By Wilson Fernández

In many organisations, top management, department heads, and business leaders sometimes express frustration with the effectiveness of Management System (MS) audits and the role of MS experts. Phrases such as “You are employed to solve problems” or “It’s your job to help us out” can be heard from leaders who fail to fully grasp the complexities and responsibilities that MS auditors and managers face. These comments not only reflect a lack of understanding of the role of MS professionals, but they also point to deeper systemic issues within the organisation, such as unclear role descriptions, lack of resources, and internal politics.

Let’s break down some of these common comments and address the underlying issues:

1. “You are employed to solve problems”

While it’s true that MS auditors and managers play a critical role in identifying issues and gaps within the management system, they are not hired to be the problem-solvers themselves. The role of MS professionals is to implement and maintain an effective MSS, evaluate processes, verify MSS conformance and S&R compliance, verify effective closures of internal & external findings, train and facilitate personnel at all levels in MSS and related topics, and to continually improve processes & systems etc. However, they should not be expected to directly resolve the problems. This mindset often comes from a lack of understanding of the basic principles of credibility, integrity, ethics, fairness, independence, due professional care, confidentiality, evidence-based approach, and risk-based approach.

• The Root Cause: This perspective stems from a lack of awareness that auditors and MS managers are meant to remain independent and objective. By expecting them to “solve problems,” organisations are violating the fundamental principles that allow auditors to assess processes impartially.
• The Real Solution: MS professionals are best used to guide, mentor, and offer expertise to the team. They should help process owners take initiative and ownership of their issues, rather than solving everything for them. It’s about collaboration and not about leading from the front as a “fixer.”

2. “It’s your job to help us out”

While guidance and support are indeed part of the MS expert’s role, the actual responsibility for resolving problems and implementing corrective actions lies with the process owners. It is not the MS expert’s job to take ownership of issues that fall outside their scope of influence.

• The Root Cause: This comment indicates a misunderstanding of the delegation of responsibility. MS professionals can assist with direction and provide expertise, but they cannot be expected to lead efforts that require resources, personnel, or operational changes. Ownership must come from the relevant departments.
• The Real Solution: MS experts should act as facilitators, helping to guide the process owners toward solutions. They can offer insight, identify gaps, and support & facilitate in problem-solving process, but the responsibility for taking action should always lie with the department or process leader or process owner.

3. “We know that we have all these problems, not through your audit findings, but how can you fix it?”

This comment highlights a disconnect between the audit process and the leadership’s expectations. Audits are not a magic solution to fixing problems. They are designed to identify systemic weaknesses and areas of nonconformance and noncompliance. Auditors can’t be expected to jump in and fix everything just because their findings highlight problems. The audit process is meant to be a reflective, data-driven exercise that identifies gaps, but not necessarily the blueprint for resolution.

• The Root Cause: This situation often arises from poor communication about the role of MS auditors and managers. Leaders may misunderstand that audits are not meant to be problem-solving exercises, but rather assessments that highlight areas for correction and corrective actions.
• The Real Solution: MS professionals need to reinforce their role as evaluators and facilitators. They should help management understand that it’s not their responsibility to “fix” everything but to guide and facilitate through problem solving process. The solution requires ownership from leadership and the right resources to address those issues.

4. “We have no resources, we need you to take the lead to fix the problem and lead by example, not just implement and audit systems.”

This statement can be incredibly frustrating for MS professionals. It pushes the expectation that they should go beyond their defined roles and take on responsibilities that belong to other departments, all while being asked to solve problems without the necessary resources.

• The Root Cause: This comment typically arises when organisational priorities are misaligned or when leaders don’t allocate enough resources to meet the needs of the MS system. Leaders may often feel overwhelmed and assume that MS professionals should step in, even though it’s not within their scope of work.
• The Real Solution: MS professionals should clarify that leadership commitment and resource allocation are critical for resolving issues. Without adequate resources, an organisation cannot expect effective change. Ownership of the process must rest with the department heads, and MS professionals should work within the established framework to advise and guide.

