Audit preparation should not be a multi-week project. Yet in most manufacturing plants, it is. The announcement of an upcoming IATF, BRC, SQF, or customer audit triggers a predictable scramble: locating CAPA records, compiling LPA evidence, verifying that standard work documentation reflects current practice, and assembling the narrative that ties it all together. According to LNS Research, the average manufacturing plant spends 120-160 person-hours preparing for a major audit (LNS Research, "Quality Management Best Practices," 2022). That is 3-4 weeks of quality team bandwidth diverted from prevention, analysis, and improvement work — the work that would actually reduce future audit findings. The documentation exists — scattered across spreadsheets, shared drives, paper binders, and individual email accounts. The problem is not a lack of records. It is a lack of a system that produces audit-ready evidence as a natural byproduct of daily operations. When compliance documentation requires a separate effort to create, it will always lag behind actual practice. And that gap is exactly what auditors find. The cost of this gap extends beyond the audit itself. Nonconformances require corrective action plans with defined timelines. Major findings risk certification — and certification loss means loss of customer qualification, which can threaten 20-40% of revenue for manufacturers in regulated industries. The operational disruption of audit preparation pulls quality and CI leaders away from the work that actually improves operations.