{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

Internal Audit Semantics

Unscheduled, random, surprise... NSA-like?

Ryan E. Day
Fri, 11/15/2013 - 16:22
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
Body

‘We call them unscheduled (vs. surprise) audits, in that they are not part of the originally planned, annual first-party audit plan.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“We sometimes need to have unscheduled audits, but they are normally not intended as surprise audits. The auditor may agree with the auditee on an unscheduled audit if the circumstances so warrant. It is to be viewed as a contingency plan when the audit findings necessitate it. We even have that in third-party audits, and they are normally called ‘special audits.’”

“There are formal and informal audits... I prefer the word ‘random’ rather than ‘surprise’ and as a courtesy try to minimize disruption and schedules.”

I came across these statements in an ongoing discussion thread in a LinkedIn group titled “Can We Have Surprise Audits in Addition to the Planned Internal Audits?” A fascinating discussion on several levels, not the least of which was a lack of consensus on the definitions used to describe internal audit types. Judging by the experience, position, and general demeanor of the participants, I figure them to be an intelligent crowd. So how do five professionals come up with five different terms to denote the same activity?

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us