Auditor and reviewer competence: the evidence an assessor asks for

How ISO/IEC 17021-1 structures it

Competence sits in clause 7 of ISO/IEC 17021-1, supported by its annexes. The structure, in plain terms:

• Criteria per function and technical area (7.1.2). You decide what competence each function needs, for each technical area you certify. The standard does not hand you the criteria; it requires you to set them.
• Documented evaluation (7.1.3). An initial evaluation against those criteria, and ongoing monitoring afterwards. Annex B lists possible evaluation methods; ISO's interpretation panel confirmed in 2013 that you do not have to combine them for every criterion.
• Knowledge and skills per function (Annex A). Set out separately for reviewing applications to select the audit team, reviewing reports and making certification decisions, auditing, and leading the audit team.
• Personnel records (7.4). Up-to-date records for everyone involved in certification activities, showing qualifications, training, experience, affiliations, status and competence.

Scheme-specific parts add detail for particular standards: ISO/IEC 17021-3 for quality management systems, ISO/IEC 17021-2 for environmental management systems, and ISO/IEC 42006 for AI management systems.

What a complete record shows, for each person

1. 1

   The criteria that applied, named by procedure and version, so a later change of criteria is visible.

2. 2

   The evidence against them: education, training, work experience, audit experience.

3. 3

   How competence was evaluated, and the result.

4. 4

   Who decided, and when. An approval with no name or date is the first thing an assessor will question.

5. 5

   The approved scope: functions, standards, technical areas or IAF codes, and any restrictions.

6. 6

   The monitoring record: what was done since approval, and when the next check is due.

The gaps the 2026 transitions expose

Reviewers and decision makers without records

The Global ACI transition requirements for ISO 9001:2026 and ISO 14001:2026 name sales staff, auditors, technical reviewers, certification decision makers, and contract and application reviewers as relevant personnel. If your records for those functions are thinner than your auditor files, the declaration is where it will show.

Approval by standard, not by technical area

An auditor approved for ISO 9001 in general is not the same as one approved for the technical areas of the client in front of you. If the record cannot show the technical area, it cannot support the assignment.

Criteria changed, people not re-evaluated

When you update criteria for the 2026 revisions, each person needs a dated re-evaluation against the new version. Otherwise the record shows approval against criteria that no longer apply.

Approval not linked to assignment

The record only protects you if assignment follows it. A register kept in a spreadsheet next to a scheduling tool will drift: someone gets assigned outside their approved scope because nothing stopped it.

For the transitions specifically

Add a line per person for each 2026 revision they work on: the training completed, the date, and who signed it off. The template has columns for exactly this. For the dates that drive the deadlines, see every transition in date order.