If you’ve ever wanted to see the full smug arrogance of certification body auditors on open display, look no further than that real-life experiment in mob mentality, the Elsmar Cove’s moderator gang. Meet Randall Daily of BSI, who (full disclosure) once falsely complained about how Oxebridge had denied him a job as an ISO 14001 auditor, only to later confirm it never actually happened because Oxebridge doesn’t do ISO 14001 audits. Daily later admitted this, but never posted a retraction, of course, because that whole “truth” thing is a flexible concept for some people.
A few readers keep an eye on those godawful people at Elsmar as a way of monitoring it for anything that could be used in court (and thank you for that), and the other day I received a note regarding one of the most face-palmable comments I’ve ever seen in my entire quality management career. Daily is claiming that internal audits under ISO 9001 are not intended to initiate corrective action — specifically “to find what needs fixing” — and he’s claimed he’s already written nonconformities (presumably against BSI clients) when people think otherwise.
Daily apparently lives in a reality where gravity goes upwards and water is actually a vegetable. In response to a poster’s claim that “Internal audits are to find what needs fixing,” Daily chimed in, even using boldface text to highlight the exact clauses that say audits are supposed to find “what needs fixing,” even as he claims the text says the opposite. It’s a stunning display of cognitive dissonance or, if you prefer the laymen’s term, utter idiocy.
[Quote: “Internal audits are to find what needs fixing.”]
No they are absolutely not! I have issued NC’s for that exact reasoning written into audit programs and identified during audits I’ve done across half a dozen different standards.
9.2.1 The organization shall conduct internal audits at planned intervals to provide information on whether the quality management system:
a) conforms to:
1) the organization’s own requirements for its quality management system;
2) the requirements of this International Standard;
b) is effectively implemented and maintained.
Nowhere is it stated that internal audits are to find what needs fixing!!! That statement in and of itself eliminates objectivity and impartiality from the process (Another NC I’d write)
One reader challenged Daily, saying:
I would also like to point out that by the standard explicitly stating that internal audits are to be used to determine whether the QMS conforms, it is implicitly stating that internal audits are to be used to determine whether the QMS doesn’t conform. That’s actually the other side of ‘whether’ (whether, or not).
Unburdened by having an ounce of logic rattling around his brainpan, Daily doubled-down, throwing his resume out there as some sort of defense, the way a serial killer might use body count to boast about the efficacy of his chainsaw:
Hey whatever but other than having created and having had certified QMS Lead and other auditor training courses, teaching about 200 or so certified lead auditor courses and having done 3rd party certification audits for about 17 years now I may have been wrong all this time.
Yes, Mr. Daily… you have been wrong for the past 17 years. Stunningly, blindingly and shockingly wrong.
This is possible, of course, because CB auditors are some of the worst-qualified professionals in any industry, and the nature of the auditor certification scheme ensures that good auditors are quickly purged from the ranks, leaving the bottom of the barrel in gainful employment they wouldn’t get in any other industry. It’s not at all clear what Daily means when he says he “certified” training courses, except one of his multiple LinkedIn profiles does show he worked for something called “BSI Learning” which — if I’m interpreting this right — means Daily “certified” training courses later provided by BSI, his employer. That’s not exactly a good credential, since had he not certified the training courses of his employer BSI, he wouldn’t have worked for BSI very long. I admit I have no idea what he’s talking about, so I could be entirely wrong.
What we do know is that a BSI auditor has publicly posted a position that is at complete odds with the ISO 9001 standard, and then admitted openly that he has written nonconformities based on that position. If this is a true reflection of what happened — and we only have Daily’s word to go by — then it means that BSI is issuing entirely bogus nonconformities and potentially causing significant harm to their clients’ quality systems.
There’s another alternative: Daily could be a terrible writer — and his public postings shows he generally is, as he likes to type in an irritating southern twang (I said type, not speak) — and he might be expressing himself improperly. That would be a generous excuse, though, since others clearly challenged him on this point and he doubled-down. It appears that Daily really believes internal audits are not supposed to find corrective actions, and he’s written official BSI nonconformities against clients for having done so. I suspect he actually hasn’t, and is just saying so to bolster his bullshit argument, since even BSI wouldn’t be that stupid. Would they?
If Daily really has written nonconformities based on this logic, then they should be overturned, and Daily subjected to intense re-training, if not outright disciplinary action. Imposing a view that essentially cripples clients’ internal audit programs, dooming them to officially-sanctioned ineffectiveness, is an intolerable affront on the entire ISO certification scheme.
Oh, and he’s a BSI Client Manager, too. Sigh. Please, someone take away Randall Daily’s pencils and other sharp objects before he hurts himself or others.
About Christopher Paris
Christopher Paris is the founder and VP Operations of Oxebridge. He has over 30 years' experience implementing ISO 9001 and AS9100 systems, and is a vocal advocate for the development and use of standards from the point of view of actual users. He is the author of Surviving ISO 9001 and Surviving AS9100. He reviews wines for the irreverent wine blog, Winepisser.