Special Processes for SERVICES

[lorenambrose]

I do not want to beat a dead horse, BUT as I look through the forum and then look at the standard I see that pesky word......."SERVICE". We all understand special processes in a production environment, but how would this clause apply to rendered services?

Does anyone have an example of a special process for rendered services?

 

[John Broomfield]

Imagine being on the receiving end of a service process that has not been designed. As the customer would you be okay with being used as the involuntary inspector of the quality of that service?

That tells us that all service processes are inherently “special”.

The fact that we think they are “pesky“ reveals our lack of respect for service processes and for our customers.

Unreconstructed, the closest we get to repairing this is “customer service”: the warm glow we impart by our good manners while apologizing for our service failures.

Even though we are hot on product quality, our customers increasingly expect our service processes to be determined, planned, designed and validated before delivery.

Service and product quality are integral, symbiotic in building and retaining an excellent reputation.

And a product without service becomes a commodity; bought on price alone.

 

[Bev D]

“”Special” has a specific meaning in the standards. While I believe that services should be planned and validated etc. that doesn’t mean they are “special” according to the standards. Can you provide a specific example that meets the definition as provided by the standards?

 

[John Broomfield]

I suppose if your customer has agreed to verify the conformity of your services then your service processes are not special.

But rarely does our sales process sign up our customers to do this. Hence, why I’m saying that your services are delivered by special processes.

Beyond that though we have servitization of products as with Rolls Royce’s Total Care for customers of its jet engines.

More examples: What is servitization of manufacturing? A quick introduction | Emerald Publishing

 

[Jim Wynne]

I suppose if your customer has agreed to verify the conformity of your services then your service processes are not special.

You're missing the specific meaning of "special" that Bev referred to. "Special" processes are those that produce results that can't be directly verified without destructive methods after processing. I can't imagine a special process that doesn't produce a tangible product.

 

[Tagin]

Speculating here...suppose you are providing software-as-a-service but are using a third-party service or device for encryption of your traffic. There is no way that I know of to verify if the encryption is being properly (i.e., securely) done without knowing the exact algorithm AND the implementation code (since many failures of proper encryption are due to bad implementations, not the algorithm per se). But if you have no access to the code, then you cannot verify that encryption output is secure. So this might be a case where validation is required, and so is a special process?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Speculating here...suppose you are providing software-as-a-service but are using a third-party service or device for encryption of your traffic. There is no way that I know of to verify if the encryption is being properly (i.e., securely) done without knowing the exact algorithm AND the implementation code (since many failures of proper encryption are due to bad implementations, not the algorithm per se). But if you have no access to the code, then you cannot verify that encryption output is secure. So this might be a case where validation is required, and so is a special process?

Software is a product, not a service. Allowing a second or third party to use the product doesn't make it a service.

 

[lorenambrose]

Imagine being on the receiving end of a service process that has not been designed. As the customer would you be okay with being used as the involuntary inspector of the quality of that service?

That tells us that all service processes are inherently “special”.

The fact that we think they are “pesky“ reveals our lack of respect for service processes and for our customers.

Unreconstructed, the closest we get to repairing this is “customer service”: the warm glow we impart by our good manners while apologizing for our service failures.

Even though we are hot on product quality, our customers increasingly expect our service processes to be determined, planned, designed and validated before delivery.

Service and product quality are integral, symbiotic in building and retaining an excellent reputation.

And a product without service becomes a commodity; bought on price alone.

sagree with your premise that the use of the work "pesky" means we do not understand. I contend that the standard has missed the mark a bit.

 

[lorenambrose]

Software is a product, not a service. Allowing a second or third party to use the product doesn't make it a service.

Software can definitely be a service. SaaS is a complete industry by itself. What does a third party have to do with this?

Actually, SaaS is a good example that I did not think of. It is the norm in the IT / Communications industry.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Software can definitely be a service. SaaS is a complete industry by itself. What does a third party have to do with this?

Actually, SaaS is a good example that I did not think of. It is the norm in the IT / Communications industry.

Software is a product. Allowing others to use it for a fee is a service.