According to ISO 9001:2015, clause 6.2.1, the organization is required to establish quality objectives at relevant functions, levels, and processes for the quality management system (QMS). The quality objectives must be consistent with the quality policy, measurable, monitored, communicated, and updated as appropriate.
The organization is also required to maintain documented information on the quality objectives, as per clause
7.5.1.
Therefore, in the scenario given, the quality objectives defined by the external consultant are not in alignment with the organization's quality policy, as they are based on those of a competitor, rather than the organization' s own purpose, strategic direction, and customer requirements. This creates a mismatch between the organization's vision and goals, and the quality objectives that are supposed to guide and measure the QMS performance. Moreover, the quality objectives are not maintained as documented information, which makes it difficult to communicate, monitor, and update them, as well as to demonstrate evidence of their implementation and achievement.
Hence, the circumstances in which a nonconformity against clause 6.2 of ISO 9001 could be raised are B and C, as they indicate a failure to comply with the requirements of clause 6.2.1. The other options are either irrelevant or not directly related to clause 6.2, as they do not pertain to the establishment and documentation of quality objectives.
References:
ISO 9001:2015(en), Quality management systems - Requirements, clause 6.2.1 and 7.5.1 ISO 19011:2018(en), Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.4 and 6.7.2 ISO 9001 Lead Auditor Training Course | IRCA Certified | BSI, section "Learning objectives" ISO 9001 Lead Auditor Course Material | 3FOLD Education Centre, module 5 and 6

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
Stage 1 Audit (ISO 9001:2015, Clause 9.2.2) is a documentation review to assess the readiness for a Stage 2 Audit. The auditor must document:
Observations that could lead to nonconformities, ensuring they are addressed before Stage 2.
Areas needing improvement, such as missing documented information or unclear process definitions.
While understanding the auditee's main processes is important, documenting interviews is not a requirement at Stage 1.
Reference:
ISO 9001:2015, Clause 9.2.2 (Internal Audit Reporting)

ISO 9001:2015 requires audit findings, including non-conformities, to be based on objective evidence and to be clearly described , stating exactly what requirement was not met and where .
A non-conformity statement must:
* Reference the specific requirement (procedure or ISO clause), and
* Describe the objective evidence observed , without assumptions, generalisations, or conclusions about causes.
In this scenario:
* The requirement is clearly stated in Procedure P-02 Rev.3 , which requires samples sent to the laboratory to include reference to the raw meat batch number to ensure traceability.
* The objective evidence observed by Auditor 1 is that samples from PL2 did not include the raw meat batch reference , while samples from PL1 did.
Why option C is correct:
C). "Samples of hamburgers sent to the HMB's laboratory for analysis by PL2 did not refer to the raw meat batch number as required by P-02 Rev.3." This statement:
* Accurately reflects what was observed,
* Clearly identifies the affected process (PL2),
* Directly references the unmet requirement (P-02 Rev.3), and
* Is factual, specific, and evidence-based.
Why the other options are not the best description of evidence:
* A is a generalised conclusion and does not describe the specific evidence observed.
* B assumes a lack of awareness, which was not evidenced during the audit.
* D refers to product identification for delivery to the client, which is not what was observed (the issue was laboratory sample identification).
ISO-aligned conclusion:
The correct way to describe audit evidence is to state precisely what was observed against the requirement
, without interpretation or assumption. Therefore, the statement that best describes the identified evidence is Option C .

When conducting a third-party audit to ISO 9001, especially in the context of training and corrective actions taken due to customer complaints, the most appropriate audit trails to follow would be:
A: Ask if customer complaints had ceased since the multi-skilled training finished. This audit trail is relevant because it directly relates to the effectiveness of the corrective action taken. If customer complaints have decreased or ceased, it could indicate that the additional training was effective1.
F: Review records to assess if all planned training has been completed. This trail is important to ensure that the training plan has been fully implemented and to verify that all staff members have received the necessary training. It also helps in assessing the adequacy of the training in terms of content, frequency, and outcomes1.
These two trails, A and F, are closely linked to the issue of customer complaints and the organization's response to them. They provide insight into whether the actions taken were suitable and whether they have led to improvements in staff performance and customer satisfaction1. The other options, while potentially useful, do not directly address the immediate concern of the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken in response to the customer complaints1.

ISO 9001:2015 clause 9.1.1 requires the organisation to determine what needs to be monitored and measured, the methods needed to ensure valid results, when monitoring and measurement shall be performed, and when results shall be analysed and evaluated.
B is correct because recorded sensory testing results provide evidence of monitoring and measurement results.
C is correct because use of the Hedonic Scale shows a defined method for monitoring product quality.
D is correct because clause 9.1.1 requires monitoring and measurement results to be analysed and evaluated.
A relates more to competence under clause 7.2. E, F, G and H may be useful in some contexts, but they are not direct evidence of conformity with clause 9.1.1 in this scenario.