Seven reasons laboratories struggle in a first accreditation assessment

1. An unclear or unrealistic scope

Applying for tests the laboratory cannot properly support leads to avoidable findings. Define a scope that matches your equipment, people and validated methods.

2. Documents that do not match practice

Procedures copied from templates or other laboratories rarely describe how your team really works. Assessors compare documents with what they observe, and differences become findings.

3. Weak method validation or verification

For testing laboratories, evidence that methods are fit for purpose is central. Gaps here, along with weak treatment of measurement uncertainty, are among the most technically demanding areas to put right.

4. Incomplete equipment calibration and traceability

Instruments need to be calibrated with traceability to appropriate references, and the records have to be complete and easy to retrieve. A single missing calibration record can lead to a finding.

5. Thin evidence of staff competence

It is not enough that people are experienced. You need records showing they were trained, assessed and authorised for the work they do.

6. Internal audits and management review done on paper only

When these are rushed just before assessment, it shows. They should be genuine, scheduled activities that lead to real corrective actions.

7. No proper rehearsal

Many laboratories walk into the official assessment without ever being assessed by someone who knows what to look for. A rigorous mock assessment finds the problems while there is still time to fix them quietly.

The common thread

Almost all of these are about evidence and consistency, not about the laboratory being bad at its work. A good laboratory can still fail to show that it is good. Preparation is largely about making competence visible.