Consultancy service that produces independent reports - Is 7.3 applicable or not

[JaneB]

In an initial meeting with the registerars, it was commented that section 7.3 of 9001 would have to be complied with as there would be "design and development" of the reports produced.

Warning: you have your blinkers on. It's why just having only the word 'product' throughout the Standard misleads so many people. Please do NOT forget it is meant to be read service/product.

Jeff is completely correct:

you need to change the way you are viewing the standard. When reviewing the standard replace the word “product” with “service” and yes you must apply 7.3 to the design and development of the product, which in this case is the report. If this company designs and develops a report that does not meet the needs of the client then they are non-conforming to clause 7.3 of the standard.

This is a service provided. The content of the report is the product (or result of the service).
It's typical of such analytical types of businesses (eg, consulting) where the end product IS the report supplied. No, it isn't 'just a report' - what the customer has paid for is the information - the content - of that report. Similar thing, perhaps, to a market research report. Again, it isn't 'just a report', it's the findings, the data and the conclusions in it.

The report is just the format in which the output of the process is presented to the customer. The content of the report is the result of the service provided.

Yes, exactly.

Perhaps if they're doing exactly the same kind of assessment and producing exactly the same kind of report (albeit with different data) for every customer, then you can argue design isn't applicable.

But a more intelligent approach would be to look at the requirements and say, how and where do we do this? (And it'll be very different from manufacturing widgets). A comptent auditor will interpret & apply the requirements in a way that is appropriate for the nature of the organisation, its activities and of course the registration scope.

 

[arios]

I will go for non applicable.

 

[JaneB]

there has to be a systematic approach to the collection, analysis and reporting of data to ensure that customer's needs are satisfied. Unless the organization uses a pre-defined 'standardized' approach to doing this (same approach to every project or 'family' of projects) then each project/assignment has to be treated as a separate 'product' that needs to be 'taylored' (designed & developed) to meet the customer's requirements.

Just so -

If tailored to each unqiue circumstance = design. If already standardised and consistently applied, the 'design' happened only once (consider it as planning in that case) and then just keep doing it..

 

[Jeff Frost]

I will go for non applicable.

You should go back to step one. Read ISO Guidance on ISO 9001:2008 Sub-clause 1.2 'Application' and if you can justify the exclusion then go for it. But you cannot just say “Not Applicable”, you must explain why it is not applicable to your business model and the ISO 9001 Standard.

http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/3554792/1.2Application.doc?func=doc.Fetch&nodeid=3554792

 

[JaneB]

You should go back to step one. Read ISO Guidance on ISO 9001:2008 Sub-clause 1.2 'Application' and if you can justify the exclusion then go for it. But you cannot just say “Not Applicable”, you must explain why it is not applicable to your business model and the ISO 9001 Standard.

Yes, indeed. More excellent and very accurate advice from Jeff.

 

[glenn0004]

The final reports always follow a standard format - the only variable is that some areas of a business could be excempt from the report (ie graphics print). This would be defined prior to accepting the instruction from a customer to provide consultancy.(7.2 ?)

Hope this helps

 

[glenn0004]

Thanks Colin

I 'll come back to you with some more details if needed

 

[Colin]

I have to disagree with you on this one Jane - just because they are providing a service, does not necessarily mean that they are designing the service. From what Glenn has told us it looks to me like a standard, pre-agreed service that may have a couple of variations - which can be dealt with under 7.2 I suspect.

Jeff - I quite agree that any exclusions must be justified, not just stated - there is another thread ongoing about the very same subject.

 

[JaneB]

I have to disagree with you on this one Jane - just because they are providing a service, does not necessarily mean that they are designing the service. From what Glenn has told us it looks to me like a standard, pre-agreed service that may have a couple of variations - which can be dealt with under 7.2 I suspect.

I agree - there's no disagreement from this quarter.

Based on the info supplied, I agree it sounds like the same service each time, so no, design isn't applicable. (But it's always difficult to establish these things remotely and without full knowledge of the relevant info).
Your suggestion that the poster contacts another CB to cross-check is a good one. One thing to be seriously wary of is CBs (not to mention auditors!) who aren't familiar with service-type businesses, and may not be good at accurately applying relevant requirements to them.