PECB ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Exam - Topic 6 Question 36 Discussion

Actual exam question for PECB's ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor exam

Question #: 36
Topic #: 6

Scenario 2:

Bell is a Canadian food manufacturing company that operates globally. Their main products include nuts, dried fruits, and confections. Bell has always prioritized product quality and has maintained a good reputation for many years. However, the company's production error rate increased significantly, leading to more customer complaints.

To increase efficiency and customer satisfaction, Bell implemented a Quality Management System (QMS) based on ISO 9001. The top management established a QMS implementation team comprising five middle managers from various departments, including Leslie, the quality manager.

Leslie was responsible for assigning responsibilities and authorities for QMS-related roles. He also suggested including a top management representative in the QMS team, but top management declined due to other priorities.

The team defined the QMS scope as:

"The scope of the QMS includes all activities related to food processing."

Leslie established a quality policy and presented it to the team for review before top management approval. Top management also proposed a new strategy for handling customer complaints, requiring biweekly customer surveys to monitor customer perceptions.

Which situation presented in scenario 2 is NOT compliant with ISO 9001?

AThe QMS implementation team comprised five middle managers.

BThe QMS implementation team did not include a representative from top management.

CThe responsibilities and authorities for QMS roles were assigned by Leslie, the quality manager.

DThe quality policy was reviewed by the implementation team before top management approval.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

ISO 9001:2015 Clause 5.1.1 (Leadership and Commitment) states that top management must demonstrate leadership and commitment to the QMS by actively participating in QMS implementation, integration, and effectiveness.

In scenario 2, top management refused to be directly involved in the QMS implementation team, which violates Clause 5.1.1 because leadership involvement is essential for the system's success.

Other options do not indicate nonconformance:

Option A (Middle managers in the QMS team) is acceptable.

Option C (Leslie assigning roles) is valid if competence is ensured (Clause 5.3 -- Organizational Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities).

Option D (Team reviewing the policy before approval) aligns with best practices.

ISO 9001:2015, Clause 5.1.1 -- Leadership and Commitment

ISO 9001:2015, Clause 5.3 -- Organizational Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities

by Alex at Jul 10, 2025, 10:33 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ISO-9001-Lead-Auditor Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Geraldine

2 months ago

Reviewing the policy before approval? Sounds like a waste of time.

upvoted 0 times

...

Adria

2 months ago

I agree, not having top management involved is a big oversight.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lanie

3 months ago

Wait, they didn't include top management? That seems off.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shenika

3 months ago

Assigning roles to Leslie seems fine to me, he’s the quality manager!

upvoted 0 times

...

Margarett

3 months ago

The QMS team should have a top management rep, that's a must!

upvoted 0 times

...

Alana

3 months ago

I thought assigning responsibilities was okay as long as it was clear, so I'm not sure about C. It feels like a tricky question!

upvoted 0 times

...

Olive

4 months ago

I practiced a similar question where management representation was emphasized, so I lean towards B being non-compliant.

upvoted 0 times

...

Isaiah

4 months ago

I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like the quality policy review by the team before top management approval could be a problem too. Maybe it's D?

upvoted 0 times

...

Naomi

4 months ago

I remember that top management involvement is crucial for ISO 9001 compliance, so I think option B might be the right answer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Serita

4 months ago

I'm confident the answer is B. The scenario clearly states that top management declined to include a representative on the QMS team, which is not compliant with ISO 9001.

upvoted 0 times

...

Abel

4 months ago

Okay, I think I've got it. The key issue here is the lack of top management representation on the QMS implementation team, which doesn't align with ISO 9001 requirements.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nickie

4 months ago

Hmm, the scenario provides a lot of information. I'll need to carefully review the requirements of ISO 9001 to determine which situation is not compliant.

upvoted 0 times

...

Essie

5 months ago

This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the key details about the QMS implementation before selecting an answer.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sharen

6 months ago

That's a good point, Shonda. ISO 9001 emphasizes top management involvement in assigning roles.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shonda

7 months ago

But option C also seems like a potential issue. Leslie assigning all responsibilities may not align with ISO 9001.

upvoted 0 times

...

My

7 months ago

D seems like the right answer to me. The quality policy should have been approved by top management, not just reviewed by the team.

upvoted 0 times

Leota

5 months ago

D) The quality policy was reviewed by the implementation team before top management approval.

upvoted 0 times

...

Susana

5 months ago

C) The responsibilities and authorities for QMS roles were assigned by Leslie, the quality manager.

upvoted 0 times

...

Chauncey

5 months ago

B) The QMS implementation team did not include a representative from top management.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lemuel

6 months ago

A) The QMS implementation team comprised five middle managers.

upvoted 0 times

...

Louvenia

7 months ago

Ha! This reminds me of the time my company tried to implement a QMS without any input from the big bosses. Didn't go well at all.

upvoted 0 times

Mendy

5 months ago

I agree. It's important to have buy-in from all levels of management for a successful QMS implementation.

upvoted 0 times

...

Robt

6 months ago

Definitely! Without their input, it's hard to get everyone on the same page.

upvoted 0 times

...

Serita

7 months ago

That sounds like a recipe for disaster. Top management should have been involved.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cyndy

7 months ago

I'm not sure about that. I think C might be the issue, as the responsibilities and authorities should have been defined by top management, not just the quality manager.

upvoted 0 times

...