PECB Exam ISO-22301-Lead-Implementer Topic 2 Question 4 Discussion

Actual exam question for PECB's ISO-22301-Lead-Implementer exam

Question #: 4
Topic #: 2

[All ISO-22301-Lead-Implementer Questions]

Scenario:

Headquartered in Sri Lanka, Operons Inc. is a freight forwarding company that adopted a BCMS aligned with ISO 22301. Prior to the certification audit, Operons Inc. measured gaps between their BCMS and the standard's requirements to ensure compliance. The certification body was contracted to conduct the audit, and a biased auditor from a previous ISO 9001 audit was replaced upon request. During the audit, two minor nonconformities were identified, and the audit team issued a recommendation for certification.

In Scenario 8, the certification body accepts Operons Inc.'s rejection of the auditor and appoints another one. Is this acceptable?

ANo, the auditor can be rejected only if a conflict of interest situation is present.

BYes, previously displayed unprofessional conduct is a valid reason to replace an auditor.

CYes, the auditor has previously audited the company against ISO 9001, which is a valid reason for replacing the auditor.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

by Garry at Jan 12, 2025, 09:06 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ISO-22301-Lead-Implementer Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Junita

3 days ago

I'm going with B. Unprofessional conduct is a big no-no, and the company has every right to request a replacement. It's like the old saying goes: 'Once a bad auditor, always a bad auditor.'

upvoted 0 times

...

Novella

9 days ago

C seems like the obvious choice here. If the auditor has already audited the company against ISO 9001, that's definitely a valid reason to replace them. Gotta keep things fresh, am I right?

upvoted 0 times

...

Rosendo

11 days ago

Hmm, I think the correct answer is B. The auditor's previous unprofessional conduct is a valid reason to replace them, even if there's no direct conflict of interest. Can't have biased auditors, you know?

upvoted 0 times

...