7.2 Customer-related processes

[johnnybegood]

7.2.1 Determination of requirements related to the product

The organization shall determine

a) requirements specified by the customer, including the requirements for delivery and post-delivery activities,

b) requirements not stated by the customer but necessary for specified or intended use, where known,

c) statutory and regulatory requirements related to the product, and

d) any additional requirements determined by the organization.


What is it required and the auditor looking for?

 

[M Greenaway]

Hey Johnny ive asked these questions before !

Part d) is particularly nonsense.

I never got a satisfactory answer.

I believe the statements are unauditable !

 

[M Greenaway]

Weeeell

With regard to a) the customer has specified certain things, note the word specified, i.e. the customer has told us what he wants in some form or another. What therefore does the organisation need to determine with these specified requirements. Is it that we are to go back to the customer and say 'are you sure ?'. Or is it simply that the organisation has a process in plcae for receipt of customer enquiries/orders ? If that is the case why not say so !

With regard to b) the concept is understandable, but I believe unauditable anless the auditor has very specific technical knowledge of the product in question. This again can be said of c).

As for d) its wording is totally absurd. Its saying that an organisation has to determine the requirements that the orgainsation has determined !

Note that these requirements come before 'contract review' - hence sound even more strange.

 

[M Greenaway]

Jim

Isnt clarification on what the customer actually wants further down in the standard ?

I understand what you are saying, and it is a process we all go through in our 'contract review' process.

The first stage is determining what the customer wants. It may be incomplete, ambiguous or conflicting but we look at that later on in the standard - the first step (as it appears to be written) is determining what the customer has specified. If the customer has specified something what is there to determine ? Maybe if its written in a foreign language.......

I do think it means what you are saying, which is normal contract review activity, again i just think it is poorly constructed.

 

[Chris May]

Peeps,

My input is as follows.

We design & manufacture electronic heating control systems, primarily for the domestic market. The sort of thing that you program so your hot water and central heating comes on when you want it.

We do not sell direct to Joe Public but to wholesalers (Newey & Eyre, Plumb Centre and the like). So they are our "customer".

We also design and manufacture electricity tariff meters, the ones that determine (god, that word again) your electricity bill. No more rotating disc. Digital techy stuff.

Anyway, bear with me.

For 7.2.1 a)
Requirements are Cost, delivery, warranty (5year), service & repair, sale or return in some cases and obviously the product must work.

For 7.2.1 b)
Due to the nature of our product we have a raft of "other" standards to adhere to that are product specific, such as BS EN 60730-1:2001 (Automatic Electrical Controls For Household And Similar Use). Now, I don't think our "customer" would be aware of these standards, but we need to be (and are). So this is a requirement.
I have spent the last two days testing units and various materials in cyclic ovens, humidity chambers and also subjecting other units to a simulated 4000V mains spike. All of these things are "invisible"to, and not stated by, the customer.

For 7.2.1 c)
On the tariff/utilities products, because we are producing products that will be used to generate revenue (the meter), it has to be very rigorously tested, calibrated and serial numbered. Each unit has, effectively, a C of C that goes with it.
Our large final testing lab soak tests, calibrates and logs all of the data for each individual meter.
This is rigorously checked by the men form OFGEM (Office of Gas and Electricity Markets) and all of this conforms with standards laid down by BEAB (phew!)
On top of this, we have the obvious health and safety issues for materials that can/can't be used.

I even have a red plastic handle which incorporates a moulded in metal, jointed protrusion. This is apparently, a British Standard "finger" for testing unreasonable access to enclosures.
It is calibrated to NAMAS Lab 0203. (Great for backscratching).

For 7.2.1 d)
The additional requirements that we "determined" was to actually extend the warranty period. We went from 3 to 5 years.
The other additional requirements we are working on at present are the cosmetic and ergonomic aspects of our products.
Time for a face-lift as some designs are about 8 years old.

Anyhow, sorry to blurt on, but that is what 7.2 means to me.

Have a great weekend.

Regards,

Chris.

 

[Al Dyer]

Just an idle thought for D above:

d) other product-related requirements (if any)?

Say we use over-the counter, Hydrogen Peroxide, in a proces, we have to know that HP degrades over time and needs to be monitored as to effective date, or disposal date.

Am I getting close?????

 

[Ted Black]

Guidance for Sales

As I was reading this thread, I was wondering how your companies guide the Sales staff so that they comply with this requirement. For example, our customers will usually send an EAU and a part number for quotation. We have oulined in our procedure the minimum information to clarify when receiving an RFQ so that the product can be sourced (we are a distributor) accurately. This includes things like getting a print or OEM engineering standard, delivery requirements, packaging requirements, etc. Of course, the Sales staff are trained in the procedure and theoretically have the knowledge to make these clarifications but there is no way to determine if they do this clarification or not (depends on the person). Does anyone use a checksheet or some other formal process (documented) to ensure that all the customer's requirements are determined before quoting or accepting an order?
This is something that I have always considered but has been strongly resisted by the Sales area. The main problem is that requirements are missed that end up costing us money. For example, we quote a part assuming that we will ship in the original container. When we receive the order, the customer advises that they want us to repack the parts into returnable dunnage which requires additional labour not included in the original quote price.

 

[Russ Kochis]

I agree that it is difficult for the registrar to audit 7.2.1(d) but its application may be more common. Some of the areas where we (manufacturing) use it is application of bar codes to product packaging, this is not a customer requirement but used internally for product inventory. We often times reduce the tolerances on certain features to make them compatable with our manufacturing processes.
Russ

 

[Al Dyer]

Kudos Jim,

Like I said, just trying to open some consideration and thought!1

With all respect, Al...

 

[barb butrym]

re page one original posts...a quickie....When not found stated in the manual or system docs (as all such stuff should be, which makes it auditable?), my question, as an auditor, would be, how have you determined the requirement for 7.2.1d as applicable to your industry/product? then look for evidence to support the answer, what ever that may be....and based on experience and industry knowledge (as we all know without industry knowledge I wouldn't have been assigned the audit!!!!) i would head out on my audit trail.