Sampling

There is much to write about sampling and they fall into two categories; site sampling, record sampling.  The first is mathematical and defined by the certification body as required by JAS-ANZ.  It can be quite a complex formula concerning site sampling, but if all sites are similar in complexity and operations, then the rule of thumb is head office plus the square root of the number of remaining sites.

Now with sampling of records, it is less defined and primarily left to the auditor to determine risk and subsequent need for objective evidence to be demonstrated.  Just remember, all auditors are charged with the responsibility of finding conformance and doing so based on a level of confidence that is experienced when reviewing any particular aspect or clause.  The more compliant, objective evidence found by or presented to an auditor that quickly gives a confidence of conformance will mean less records will be needed for review.  But on the flip side, any, and I mean any discrepancy to process, procedure, intent as demonstrated by an incorrect record or even worse, the lack of a record, will have your friendly auditor wanting more records in order to make a determination.

Remember, all auditing is based on sampling and all sampling can either give good or bad representation of the system being audited.  Once a lack of conformance is found it cannot, will not be ignored.  The extra digging or increased sampling will help the auditor either mitigate the finding or escalate it.  Simple.

previous blogs;
http://johnmasonstuff.blogspot.com/
http://john-mason-stuff.blogspot.com/