Can not do design without a Customer?

In terms of ISO 9001 7.2.1.

  • It can go either way

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#21
Re: Does ISO 9001 Clause 7.3 Design and Development apply?

Jim, before you bow out, if I may: Many innovative products don't have 'customers involvement' pe se. There's no order, no RFP, no idea on the customers behalf what is going to be specified as part of the product's performance, look etc. That was partly the problem with previous versions of ISO 9001/2 etc. with the fabled 'contract review' requirements. There wasn't a 'contact', because there wasn't a customer, yet!

I'm sure you must have worked in an organization where they design new products and they also have a marketing department - or technical 'sales' etc. They provide the 'requirements related to the customer' etc. etc. as 'design inputs'. It's probably just as well that they do, for you have also probably met Product Design Engineers who 'think' they know what a customer wants! I know I have! And the Marketing people had quite a different view of the product, than the way the Designers had specified it!

I'd suggest that, particularly in your role as an auditor, you might have to re-visit your thoughts on this...
In practice there is nothing wrong with your line of thought.

My only point, from an auditor's perspective, is that it would not be a lagitimate thing to write a nonconformance for. There is no "shall" to hang it on, especially when the same ground is covered in 7.3.2.

As to if there is wisdom in companies designing things for speculation without customer input is not at issue. They are free to be as stupid as they want, and many are, even with marketing input.
 
Last edited:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
J

JaneB

#22
A lively debate sprang up around this topic in another thread. I'm starting this separate thread not to derail the other one any further. (Perhaps we could cut the relevant posts out of that thread and post them here?)

To summarise, I think the topic under debate is:
If you have no customer involvement yet (eg, a new product or service), then none of the requirements of clause 7.2.1 in ISO 9001 apply.

BigJim holds this view strongly. His point is that 7.2.1 is not always a precursor to design, and trying to make it so goes beyond the scope of the standard. 7.3.2 covers the same ground or more, since it is not limited to customer input.

I and some others disagree, saying that you do not have to have any real live customer when you are creating a new service/product, and that you should consider the requirements of 7.2.1 as far as you can pre/while designing. The fact that the 'real' customer comes later is immaterial.

The relevant posts have been cut from the other thread Does ISO 9001 Clause 7.3 Design and Development apply? and moved here.

What do you think?

And if I've summarised inadequately, please feel free to correct!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

harry

Super Moderator
#23
Re: Cannot do design without a customer?

My views from the business perspective:

1. New product development is usually the result of a combination of market needs (7.2.1a) and the organization's reading or interpretation of 'environmental signals' from the market (7.2.1d).

2. The weightage for market needs is generally higher because it is much easier to justify and hence obtaining necessary funding and approval. The risk is generally lower because there is an existing market (existing customers) or there is a similar market (no customers but you just need to convert those from the similar market as your customers)

3. Market or technology leaders often go into completely new territory (where no market or customers exist) relying on their intuition and reading of market and technology trends (7.2.1d). The risk is high and so are the rewards.

The Wikipedia reference-linkMavica camera , precursor of present day digital camera could be a good example.
 

atitheya

Quite Involved in Discussions
#24
IMHO

7.2.1 b), c), & d) are applicable while designing new.

7.2.1 a) may be considered subsequently and will definitely work for improvements in the product / service.

However, if one does a market research for the new product / service, even customer requirement may be determined, and, in that case, 7.2.1 (a) will also become applicable.

Float the idea, do a survey, take the feedback, you got customer requirement.
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#25
IMHO

7.2.1 b), c), & d) are applicable while designing new.

7.2.1 a) may be considered subsequently and will definitely work for improvements in the product / service.

However, if one does a market research for the new product / service, even customer requirement may be determined, and, in that case, 7.2.1 (a) will also become applicable.

Float the idea, do a survey, take the feedback, you got customer requirement.
It is agreed that frequently or even most of the time that information gathered from 7.2.1 feeds 7.3.2. It is obvious, as they are even phrased similarly.

That does not establish, however, a REQUIREMENT to seek customer input before undertaking design.
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#26
Re: Cannot do design without a customer?

My views from the business perspective:

1. New product development is usually the result of a combination of market needs (7.2.1a) and the organization's reading or interpretation of 'environmental signals' from the market (7.2.1d).

