Quality Control vs Project Supervision

Quality control assesses work and processes against quality references. Project supervision takes a broader view of execution, coordination, progress, resources, issues and follow-up.

How to assess this decision in practice

QC needs clear acceptance references: drawings, specifications, methods, samples, tolerances or test results. Without them, records can become visual opinions. Supervision connects those findings with work sequence, coordination, schedule and action by project parties.

One person may perform several functions only when time, competence, independence and authority are adequate. The proposal should state whether that person may stop work, reject materials, issue instructions or only report to an authorised party.

What to check

Use this list as a starting point. The depth of review should still match the project stage, decision value, documents and risks.

1. Define drawings, specifications, methods, samples and acceptance criteria for QC.
2. Define attendance, monitored areas, report format and supervisor authority.
3. Create hold points for materials, mock-ups, concealed work, testing and close-out.
4. Separate quality findings from schedule, cost, design, access and coordination issues.
5. Give every finding an action, owner, target date and closure verification.

Turn the review into a recorded decision

1. Set the baseline: documents, conditions, dates, parties, reviewed areas and access limitations.
2. Separate observed facts, third-party statements, assumptions, risks and professional opinions.
3. For each issue, define the required decision, authority, action owner, target and closure evidence.
4. Retain document versions and approvals so later changes can be compared against the correct basis.

Questions before deciding

A useful answer should be traceable to documents, site conditions, a responsible party or a clearly stated assumption boundary.

• Who can accept or reject work?
• When must work pause for inspection?
• How are findings tracked until they are genuinely closed?

How to document the outcome

Record information sources, review dates, documents read, people interviewed, inaccessible conditions, key findings, decisions, owners and follow-up deadlines. Separate facts, third-party statements, assumptions and recommendations.

For legal, structural, geotechnical, tax, permitting, land, design or specialist-testing decisions, use appropriately authorised and qualified professionals.