1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

8.4 Control of externally provided processes, products

Discussion in 'ISO 9001:2015 - Quality Management Systems' started by white g., May 30, 2016.

  1. white g.

    white g. New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hi guys, first time here.

    Am trying to document an architectural consultancy firm, they provide just that : consultancy. and they of course do the site inspection, making sure the outcome of the building being developed is as per their design.

    Now, there's this another entity: the Developer. this developer is recommended by the client. sometimes. sometimes, the recommendation comes from the consultancy firm.

    my issue is, since the outcome of the developer's work affects the consultancy firm's realization of its design, can the processes being done by this developer be considered as 'externally provided processes' of the architectural firm??? It seems pretty obvious at first but as I think more, I kinda get confused because my understanding of 8.4 clause is 'externally provided processes' from an entity ENGAGED BY THE CONSULTANCY FIRM, like, its chosen by the consultancy firm and is working for the consultancy firm.
    but since the Developer is not working for the consultancy firm (as it is directly working for the client), then should it still be considered as 'external provider' of the consultancy firm???


    I hope I get some help here...am stuck at this point huhuhu.....
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    4,263
    Likes Received:
    2,156
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    If the developer is identified by the client, and not the consultancy, you don't have to worry about them being outsourced. You didn't out source them!
     
  3. tony s

    tony s Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,253
    Likes Received:
    951
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Laguna Philippines
    Ask yourself these questions:
    • What is our company's product/service that is intended for or required by our customer?
    • Do we need external providers to meet the requirements for the provision of our product/service to our customer?
    • Are we accountable to the customer concerning the external provider's output?
    If you answered "Yes" on the last two questions, then 8.4 clause should be satisfied by your organization to control the external provider.
     
  4. Paul Simpson

    Paul Simpson Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2015
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Now IMHO that's a bit more than consultancy. It will be worth spending some time with your client and establishing what they do and what they want to say about what they do.

    Sounds classic 'Interested party' to me. You might want to go back to Clause 4.1 and 4.2 of 9001:2015 and consider the needs and wants of the Developer compared with those of the client (and who are your client's clients if they're not the actual Developer?). Once you've completed this review (and it will take some time and probably a couple of iterations before you're comfortable with the result) you can then look at what controls you need in the QMS and they will vary whether they are a contracted developer or are independent of the consultancy you're dealing with.

    Hope this helps.
     
  5. Jennifer Kirley

    Jennifer Kirley Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    661
    Trophy Points:
    92
    Location:
    USA
    If the performance of a firm subcontracted by the client impacts the client's satisfaction, then you are right to inform the client of the subcontractor's performance, and to alert them of issues that may trigger their intervention with the subcontracted firm. I would treat that as an interface in the same manner as I would if the subcontracted firm was managed by a corporate office. Their ability to perform as per 8.4 could be relying on your communicating the results of that subprocess. Their ability to properly re-evaluate a supplier could rely on your effective communication. In this perspective, both 8.4 and 7.4 apply, also 4.2 as has been pointed out.
     

Share This Page