When faced with a situation where a standard rework operation is not approved for a product during an audit, it is crucial to follow proper procedures. Let’s break down the options:

Agree with the Quality Manager and Do Not Identify the Issue (Option A):

This approach would compromise the integrity of the audit process. Auditors should maintain objectivity and adhere to standards.

Ignoring the issue would not align with the purpose of auditing, which is to identify nonconformities and areas for improvement.

Identify the Issue in the Audit with a Note of the Quality Manager’s Comments (Option B):

This is the correct approach. Auditors should document any nonconformities or deviations from standards.

By noting the quality manager’s comments, transparency is maintained, and the issue is appropriately documented.

The audit report can then be used to address corrective actions.

Have the Supplier Document That It Will Not Be Used on the Manufactured Parts (Option C):

While this step is important, it should come after identifying the issue during the audit.

The supplier’s documentation can serve as evidence of corrective action.

Report the Quality Manager to Upper Management (Option D):

Escalating the issue to upper management should be a last resort.

It is essential to follow established procedures within the audit process before considering such actions.

In summary, the best course of action is to identify the issue during the audit, document it, and then work with the supplier to address the nonconformity. Transparency and adherence to standards are critical in maintaining the effectiveness of the audit process1.

References:

1: ASQ: ISO 19011: Guidelines for Auditing Management Systems