2. The weightage for market needs is generally higher because it is much easier to justify and hence obtaining necessary funding and approval. The risk is generally lower because there is an existing market (existing customers) or there is a similar market (no customers but you just need to convert those from the similar market as your customers)

3. Market or technology leaders often go into completely new territory (where no market or customers exist) relying on their intuition and reading of market and technology trends (7.2.1d). The risk is high and so are the rewards.

The Wikipedia reference-linkMavica camera , precursor of present day digital camera could be a good example.
That is an interesting example. I know that the business world is full of similar examples.

In contrast, an example of where extensive use of marketing gained information is the Kodak Instamatic camera of a few decades back. This was a case study in many business schools. That very successful camera was entirely developed (designed) from marketing information input. One of the most significant things pointed out in the case study is that it broke ground into marketing driving design. It was not nearly as common prior to then. George Eastman's original Kodak Brownie was entirely his own brainchild.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#27
A lively debate sprang up around this topic in another thread. I'm starting this separate thread not to derail the other one any further. (Perhaps we could cut the relevant posts out of that thread and post them here?)

To summarise, I think the topic under debate is:
If you have no customer involvement yet (eg, a new product or service), then none of the requirements of clause 7.2.1 in ISO 9001 apply.

BigJim holds this view strongly. His point is that 7.2.1 is not always a precursor to design, and trying to make it so goes beyond the scope of the standard. 7.3.2 covers the same ground or more, since it is not limited to customer input.

I and some others disagree, saying that you do not have to have any real live customer when you are creating a new service/product, and that you should consider the requirements of 7.2.1 as far as you can pre/while designing. The fact that the 'real' customer comes later is immaterial.

You can see the relevant posts in this thread Does ISO 9001 Clause 7.3 Design and Development apply?

What do you think?

And if I've summarised inadequately, please feel free to correct!
A couple of thoughts:

I can't imagine a company that has no products or services to deliver (yet) seeking ISO 9001 registration, so this might be a moot question. As just a single example, how would one be able to demonstrate "...effective arrangements for communicating with customers..." (7.2.3) if there are no customers? You could certainly try to anticipate those needs, but there would be no way to demonstrate that the chosen methods are effective.

As far as 7.2.1 is concerned, if there are no customers, there are no specific customer requirements [7.2.1(a)] , but I think that (b), (c) and (d) can and should be done prior to any actual customer involvement.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#28
That does not establish, however, a REQUIREMENT to seek customer input before undertaking design.
Really? A requirement from what source? ISO 9001? ISO 9004? Better business practices? Business 101?

An organization that would engage in a costly New Product Development process "in the vacuum", devoided of any input from potential customers, users and consumers should be awarded the Darwin award, in the corporate category.

We should not forget either the ISO 9000 definition of the term requirement when applied in ISO 9001, including 7.2.1a):
3.1.2 requirement
need or expectation that is stated, generally implied or obligatory
NOTE 1 “Generally implied” means that it is custom or common practice for the organization (3.3.1), its customers (3.3.5) and other interested parties (3.3.7), that the need or expectation under consideration is implied.
NOTE 2 A qualifier can be used to denote a specific type of requirement, e.g. product requirement, quality management requirement, customer requirement.
NOTE 3 A specified requirement is one which is stated, for example, in a document (3.7.2).
NOTE 4 Requirements can be generated by different interested parties.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#29
A lively debate sprang up around this topic in another thread. I'm starting this separate thread not to derail the other one any further. (Perhaps we could cut the relevant posts out of that thread and post them here?)

To summarise, I think the topic under debate is:
If you have no customer involvement yet (eg, a new product or service), then none of the requirements of clause 7.2.1 in ISO 9001 apply.

BigJim holds this view strongly. His point is that 7.2.1 is not always a precursor to design, and trying to make it so goes beyond the scope of the standard. 7.3.2 covers the same ground or more, since it is not limited to customer input.

I and some others disagree, saying that you do not have to have any real live customer when you are creating a new service/product, and that you should consider the requirements of 7.2.1 as far as you can pre/while designing. The fact that the 'real' customer comes later is immaterial.

You can see the relevant posts in this thread Does ISO 9001 Clause 7.3 Design and Development apply?

What do you think?

And if I've summarised inadequately, please feel free to correct!

Customers may specify their requirements but customers are often silent on their needs.

