Quality Audits

[lalapanzi]

Those of you that operate to Jar-ops will probably relate to this more than the ano operators.

Question: Under jar-ops as a department head I can no longer audit my own records? http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/otn/confused/1zhelp.gif

Apparantly quality systems get in the way! http://www.mpz.co.uk/cwm/otn/confused/shrug03.gif
If I have undetstood the concept, and I admit I may have been mislead http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/otn/evil/Dr_Evil.gif if there is an error made that affects your work then you raise a non-formity report against that department. This is all duly recorded in your reference you maintain (for auditing). They are then supposedly going to investigate this problem, find out why it happened, and what measures will be put in place to prevent it happening again. Thats all well and good, but after waiting weeks for that response, when nothing is forthcoming do I raise any non-conformity on the non-conformity?
My preference is for how I have always done it - gone straight to the source of the problem, discussed what went wrong and sort it. http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/otn/angry/argue.gif
Another part I have a problem with, is if an outside person is going audit my department how much time I am going to have to spend explaining things either to them or going over pages of findings, most of which only highlight the fact that that person doesn't know what to look for when undertaking the audit. This is especially true when it comes to loadsheets. http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/otn/angry/tdo3.gif
Your experiences of how this works invited.


------------------
say it with icons!

[fcit]

Hi,

well, you really think that you are so unbiased that you can admit to weird habits within your operation? Probably not, if you are honest, which is why the audit system is in place.

The idea is to have some knowlegeable INDEPENDANT individual, who is monitoring what you do and does write up anything that appears not to conform to the way you laid it down (in writing).

Auditing is supposed to get department heads to think about the workprocess withing their operation (that's the ideal case).
They - the department heads - start observing, track frequent errors and omissions and put measures in place that are there to prevent these shortfalls. This is also commonly referred as your manuals (how do I, as a department head, suppose MY operation to run).

The bottom line will be, that the clearlier your procedures are setup and your folks obey to the rules, the better you'll be performing in an external audit.

The external auditor (should) read the manuals and observe the operation according to the procedures laid down therein. He should NOT judge you upon procedures he thinks are right (i.e. if the auditor is from some other airline, he shouldn't base the non-conformities on the operation there, but on your manuals). Of course, he can give you advise if he thinks something's majorly wrong.

In case a non-conformity is dicovered, you as a department head should go ahead and look at your ops, why your people weren't working according to the procedure. Most of the time the prime reason is, that some unknowlegeable person wrote down a procedure that was just sounding good on paper, but is impossible to be followed by the ones that have to obey it. So, in case you come across a non-conformtity for a non-conformity, I would strongly suggest to take a close look at the real world and find out where the discrepancies are.

Of course, this is all theory and I certainly agree that things go slightly different in the 'real world'. However, the bottom line is that quality systems, in general are a perfect tool to oversee the performance of your operation (even if you are just performing internal audits).

Cheers
fcit

[jumpseater]

If you want someone to come and read your watch for you and tell you the time, I'll do it, reasonable rates too!
:)

[lalapanzi]

fcit - thanks for your impute, some interesting points of view. I can understand where you are coming from, but this sounds like getting bogged down with paperwork. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif

Jumpseater - needs a new battery, so will have to use your watch, but only if quality approved :)

------------------
say it with icons!

[fcit]

lalapanzi,
yeah that's the negative side of the story. It took a fair bit of time to write the manuals. But once established it can proof quite a usuful tool.

Cheer
fcit

[benjamin]

Lalapanzi

Not wishing to cause to many ripples on here but it seems to me that your quality organisation is a bit screwed up....I agree entirely with the comments raised by FCIT.

It is not the job of a quality audit to correct any non-conformities...that has to be the responsibility of the company/individual.

It is the auditors job to spot things that may have slipped through your own net thereby adding an extra degree of safety....the auditors that we use definitely know which way up a loadsheet goes!

The most important thing to note is that under the principles of JAROPS and ISO 9001 it is not the job of the quality manager to suggest ways and means of correcting non-conformities, he is there solely to manage the quality process. If your area has a problem the emphasis is still fairly and squarely with you and your staff to spot it...preferably before the auditors do!

Hope I am not preaching...but the subject is a bit close to the heart

SPIKE