FAQ: Why don't traditional audits work?
Control is an illusion.
Stephen R. Covey
Traditional auditing methods don't work because, no matter how many times they're performed, little change is seen as a result. In other words, there's little personal or organizational learning.
– And why?
– Because they don't fulfill the purpose for which they were designed. That is, ensuring compliance with the methodological steps, implementation guidelines, and understanding of the philosophy.
The problem with audits is that most They are more punitive than educational. Therefore, they do more harm than good.
TPM and 5S are two complementary management systems that, like everything in life, require monitoring to ensure their success. They both have in common the In-Stage Audit.
Let's be honest
If an ISO audit comes, whether it is Quality, Environment or integrated, everyone knows that it is about staying silent, responding as little as possible and as they say in the movies: "“Everything you say will be used against you.”.
The ultimate goal of any audit is the absence, or failing that, the minimum number of nonconformities received. Therefore, the important thing is not to show every problem in the workplace, but rather to learn how to "trick" the auditor into believing that everything is fine and thus achieve a successful "passage" as best as possible.
And before my auditor friends get angry, let me clarify: It's not that ISO promotes this type of lies. On the contrary. The spirit of the standard is different and is aligned with what a more demanding system like TPM seeks. What I'm doing is simply describing a common practice I've observed over the past 25 years in all types of companies and countries. Objective Evidence...
With that negative experience under our belts, it's difficult for TPM and 5S audits to emerge unscathed. However, that's our goal.
Audits should be viewed as a potentially very effective means of learning, not as a system where everyone is a criminal until proven otherwise.
Origin of the Problem
The education system typically administers blind exams. This means that one day the teacher or professor comes and administers an assessment. Often, you're given advance notice, and other times, it's a surprise test.
In both school and university, exams consist of random questions on topics chosen more or less at random.
You may get an excellent or a failing grade, and in neither case does it represent the truth of your knowledge. You may have gotten the question you knew the answer to, and you left with a congratulations. Or you may have gotten the question you hadn't understood or reviewed, and you leave with a bad grade. In both cases, neither represents the reality of your knowledge, because the system is incapable of demonstrating real knowledge. The only one who truly knows how much they know is the student themselves.
To avoid this situation where auditees don't know what they'll encounter during the "exam," TPM has developed a very sound practice of providing advance notice of the audit content so that nothing asked comes as a surprise.
Transformative Audit is Self-Audit
TPM auditing aims to avoid these errors by ensuring that operators know in advance the questions that will be asked. This minimizes the examiner's discretion and makes it easier for the group to know in advance. what is important.
By involving the auditees in the construction of the audit, creating it, correcting it, or both, the audit ceases to be an element of surprise and becomes an experience enhancer. It's an effective method for checking learning on the most important topics.
Because the most critical aspects are already expressed in the form's questions, the audit, rather than being a surprise, is a way to make transparent what truly matters.
Doing it this way also avoids the need to "lie" to make the auditor believe that everything is fine and to ignore the non-conformity.
The TPM method of self-audits requires a dialogue with oneself. There's no need to lie because it's self-assessment. No one will be in control. Lying would be like lying to yourself. Like cheating at solitaire…
A self-audit is even more demanding than an audit conducted by an external auditor. Because people confront themselves, and there's nothing tougher than self-assessment.
This is why audits in TPM are designed from a self-audit perspective. The main goal is to serve as an educational space, a space for affirming knowledge, confirming directions, and, of course, for checking understanding and resolving doubts.
Management audit
– And how is management auditing understood in this context?
– Yes, it's true that in addition to the self-audits of Small Autonomous Groups, audits of managers and management are also conducted. That's why it's important to understand the differences. The form is actually the same; however, the most demanding is the self-audit, as it's the hardest to pass. The other two serve educational purposes and consolidate the management system.
From the auditee's perspective, it is an opportunity to deepen their knowledge and clarify any doubts.
It is a scheduled opportunity to ask questions that will improve implementation.
From the auditors' perspective, it is a way for them to demonstrate support for the management system, fulfill their role as trainers, and reinforce action priorities.
Therefore, while these audits are also part of the TPM system, they are conducted when the group requests them because it believes it is ready to successfully pass them.
Conceived this way, the first step will be the self-audit, then the audit of the managers, and finally the audit of the management, or, as the Japanese call it, the Audit of the President.
The most important thing is that, if they are carried out this way, they cease to be a moment of tension or a waste of time, and become a space for shared learning.
