Why auditors should not give recommendations

 

Audits must always be objective and impartial. Auditors should be selected based on their ability to conduct an objective and impartial audit. They should be free from influence and if at any point through the audit they become aware of a conflict of interest they must discontinue the audit. Quality management system auditors that have completed an ISO 9001 training will be aware of the requirements of clause 9.2.2 of ISO 9001:2015.

As auditors progress through an audit they are assessing the suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness of the management system. They are there to identify that the areas have been adequately controlled and to identify areas requiring additional controls. Is it then not prudent for them to advise the organization in areas where they could improve and the methods by which they can achieve this improvement? After all, will it not help them get there quicker. Why then does ISO 9001 training contradict this logical conclusion?

Auditors are like photographers who take a snapshot in time of the management system as they see it. The reality may be different i.e. better that what they have observed or perhaps, in some cases, worse. ISO 9001 training brings to light the difference between auditors and inspectors. Inspectors are the final gatekeepers and are checking the outputs of the process. Auditors are looking at the entire process and the effectiveness of it. Based on the criticality of the process, inspectors can choose a 100% sample size. Auditors given the limited time frame within which they need to meet their audit objective have to choose a smaller but representative sample that will deliver the confidence that the process is working well.

Auditors cannot within this small timeframe fully appreciate the culture of the organization, all the risks and all the facts of the process. As such based on the small sample size it would be subjective to assume what caused an issue, when identified. We already know, from ISO 9001 training and the standard, that the audit must be objective. As auditor thus we remain objective by no giving recommendations we well as maintain the no conflict of interest, since when we give recommendation we are stepping into the shoes of a consultant.

Further by giving recommendations we undermine management’s authority and we slowly kill the system. ISO 9001 training teaches how non-conformities must be acted upon and the root cause identified and addressed. By giving recommendations, we kill this system, as organizations choose to implement the recommendation as a corrective action. If this recommendation, then turns out to be wrong who will bear the cost of this advice? As auditors let us save our opinions and recommendations until the audit is completed. Once we take off our auditor that we are now free to advise as needed without there being any conflict of interest. Of course, now as consultants we cannot audit the system!