A certification body (CAB) has developed a method to influence the number x of the sample size:
Before determination of the sample size x, some of the organisation’s sites are merged to “one site”. The numbers of employees of these sites are added and then, according to IAF MD 5, the audit time is determined as for one site. (The merging of sites is always justified by the CAB, for example, with few employees in some sites, or simple activities, etc.).
Example:
QMS; initial certification
In addition to the central function, a company has x=26 other sites, each with 5 employees.
According to y= √x, 6 sites would have to be audited (MD 1, 6.1.3.3). According to IAF MD 5 Annex A, 6 sites with 1.5 audit days each and the central function would have to be audited for QMS, i.e. 9 days and the audit time for the central function.
If, however, three sites (one site plus two remotely audited sites) are merged to one site before the calculation and x results in x=24 and the sample y= √x results in 5 sites as sample size. One site has now 15 employees, then according to IAF MD 5 the maximum audit time is (4 small sites with 5 employees (1.5 audit days) and one “site” with 15 employees (2.5 audit days): 6 + 2.5 days = 8.5 days plus the audit time for the central function. If only small sites were in the sample, the audit time would be reduced to 7.5 days and the audit time for the central function.
Is this type of merging or clustering of sites prior to sampling, regardless of the selection of sites for sampling, permitted?
Question: Can the audit time for a multi-site organisation be calculated as if it was a single site?
September 2021
The intent of IAF MD1 is clear and it is not to be used in the way the CB indicated in the Question.
Justifications can be made to clarify and explain the considerations made to take any decision taken to redistribute the efforts (i.e. MDs) among the sampled sites.
It is not allowed by IAF MD1 to merge or cluster sites to reach a benefit in terms of reduction of MDs at the starting point.
As said above, this can be instead justified after the calculation of the efforts has been completed but still the output of the calculation is unbalanced and doesn’t make sense in relation to the effective and efficient audit time to be dedicated in the specific context.
So the answer to the Question posed is NO.