One of the key demands from industry was ensuring the assessment process was independent.
Under ISO 17024:2012, this is often referred to as being impartial, neutral or free from conflicts of interest etc.
IPSQA assessors may not assess candidates in the following circumstances:
- Assessing persons (employees or volunteers) from the same legal entity
- Assessing family members (within 2 degrees of separation)
- Assessing persons who they have trained within two years*
- Assessing persons who they have been in an intimate relationship with, within two years
Regardless of the above, where there is any conflict of interest, a documented risk plan must be developed and approved.
Assessors are also bound by the IPSQA Code of Conduct.
* Exceptions may be approved by the Certification Commission on a case-by-case basis, subject to an approved conflict of interest plan as per ISO 17204:2012.
FAQ:
Q1. Can we train our students through one instructor, but have them assessed by another, both from our training entity?
Yes, if for example you are a training company and have a cohort of external students, you could have them trained by one instructor, and then assessed by another (who is an IPSQA Assessor and providing they have not been involved in other training to the candidates within two years and also do not breach the other requirements for independent assessment).
Q2. Can we assess and certify our own employees under ISO/IEC 17024:2012?
Yes, a certification body may assess its own personnel, but this is treated as a significant threat to impartiality and must be explicitly identified, documented, and controlled in line with ISO/IEC 17024:2012 impartiality requirements (e.g. clauses on impartiality, conflict of interest, and management of threats such as self‑interest and familiarity).
Q3. Is it enough that the assessor has not trained the candidate in the last two years?
No. The “no trainer–examiner for two years unless otherwise justified” control addresses only one risk (the same person training and examining) and, by itself, does not remove other impartiality threats that exist when certifying in‑house personnel, such as line‑management relationships or performance incentives.
Q4. What additional controls do we need if we assess our own staff?
You must carry out and record a risk analysis for in‑house certification activities, then apply safeguards such as: using examiners who are independent of the candidate’s line management, separating the assessment from the certification decision, and have a policy in place to demonstrate that self‑interest and familiarity risks are effectively managed.
Q5. When should we consider using an external certification body instead?
Where the impartiality risks from certifying your own personnel cannot be effectively mitigated—such as in small organisations with limited separation of roles, or where commercial/contractual pressures are high—using an external asseessor is generally the preferred way to demonstrate credible impartiality to clients and IPSQA.
Q6. How should we document our approach for accreditation purposes?
You should maintain: (1) an impartiality risk register and/or policy that explicitly covers in‑house assessments for staff (employees, contractors or volunteers); (2) procedures describing controls for staff certification; and (3) records for each in‑house case showing how risks were evaluated and what safeguards (e.g. independent examiners, separate decision‑makers, peer review by another ATC, internal post-assessment moderation, exernal post-assessment moderation by IPSQA) were applied, so that IPSQA can verify conformity with ISO/IEC 17024:2012.