By Julius DeSilva

Over the years, I’ve worked with countless organizations—from maritime operations to manufacturing and government agencies. And one trend keeps surfacing: teams that proudly say, “We audit regularly,” when in reality, what they’re doing are inspections with an audit label.

One client once told me, “We have a robust audit schedule. We go out and check everything weekly—equipment, logs, PPE use…” I had to gently point out: “That’s great, but that’s not an audit. That’s an inspection.”

This confusion isn’t just semantic. It has real consequences for your system’s effectiveness, your people’s mindset, and your ability to truly improve.

Audits vs. Inspections: Why the Distinction Matters

An inspection focuses on finding faults—Did this get done? Is this within tolerance? Is this item here or not?

An audit, on the other hand, asks:

• Is the process being followed?
• Is it effective?
• Does it fulfill the intent of the management system?

When organizations blur the line between the two, they often:

• Reduce audits to checklist exercises.
• Focus more on compliance ad conformity than effectiveness.
• Miss the bigger picture of evaluating system performance and improvement.

Impact on the System: Paper Compliance Over Process Excellence

When inspections masquerade as audits, the management system suffers:

• Findings are limited to surface-level issues—you miss the opportunity to assess if your system is achieving its objectives.
• Audit reports become checklist results, not insight generators.
• You risk repeating nonconformities because the root causes are never explored.

The system ends up being something you “pass” rather than something you use to drive performance.

Impact on Personnel: From Engagement to Evasion

Let’s be honest. When your audit team acts like inspectors:

• People get defensive.
• They prepare for audits like they’re preparing for battle—“Let’s make sure nothing’s out of place.”
• Instead of highlighting issues and learning from them, staff hide problems, fearing punishment or blame.

Staff hiding problems becomes a culture. One quality manager told me, “My team shuts down during audits. They say as little as possible. They just want to survive it.” That’s not the spirit of continuous improvement. That’s survival mode.

Impact on Quality Culture: Conformity Over Commitment

When audits are indistinguishable from inspections:

• Quality becomes a box to check, not a value to live.
• Teams focus on pleasing the “auditor”, not owning the process.
• A culture of fear takes root, where people associate audits with getting “caught” rather than getting better.

True quality culture means people raise issues before they’re found, because they know the system is there to help, not punish.

Impact on Corrective Action: Fixing Symptoms, Not Systems

If the audit doesn’t explore why something went wrong, the resulting corrective actions are shallow:

• Fixes address the immediate issue but not the cause.
• Problems resurface, but under a new name or in a different process.
• The organization keeps spinning its wheels, applying band-aids instead of systemic solutions.

I once reviewed a file with the same type of nonconformity recurring three years in a row. Why? Because each audit (read inspection) only pointed out what was wrong, not why it was happening.

So, Are You Auditing—or Inspecting?

It’s time to ask yourself:

• Do your audits assess effectiveness or just checklist conformity?
• Do they result in improvement or just closure of findings?
• Are your people engaged or just compliant?

If your audits feel like inspections, you’re not unlocking the full value of your management system. Reach out to me to learn how QMII can help improve your audit program and drive value for your system.

Final Thoughts

True auditing is about learning, improving, and driving performance. It’s about working with your people—not policing them. And it’s about making your management system a living, breathing part of how you do business—not just something you prepare for once a year.

So next time you schedule an “audit,” pause and ask: Are we really auditing—or just inspecting with a clipboard?

About the author

Julius DeSilva is the CEO of Quality Management International Inc. A former merchant marine officer, he has assisted organizations of varied sizes across a wide spectrum of industries implement process-based management systems conforming to ISO and other standards. He is well versed in the following standards: maritime safety/security, aerospace, environmental, supply chain security, and quality. He teaches, consults, and audits in these disciplines, including process improvement and leadership-related topics. DeSilva received his MBA from the Darden School of Business, University of Virginia. He is an Exemplar Global certified lead auditor to various ISO Standard including ISO 9001 and is an Associate Fellow of the Nautical Institute.

 

This article first appeared on Julius DeSilva’s LinkedIn page and is published here with permission.