I'm QM at a small company dealing with electronics and automation. Including asambling of computers. We face a question regarding applying the requirement 7.3 Design and develpoment in assembling the computers. In our opinion we don't need to consider a design for every assembled central unit, as we just put together parts and components resulting a sistem already designed by brand names in the world. A design project would mean records for every stage that ISO 9001 requires. We try to keep things as simple as possible. Of course we have a design procedure for cases when we consider or our client ask for (eg. IT & C networks).
All that worry is against the requirement of Certification Body which has a different oppinion.
What do you think Q-falks? Is it or isn't necesary? And why?

I'm QM at a small company dealing with electronics and automation. Including asambling of computers. We face a question regarding applying the requirement 7.3 Design and develpoment in assembling the computers. In our opinion we don't need to consider a design for every assembled central unit, as we just put together parts and components resulting a sistem already designed by brand names in the world. A design project would mean records for every stage that ISO 9001 requires. We try to keep things as simple as possible. Of course we have a design procedure for cases when we consider or our client ask for (eg. IT & C networks).
All that worry is against the requirement of Certification Body which has a different oppinion.
What do you think Q-falks? Is it or isn't necesary? And why?
I assume you buy components and sub-assemblies (LRUs) and put together a 'box'. Design is probably applicable to you only in the sense of how you design your assembly processes (7.1). Traditionally process design was not considered Design in the traditional sense / use.

How do you determine customer requirements and the degree to which they go? Does your customer define the enclosure? The basic frame compenents and sub-assemblies attach to?

It sounds to me like 7.3 would not be applicable.

It sounds to me like 7.3 would not be applicable.

It sounds to the same. We have to persuade our certification body. If we don't succede, we will have a QMS for auditors not for us. But I guess we will be neither the first nor the last in that situation. A situation in which the spirit of ISO dies little by little.
Thank you for you quick reply.
Florin Pirvulescu