EXPLORING VARIABILITY AMONG QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AUDITORS WHEN RATING THE SEVERITY OF AUDIT FINDINGS AT A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Rowena Chrystal Simons, Andre Bester, Mellet Moll

Abstract


A reliable quality assurance (QA) function in the nuclear environment is underpinned by the effective identification of risk, and by effective decision-making processes in relation to the risk identified. The need for competent auditors who are able to remain objective and independent at all times forms a critical component of this process. This exploratory study sought to determine reasons for the noted inconsistency among auditors when rating the severity of audit findings, and to provide recommendations to reduce this variability. The Delphi technique, a structured process to gather information from a panel of experts, was adopted to enable multiple iterations of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis, in an attempt to mimic the elements of a sequential exploratory strategy related to a mixed method methodology. 


Keywords


Audit findings; nuclear; risk; bias; mixed method; auditor; validity; rating, objectivity

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7166/28-1-1512

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2017 Rowena Chrystal Simons, Andre Bester, Mellet Moll


ISSN 2224-7890 (on-line) ; ISSN 1012-277X (print)


Powered by OJS and hosted by Stellenbosch University Library and Information Service since 2011.


Disclaimer:

This journal is hosted by the SU LIS on request of the journal owner/editor. The SU LIS takes no responsibility for the content published within this journal, and disclaim all liability arising out of the use of or inability to use the information contained herein. We assume no responsibility, and shall not be liable for any breaches of agreement with other publishers/hosts.

SUNJournals Help