices Group. He is also a member of the Quality Council of the ANSI/ASQ National Accreditation Board (ANAB). Paul can be reached at pcpalmes@cableone.net
 |
 Have an issue to raise? A question to ask? Give us your opinions now in the Online Forums. |