7.3.2 backs up 7.2.1 by ensuring design also translates customer needs into product requirements.

The most successful companies do not wait until they have customers specifying their requirements. They get ahead of their customers by understanding their needs better than the competitors (does Apple do this mostly?).

Having done this and the right kind of advertising they are reasonably assured of success in the market.

This also applies to companies that respond to RFP's. Successful bidders look beyond the requirements specified in the RFP to understand their potential customer's needs better than their competitors.
 
S

sathishthantri

#30
Can anyone helo me in understanding which product or service is realised without "customer" involvement ?

3.3.5
customer
organization​
(3.3.1) or person that receives a product (3.4.2)

EXAMPLE Consumer, client, end-user, retailer, beneficiary and purchaser.​
NOTE A customer can be internal or external to the organization.

SATHISH
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
K Determining Effect of Failure without a DFMEA (Design FMEA) FMEA and Control Plans 1
N 510k without DHF (Design History File) that we bought a 3 years ago US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
G AS9100 Design Contract Issue - Contractor without AS9100 Quality System AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
M Reducing both Detection and Occurance in a Design FMEA WITHOUT a Design Change FMEA and Control Plans 8
DuncanGibbons Section 8.3 relevant for design organisations AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
P DFMEA - Machinery Design Best Practices FMEA and Control Plans 0
R Is a FAIR required on parts that we design? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
U API Spec Q1 - 5.6.1.2 C (3) - Design software Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
N Example for design and development planning,input,output,review,verification,validation and transfer Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 4
A 8.6 Release of products and services, 8.3 Design and development - evidence required ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
C Stress / Challenge Conditions for Design Verification Testing to Reduce Sample Size 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 11
J Significant change related to design and intended use EU Medical Device Regulations 3
S Traceability of requirements to design and risk Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
U NOC - What is considered a "design change" EU Medical Device Regulations 5
Q PPT used as Design Review ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D Design Verification Sample Size vs Repeats Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 9
A Design and development procedure for API Spec Q2 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 6
D Design controls - Inputs, outputs, V&V, DHF, DMR ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
LostLouie Manufacturer divorced from Design process, is he justified in design process deficiencies? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
R DFA & DFM - Examples for Design for assembly and design for manufacturability Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
D Using Laboratory Notebooks in R&D and Design and Development ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D ISO 13485 - 7.3.6 Design and development verification - Do most folks create a separate SOP? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
K Joint approval between OEM and Manufacturer on Design Documents ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M API 4F/7K/8C Design Package Validation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
A Design History File - Not ready to share the design drawings or Bill of Material US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
W Need for current design or process control FMEA and Control Plans 2
A What is the difference between Design Process, Process Design and Design Control? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
D Test summary report example for design validation wanted - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
B Why the Greek god Hephaestus should have done a design FMEA (DFMEA) on his giant robot APQP and PPAP 1
S Documenting Design Verification Test Results (ISO 9001) Design and Development of Products and Processes 1
DuncanGibbons Understanding the applicability of Design of Experiments to the IQ OQ PQ qualification approach Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 5
S Requirement to Conduct New Shelf-life Testing? (re-do testing for design change) EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Sample Agreement available for Outsourcing Medical Device Design activity? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
DuncanGibbons How is the arrangement between Design and Production organisation envisaged? EASA and JAA Aviation Standards and Requirements 4
L Design & Development of a SERVICE Service Industry Specific Topics 13
C Documentation for items used for Design Verification 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P Design verification driven by new equipment. How is this different than process validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
A AS9102B - 3.6 Design Characteristics and form 3 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
P Design FMEA - Detection Rating criteria ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
U Medical Device Design finalization testing ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S MDR Delay - MDD design Change? (before new MDR DOA) EU Medical Device Regulations 8
J Iterative design and production for custom made products ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
T Design Input detail & specificity ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
J Design file for pre-existing products - Inputs and Outputs ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
D Design Transfer Template capturing Customer Specific Requirements Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
T Design Control Procedures later in the Development Process ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
M Looking for a Presentation on Design for Excellence (DfX) Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
K Old medical devices -> 7.3.7. Design and development validation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
R Design and Manufacture Guidelines for Surface Mount Technology Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 9
optomist1 Design Exclusion, but now we might have an outsourced Product Design ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5

Similar threads

Top Bottom