 |
Internal audits and pastures new?
By Allan J. Sayle, President Allan Sayle
Associates
“Thus sang the uncouth swain to the oaks and
rills,
While the still morn went out with sandals gray;
He touched the tender stops of various quills,
With eager thought warbling his Doric lay.
And now the sun had stretched out all the hills
And now was dropped into the western bay;
At last he rose, and twitched his mantle blue:
Tomorrow to fresh woods and pastures new.”
Lycidas, 186 -193.
John Milton.
Download
Article: Adobe Acrobat pdf (220kb)
Importance
A matter raised almost in passing by Jim Wade (of the Business
Improvement Network, based in the UK) in a post on the Saferpak
Discussion Forum is significant to quality professionals, business
and the entire ISO 9000 standards, training and certification industry.
Not because of the actual message he posted, but because of its ramifications.
It would seem to me we are probably witnessing the first signs of what
Joseph Schumpeter would describe as a “perennial gale of creative
destruction.” Something new is happening and it could well
sweep away many features of present day quality programs and the services
offered to organizations. The underlying concepts are not “new”
in that certain features were described some time ago. What is “new”
is that it seems some companies are acting on them and, I believe, they
are the vanguard for thousands of others that could follow.
No crystal ball
In this article, the views expressed are based on my personal
understanding of the information at hand, primarily from Mr. Wade, on
my stances stated and written over a period of many years and my consequent
analysis of the situation as it appears to me. This article does not pretend
to present the outcome of gazing into a crystal ball and some of the possibilities
described may never materialize or, if they do, they may become manifest
in slightly different form. However, as it is a fundamental principle
of effective business management that one tries to foresee events and
prepare for them - that being the nature of taking “preventive action”
- this article is presented accordingly.
Naturally, one expects there will be considerable discussion and perhaps
fierce debate over the article’s views. Some people may regard the
sentiments expressed as “heretical”, likely, as being controversial.
Without fulsome debate, neither consensus nor professional progress is
possible.
Valued participation and facilitation
Being a person who believes in free speech and the importance
of full, uncensored airing of controversial matters, I am using the internet
to post this article in preference to submitting it to a traditional “professional
quality body”, hoping the latter might deign to publish it in the
fullness of time, unedited, unexpurgated and if it does not seem to threaten
an establishment or its view or mantra, or an assault on someone’s
personal opinion, prejudices or preferences. Moreover, because I believe
the eventual changes I attempt to describe herein as possible will affect
so many firms – globally – only the internet can provide the
global reach in a timely manner such that businesses (and individuals)
can decide sooner than otherwise on their individual courses of action.
Only the internet can provide vibrant forums in which thousands of quality
professionals and others who may be affected can quickly air their views,
unhindered, unedited – in the raw, so to speak – as genuine
stakeholders - and get a feel of the international sentiments that emerge.
They will be able to make their voice heard and through their postings
know their views are seen, considered, discussed and valued.
Put another way, all “letters to the editor”, not
an edited selection of palatable platitudes, will appear. (For those reasons,
I am increasingly of the view that internet discussion forums will become
the principle homes for future professional societies having international
membership and that present day, traditional ones residing in bricks and
mortar monuments will fade in importance and relevance. They are ponderously
slow in facilitating communications and solutions responsive to management’s
desires and thinking in a timescale that maintains the credibility of
the quality profession in the eyes of management.)
So, it is necessary that I express my appreciation to Simon Timperley
of the Saferpak
Forum for first posting this article and making available his Forum
for so many international citizens to participate in what I regard as
an important issue that will affect them. As with similar sites, the Saferpak
Forum by its existence, technology and nature is one that practices Voltaire’s
maxim: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the
death your right to say it,” (within, of course, the limits
of courtesy and proper conduct.) It is not a Forum in which one has to
go to a Council of the self-important to have one’s right of reply
validated. Through the internet is every practitioner valued for his or
her contribution.
Background sequence of events to this article
The beginning stems from Mr.
Wade’s post on the Saferpak Forum. The sequence of postings
leading up to the writing of this article is shown in Appendix 1.
A discussion of the information available
Having now considered carefully those posts on the Saferpak
Forum, the two main questions that arise are:
1. Does the idea of process review comply with ISO 9001:2000?
2. Might process review as a surrogate for internal audits accord with
my publicly expressed views?
Beyond answering those questions, one then ponders the possible ramifications
of internal auditing no longer featuring as a requirement of ISO 9001:2000.
1.
Does the idea of process review comply with ISO 9001:2000?
top of page |
 |
