Internal Audit Approach – Should It Be Procedural or Clause-Based?

 I think the Internal Audit should be procedural based not the standard clause based

RephraseRephrase with Ginger (Ctrl+Alt+E)

Can you explain a bit more, I'm not following.

Thanks!

And welcome to the forums!

I think the op might have used some software to check English?

In response to the original question, you can and I think should do both.

So firstly you have the standard requirement - the first step to all audits I do is to check that this is reflected in the FSQMS of the site and that the process contains all the clauses.  The next step is then to physically look go see and find out if what the site say they're doing is reality.  To have a decent audit, to my mind you need both.  The latter is more important in my view but remembering it's only a snapshot, having the right procedure (which people are trained against) is more likely to then have a compliant process which is consistently implemented.

But isn't that always the way with QFS?  In the case of you can do x or y the answer is normally "what about both?"

Who is Ginger?

The nemesis of Mary Ann?

Yeah, our internal audit we cover both.   Agree with GMO.

I too am not following the statement.   

One of the first "requirements" for an internal audit is to establish the scope of the audit.   If one of the purposes of the internal audit is to ensure that you meet the clauses of the standard, not using that standards clauses as part of the scope doesnt make sense to me.   

Im sure its possible to conduct an internal audit without a consulting a standard.  But why re-invent the wheel.   

Also Drax, Why is Ginger?

Who is Ginger?