Internal Audit Still Less Maximum

According to M. Harisun Ulum, ISO Consultant, ISO 9001:2008 is based on some internal auditing purposes. First, meet the arrangements that have been planned in advance. Secondly, to meet the requirements of international standards, namely ISO 9001:2008. Also the quality management system requirements that have formed organizations and to learn about systems that have been effective or not yet formed.
However, it is recognized Harisun, the constraints faced by the company conduct an internal audit was limited to mandatory. In other words, as if only to simply meet the requirements of ISO alone. "And with obtaining ISO, management in the company hopes to get the problem tambah.Dan value, added value is often not achieved because of the constraints facing the internal auditing purposes," said Harisun the Quality Club.
Harisun later revealed that several factors are an obstacle is less the maximum internal audit of Human Resources (HR) or the auditors and the methods employed in conducting internal audits. "We have to look at auditor competence. During this time, met the human resources entrusted to the auditor is still insufficient understanding of ISO 9001. When conducting internal audits, they do not know the method. Well, that often occurs at the time of audit, audit their only origin only. Do not know where the beginning and the end is like, "he said, come clean.
And usually, he added, they conduct an audit only on the basis limited to documents only, not Based on the needs of management or corporate needs. Though the company to implement ISO 9001 to get added value. In addition to the competence of auditors, the most important is the method of auditing. Sometimes they use a method of auditing is not from front to back or from back to front. They had been partial, center, from the middle, to the previous, back to back. "If you want consistent, the best is from front to back. Or the opposite, from back to front. If we take a sample like that, will come to light deficiencies system where we are. "
Then the internal audit should be how to keep up? He again explained, an auditor must understand the types of processes in the company and what the company wants. So, if an audit should not only based on the procedure alone, the findings obtained do not just limited to the fulfillment of the document alone, but to be seen what the company desires. Of internal audits carried out will be known that the company's goals, how to achieve it, seen from the process if the procedure is what has not been sufficient, and others.
He also saw, less the maximum internal auditor's audit work was limited due to a side job (side job). And they also felt additional work was not compensated. But if the company build a culture of improvement, it can be minimized.
Therefore, Harisun take a solution, to overcome the internal audit ketidakoptimalan there should be a paradigm shift. Most importantly there must be equality paradigm. During an internal audit is seen as a frightening specter. Paradigm is that an auditing firm to look for opportunities for improvement, improvement. The consequence is that many of the findings section or department that does not mean bad performance. A department or section to say if its findings, although a little ugly but not acted upon. So, the mindset must be changed.
"This paradigm must be agreed upon by management, auditors, and auditi. If it is done, auditi will not cover the deficiencies in parts. It will even bring up that followed its findings that, "he said.
So, to toward a professional internal audit, internal audit Harisun also suggested having a separate section, an independent team, so that maximal performance. The reason for this is often encountered, there are auditors of the supervisory level, and then auditing the other parts that auditi his manager. Of course, there are psychological burden faced. "But, if team i has an independent internal audit, will lose the psychological burden," he said.
For midsize companies down, she suggests better auditors have the authority. If the auditor does not have the authority, then the goals for improvement will be lost. In essence, the auditors have the authority. Between auditors and auditi have the same level. (Wan)