The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  ISO 9001/4:2000
  Subcontracted services/Permissible Exclusions

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Subcontracted services/Permissible Exclusions
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 9
From:Aptos, CA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 21 February 2001 02:43 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for juliedrys   Click Here to Email juliedrys     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If a company subcontracts an activity such as Design Control, is this a permissible exclusion?

My opinion is that it is not an exclusion, as it would be if the company were not responsible for design (if we build-to-print, for example -- customer provides the design). The standard clearly states that it cannot be excluded if it affects the organization's ability or responsibility to provide conforming product.

In my opinion, even if you don't have the capability to do design but the customer holds you responsible for it, it cannot be excluded. Furthermore, if the activity is subcontracted, the subbed processes must be identified and controlled (per clause 4.1).

This seems fairly obvious to me, but an instructor in an RAB-approved Transition Course I took stated that this subcontracted design activity would be a permissible exclusion. I wholeheartedly disagree, in this case, but am curious how others would address this in their quality manual? Would you include section 7.3, but state that the activity is subcontracted (and therefore controlled)?

It's very interesting to observe these initial (and varied) interpretations of the new standard.

Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks. This site is very useful...

ps) Anyone else have the new standard on their Palm Pilot? It's cool.

Julie Drysdale

IP: Logged

Dan Larsen
Forum Contributor

Posts: 137
From:Sussex, WI
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 21 February 2001 10:06 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dan Larsen   Click Here to Email Dan Larsen     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I tend to agree with you, Julie. I think the key is the fact that your company is taking the responsibility for the design.

Now, with respect to the manual, I think I would write it in that (and this assumes that all design work is subcontracted) the company subcontracts but takes responsibility for design, and that the subcontract designers are subject to purchasing requirements that reflect and incorporate the requirements of the design clause. Then I would prepare a purchasing document that would become part of the PO package that goes out to the supplier. I'd also audit my supplier to make sure he is conforming to the requirements.

Can't say I've ever run across this (I tend to work with non-design companies), but it would seem the logical approach.

Playing the devils advocate, I guess it might be possible to argue that the design clause doesn't apply to me if I subcontract all the design work. But if I were the auditor in that situation, I think I would take a hard look at how the company is controlling the subcontracted work. I'd also carefully consider the scope of the registration. If the word "design" is in the scope of the registration, I think it would have to be a finding if there were no design controls.

IP: Logged

Doug Stimson
Forum Contributor

Posts: 15
From:Arden, NC USA
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 21 February 2001 02:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Doug Stimson   Click Here to Email Doug Stimson     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Check out titled "subcontracted or outsourced processes.
".......outsourced or subcontracted to an external organization is NOT adequate justification................

IP: Logged

Forum Contributor

Posts: 13
From:Laredo, Texas
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 21 February 2001 05:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for gutieg   Click Here to Email gutieg     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
To me, subcontracting the full design work can create other problems, since there is always a need to align the customer requirements not only to engineering specs but also to the manufacturing or service processes. When you subcontract part of the design work (do testing, make drawings, etc.) it can ve valid for optimal resource utilization, but IMHO the design process is one that you should own and manage so direct interaction with customer and interal areas are assured. Summarizing, I think that some specific design activities could be sub-contracted and managed as a purchase but if you want to do that with the full design process it can be difficult to handle from the point of view of a certificaton audit.
Only if your company does not carry out design at all may be justifiable to exclude this requirement for iso 9001.

Gus Gutierrez

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 21 February 2001 05:30 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

To which standard are you referring?



IP: Logged

Forum Contributor

Posts: 19
From:Ontario, Canada
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 22 February 2001 05:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for awk   Click Here to Email awk     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

I tend to agree with your instructor. I suggest you speak with the registrar you will be using. Find out if, according to the circumstances with your company, the registrar will allow the design function to be listed in your company scope.

I have implemented ISO in a number of companies where the design function was out-sourced. It was not included in the scope of registration for the reason that the companies had only limited control over the out-sourcing, not to the extent as when the design is a part of your own facility.

Other considerations, is the design an element outlined on your organization chart; this would be difficult to audit internally and would need to be a supplier audit.


IP: Logged

Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 9
From:Aptos, CA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 22 February 2001 06:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for juliedrys   Click Here to Email juliedrys     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
First of all, thanks to everyone for the replies. To clarify, this is not an actual case at my company; I am a consultant (uh oh). This was a question posed as an example in a 9000:2000 Transition training course.

The guideline found at is very clear about this: "Where the overall responsibility for product realization belongs to an organization, the fact
that a specific product realization process (such as product design and development or
manufacturing) is outsourced or subcontracted to an external organization is not an adequate justification for the exclusion of this process from the QMS."

However, I also agree that it would not be very common to outsource all of your design work and still take responsibility for it.
This was simply an excercise in the class; in a real-life circumstance, I suppose other factors could apply.

I much more commonly see manufacturing being outsourced, however, and this is why I asked.
In this case, the company cannot say that the manufacturing requirements do not apply; in fact, they are responsible (through their supplier management system) for managing their suppliers to ensure sufficient control.
In this case, the scope of the registration reads "...for the design and management of manufacturing of..." It's a bit awkward, but this is what the registrar recommended.

Julie Drysdale

IP: Logged

David Mullins
Forum Contributor

Posts: 248
From:Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 22 February 2001 06:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for David Mullins   Click Here to Email David Mullins     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Covered under purchasing, I believe. External auditors should assess your ability to ensure that the purchased designs meet your requirements.

I recall a question that was very similar to this one, about a year ago, and there was a fair bit of debate in the thread.

At the end of the day, it depends on the degree of control your company wishes to economically and efficiently apply to this process.

My standard caveat of making sure you're adding value by your interpretation applies.


IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA

posted 22 February 2001 06:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
->Furthermore, if the activity is subcontracted, the subbed
->processes must be identified and controlled (per clause

When you outsource design, you look at your outputs to the design company and their feedback (their output) to you. You have to define the requirements for them to do the design (purchasing of a service). If I build a building and I subcontract the design part (maybe I'm just a turn-key who coordinates getting everything together and getting the building built), my procedures and such have to describe what outputs I have to each service I sub-contract as well as purchasing related aspects). In so far as design goes, if I do anything 'listed' in section 7, it is applicable to my registration. If I don't, it's not. I would state my output to the design firm but it may be I'm responsible for part or all of of 7.3.1. I have to ask myself what I do and do not do as I go thru the standard line by line.

->In my opinion, even if you don't have the capability to do
->design but the customer holds you responsible for it, it
->cannot be excluded.

You're outsourcing it and the customer simply holds you responsible for it. This doesn't change anything at all - you're outsourcing it whether the customer requires it or not because it is not a 'core function' to your business.

Look at your part in the whole thing. Say I farm out the design but I do validation testing in-house. I'm 'responsible' for addressing the requirements of 7.3.6. I cannot say I am not responsible for addressing 7.3.6 just because it is a sub-clause of 7.3.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!

Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!