Human factors is one of the most underestimated parts of an AS9100 audit, yet it influences every process tied to quality, safety, and conformity. When auditors reference human factors, they look for evidence that an organization has considered how people’s behavior, workload, environment, skills, communication, and fatigue can influence product quality or service performance. Under AS9100D, this expectation appears in Clause 7.1.4, where organizations must account for the conditions that affect human performance and process conformity.
AS9100 Audit Questions for Human Factors
A Practical Guide for Aerospace and Defense Suppliers
Human factors has moved from a vague concept to a structured expectation under AS9100. The standard calls for organizations to understand how people influence processes during planning, execution, verification, and correction.
Auditors use this requirement to confirm the company’s approach to training, workload, communication, workplace conditions, and error prevention.
For manufacturers, machine shops, integrators, and service providers, this area signals maturity in the quality management system. It also points to process resilience during stress, turnover, or unexpected events.
Below is a clear breakdown of what auditors tend to ask, why they ask it, and how to prepare strong evidence.
Why Human Factors Matter Under AS9100
Human performance shapes production quality. Even with advanced controls and automation, people set up machines, interpret drawings, complete inspections, review contracts, approve documents, and respond to nonconformities.
AS9100 requires organizations to consider how physical, psychological, organizational, and environmental influences can affect product conformity. This supports risk-based thinking and strengthens mitigation plans. It also links to training, competency, document control, work instructions, and corrective action.
Common AS9100 Audit Questions for Human Factors
Auditors rarely ask about human factors directly. They ask about the activities, controls, and behaviors that demonstrate the company has considered it. Below are sample questions aligned with real audit practices.
Planning and Risk
• How did you consider human-related risks when planning processes or changes
• What human performance risks are tied to your key processes
• How do you prevent overload, time pressure, or unclear instructions from introducing error
Competence and Training
• How do you confirm personnel understand their tasks beyond initial training
• How do you verify new or temporary staff are not placed into roles beyond their competency
• What controls ensure inspectors, machinists, assemblers, or reviewers stay current in skills
Work Instructions and Design of the Workspace
• How do your work instructions reduce the chance of mistakes
• How do you ensure equipment labeling, color coding, or visual controls support accuracy
• What reviews occur when you change layouts, tools, or instructions
Communication and Behavior
• How are shift-to-shift handoffs handled to reduce miscommunication
• How do you verify teams understand customer requirements before starting work
• What actions help reduce interpretation errors between engineering and production
Fatigue, Workload, and Conditions
• How do you assess whether high workload or fatigue could influence quality
• What process manages overtime, repetitive tasks, or environmental conditions
• How is workspace ergonomics evaluated
Error Prevention and Corrective Action
• What human-related root causes have been identified in your corrective actions
• How did you address behavioral, training, clarity, or workload contributors
• What improvements have reduced repeat human-driven issues
What Strong Evidence Looks Like
Auditors do not expect a formal “Human Factors Program.” They look for integrated controls spread across existing procedures.
Examples of high-value evidence include:
• Training matrices tied to risk, not just job title
• Documented handoff procedures for shifts or departments
• Clear work instructions with photos or visual cues
• Risk assessments that include operator error or interpretation risks
• Ergonomic or environmental reviews for critical operations
• Corrective actions that identify human-related contributors without blaming the operator
• Lessons learned applied to training or job setup improvements
Improving Human Factors in an AS9100 System
Organizations can strengthen readiness through small, controlled actions.
• Add human-factor considerations to the risk register
• Strengthen work instructions with better visuals
• Review training effectiveness more regularly
• Build simple fatigue or workload checks for high-risk roles
• Capture communication risks in internal audits
• Include human factors when analyzing scrap, rework, or escapes
These steps demonstrate control, foresight, and maturity to an auditor. They also improve operational quality and reduce unplanned variation.
Final Thoughts
Using as9100 audit questions for human factors as a preparation tool gives companies a structured way to review the most overlooked clause expectations. Human factors show whether an organization understands how real people work, how they fail, and how systems support them. When this is visible across training, risk, instructions, and corrective action, auditors see a stable, reliable QMS with lower long-term risk.
Human Factors FAQs for AS9100D Audits
1. How does AS9100D define human factors in an audit?
Auditors evaluate how conditions such as behavior, communication, fatigue, workload, skills, and the work environment influence process performance and conformity. This expectation appears in Clause 7.1.4, which requires organizations to consider factors that affect human performance.
2. What evidence shows that human factors are being controlled?
Clear work instructions, verified training, structured handoffs, ergonomic reviews, workload planning, environmental monitoring, and human-factor considerations in corrective actions all serve as effective evidence during an AS9100D audit.
3. Why are human factors important to AS9100D risk-based thinking?
Human-factor conditions recur with every process cycle. If not controlled, they create continuous and cyclical risk that impacts product quality, safety, and delivery. Incorporating human factors into risk planning strengthens process reliability and supports AS9100D compliance.
Ronnie Lee Roberts II has worked in the Department of Defense (DoD) quality environment since 2017, supporting programs at Patuxent River and Webster Field (NAWCAD/NAVAIR). A certified AS9100:2016 Rev D Lead Auditor (2022–2025), he brings deep knowledge of quality management systems, documentation control, and audit readiness across aerospace and defense operations. His background includes hands-on experience inspecting to specification per engineering drawings and customer requirements, verifying process conformity, and maintaining compliance with AS9100D clauses related to documented information, product realization, and risk management.
In addition to audit work, Ronnie has supported QMS development, technical writing, CAD-based documentation, and controlled record structures that ensure traceability and repeatability. He also holds ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018 Lead Auditor (TPECS, 2023) and Certified CMMI® Associate (2025) credentials, supporting CMMI-DEV Level 3 environments. His focus remains on aligning documentation and inspection practices with AS9100D standards to drive measurable quality performance and readiness for customer and regulatory audits.