5. “You Work for Us…”

This is another common comment heard in many organisations. While it’s true that MS auditors and managers are employed by the organisation, they must maintain their independence to effectively assess processes and ensure compliance. This comment often reflects a misunderstanding of the role MS professionals play in the business.

Root Cause: This comment can arise from a lack of awareness of the importance of impartiality in auditing and management system assessments. MS professionals are not just employees working to fix problems; they are independent evaluators who provide objective insights, identify business risks etc.

Real Solution: MS professionals must be empowered to perform their role without undue influence. They work with the organisation to guide and improve, but they should always maintain an independent stance to ensure the integrity of the audit and management system processes. It’s crucial to communicate that their role isn’t to be a subordinate problem-solver but an impartial advisor.

Underlying Issues Leading to Misunderstandings

These comments and frustrations stem from a variety of deeper organisational issues, including:

• Lack of Understanding of Management System Standards (MSS): There is often a gap in understanding the true role of MS professionals, especially in organisations where the focus has been on operations or financial results rather than process management.
• Insufficient Investment in Resources: In many organisations, MS programs are underfunded, with inadequate resources allocated to achieve the necessary improvements. Leaders may then turn to MS professionals to pick up the slack, expecting them to work miracles without the proper tools.
• Lean Systems Applied Incorrectly: Lean systems are often used to cut costs, but this can sometimes result in reduced capacity to address issues properly. If an organisation is trying to achieve results on minimal resources, MS professionals may feel pressured to “fix” problems instead of guiding leadership to address root causes.
• Internal Politics and Toxic Environments: Often, organisations are rife with internal politics or favouritism, which can distort the decision-making process and create friction between departments. MS professionals should be shielded from these influences, but sometimes leaders fail to understand that independence is vital.
• Lack of Time for Important Issues: Leadership may be overwhelmed with urgent matters, creating a tendency to prioritise short-term results rather than long-term systemic improvements. This lack of time for addressing root causes and strategic planning leads to frustration when problems are not immediately solved.

Moving Forward: Clear Expectations and Stronger Communication

To address these frustrations, organisations need to:

• Educate Leadership: Senior leadership and department heads need to understand the true value of MS auditing and the boundaries within which MS professionals operate. Regular training or communication can help bridge these gaps.
• Clarify Role Definitions: Clear distinctions must be made between the responsibilities of MS professionals and the process owners. This clarity can help avoid confusion, minimise expectations, and ensure that all parties are aware of their roles and the limits of their responsibilities.
• Provide Adequate Resources: For any MS initiative to succeed, it requires proper resourcing. This includes human, financial, and technical support. Without the right resources, expecting results from MS auditors and managers is unrealistic and unfair.
• Foster a Healthy Workplace Culture: A shift towards a more collaborative, transparent, and supportive culture can alleviate the tensions caused by internal politics. Open communication and a focus on the organisation’s shared goals will help MS professionals focus on their core functions.

Conclusion

The comments we hear from top management and leaders reflect a misunderstanding of the true role of MS auditors and managers. These professionals are essential in guiding the organisation toward continuous improvement, but they cannot and should not be expected to solve problems or take ownership of issues that belong to other departments. A stronger focus on clear role definitions, resource allocation, and leadership education will help resolve these frustrations and ensure that MS professionals can effectively carry out their responsibilities while fostering an environment of collaboration and growth.

About the author

Wilson Fernandez is an experienced Management Systems Leader, Auditor, and Quality & Safety Professional with a global career spanning across engineering, manufacturing, automotive, infrastructure, and service industries. With deep expertise in ISO-based and industry-specific standards, he has successfully led initiatives in Quality, Health & Safety, Environmental, and Risk Management systems. Wilson has conducted hundreds of audits worldwide, applying process-oriented approaches and driving continual improvement.

He is passionate about sharing practical insights, highlighting regulatory responsibilities, and simplifying complex systems for real-world application. Through his articles, Wilson aims to raise awareness, build robust systems, and foster a culture of responsibility, safety, and quality across businesses of all sizes.

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