An internal auditor of a manufacturer of polystyrene packaging products for the electronics industry raised a nonconformity against section 10.3 of ISO 9001 in Report IA202. The nonconformity (NC 3) stated:
"The reject rate of the finished product of 9.7% needs improvement as it doesn't meet the stated objective of top management of 5%."
As the third-party auditor reviewing the internal audit process, you come across the nonconformity. For corrective action, the Quality Manager conducted an investigation into the reject rates. He reported that the collection baskets for products ejecting from the moulding machines were not large enough. About 6% of products fell onto the wet and dirty factory floor. Management stated that replacing the baskets was too costly and ordered the Maintenance Manager to ensure that the floor was kept clean and dry to prevent rejects. The auditor later checked the factory floor, which was wet and dirty in places.
From the following nonconformities, select three that the auditor could raise to ISO 9001.
Will the auditee be subject to an audit follow-up if a minor nonconformity has been reported by the audit team leader in the audit conclusions?
Scenario 7: POLKA is a car manufacturing company based in Stockholm, Sweden. The company has around 14,000 employees working in different sectors which help with the design, painting, assembling, and test drives of the final product. The company is widely known for its qualitative products and affordable prices. In order to retain their reputation, POLKA implemented a quality management system (QMS) based on ISO 9001.
Before applying for certification, the company decided to conduct an internal audit to check whether there are any nonconformities in their QMS and if the requirements of ISO 9001 are being fulfilled. The top management appointed Sean, the internal auditor, as the team leader of the internal audit team. Sean required from the top management to have unrestricted access to the employees and executives of POLKA and to the documented information. Furthermore, Sean required to establish a team with a large number of auditors, considering the size and the complexity of the organization. The top management of POLKA agreed with Sean's requirements.
The top management, in cooperation with Sean, assigned 10 more employees to the audit team. Following that. Sean planned the audit activities and assigned the roles and responsibilities to each auditor. They began by interviewing employees of different manufacturing departments to check whether they are aware of the process of the QMS implementation. While conducting these activities, one of the auditors asked Sean for permission to audit the department in which he worked on a daily basis, as he was very familiar with the processes of the department.
Along the way, the teams findings showed that the staff were trained, documented information was updated, and the QMS fulfilled the requirements of ISO 9001. The internal audit took three weeks to complete, and on the last week the audit team held a final meeting
The team shared their results and together drafted the audit report This report was submitted to the top management of the company. The report was maintained as documented information, and was available to the relevant interested parties.
Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:
Ten employees of POLKA were part of the audit team that conducted the internal audit. Is this acceptable?
Which one of the following options is the definition of the context of an organisation?