If an auditor assumes there is a nonconformity, what should be the appropriate action?

The appropriate action for an auditor who assumes there is a nonconformity is to investigate further whether a real requirement exists and if it is not complied with. This approach reflects the fundamental principle of auditing, which emphasizes the importance of objectivity and fact-based evaluation. Auditors must verify the presence or absence of evidence before concluding that a nonconformity is present.

By conducting further investigation, the auditor ensures that any findings are substantiated by actual data and observations, rather than solely based on assumptions. This thoroughness is essential to uphold the integrity of the audit process and to provide accurate feedback to the organization being audited. It also aligns with ISO 9001 standards that advocate for evidence-based decision-making and continual improvement.

The other responses do not promote adequate verification processes. Merely dropping the assumption ignores potential issues that could affect the quality management system. Writing an auditor's report immediately without investigation could lead to misleading conclusions. Suggesting immediate corrective action without confirmation of a nonconformity could result in unnecessary resource allocation and may divert attention from more pressing issues that need to be addressed.