ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Dumps With Exact Questions and Answers

The appropriate response in this situation would be:

C. I will raise it as a minor nonconformity; you have the option to appeal to our Certification Body.

This response acknowledges the restaurant manager’s point that the shortage of some hamburgers may not constitute a management system failure. However, the fact remains that the menu was not updated to reflect the current availability of products, which led to customer dissatisfaction. This is a deviation from the ISO 9001 standard, which requires that the organization ensures the availability of resources needed to provide products and services as promised1. Raising it as a minor nonconformity allows the organization to address the issue within a specified timeframe and provides an opportunity for appeal if the organization disagrees with the auditor’s decision2.

According to clause 4.1 of ISO 9001:2015, the organization should determine external and internal issues that are relevant to its purpose and its strategic direction and that affect its ability to achieve the intended results of its quality management system. The organization should monitor and review these issues and update them as necessary. Although the standard does not explicitly require documented information of these issues, it does require documented information as evidence of the implementation of the actions taken to address risks and opportunities, as per clause 6.1. The organization should also retain documented information as evidence of the results of the monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation of its QMS, as per clause 9.1. Therefore, the auditor should not accept the legal compliance expert answering the question, as he is not the person responsible for the process and may not have the necessary competence or knowledge of the QMS. The auditor should also look for evidence that the actions resulting from the risk assessment had been taken, as this is a requirement of the standard and a way to verify the effectiveness of the QMS. The other options are not appropriate courses of action for the auditor, because they do not address the audit objective or criteria, or they may compromise the audit integrity or impartiality. For example, option B may not be feasible or reliable, as the Technical Manager may not be available or able to provide the necessary evidence by phone. Option C may cause unnecessary delay and inconvenience for the audit process and the auditee. Option E may not solve the problem, as the guide is not the main source of evidence or information for the audit. Option F may be disrespectful or unprofessional, as the consultant may have a legitimate role or interest in the audit. References: ISO 9001:2015, ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on Context of the Organization, ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on Audit Evidence