Our vision on issues during commissioning process

Test documents

  • Creating and reviewing of test documents is often a diffuse process for stakeholders
  • Finding the right test document (digital/online/cabinet) can be difficult. Mostly test documents are kept in private storage places.
  • Is the test document validated, are we allowed to use it?
  • Changes in test documentation not easily traceable. What has been updated?
  • Most test documents are on paper. Because the test environment is not always clean, the processed test document also becomes filthy
  • No clear section for outstanding issues and not easy to relate them to a specific test question
  • Not possible to ad files or pictures to test results, or record the situation properly in detail

Outstanding Issues

  • Outstanding issues poorly substantiated, lack of info and/or pictures
  • Solving outstanding issues is difficult, missing specification like component number, location description, technical drawing numbers etc. What and where is the issue?
  • Which discipline has to solve what outstanding issue?
  • Not clear if outstanding issues relate to the Customer or Notified Body
  • Solutions for outstanding issues not supported by explanatory text, documents or pictures.
  • How are solved outstanding issues processed from engineering to production, and back to commissioning
  • Is an outstanding issue, which does not relate to a specific test, already reported?
  • Unclear which outstanding issue relates to which specific test question


  • How many outstanding issues are there?
  • Status verification is mostly done by manual counting (which test questions are processed)
  • Status report is ad hoc and based on “cut and paste” from non-validated former status or ‘guesstimates’
  • Unknown what the (detailed) test status and outstanding issues really are, not real-time
  • What execution level is necessary for delivery? What are the terms of the TollGate?


  • Priority definition of solving outstanding issues unclear and often even changed during commissioning process
  • No link between solving outstanding issues and periodization for future (related) tests
  • Many people/stakeholders within the project perform duplicated work, e.g. transcribe the same test results to Word and Excel
  • Customer, Supplier and Notified Body all create their own list of outstanding issues on paper. Although they performed a joint test execution – their personal test remarks often differ
  • Other disciplines than Commissioning team have no (digital) insight in the commissioning process and progress (e.g. Engineering, Production, Contract Management, Planning, Top Management, Legal)
  • Often commissioning data is not available online for contractors, although most projects are executed with multiple (sub)contractors. These contractors don’t have a detailed work list available and management is not aware of the exact status from (sub)contractors
  • During handover, work in progress is usually quickly communicated verbally (certain details are written down in a log book), but it mostly remains a bilateral process within one discipline. Cross border discipline information is mostly not at hand, complete nor easily accessible.
  • A multitude of highly qualified people (e.g. project team lead, discipline head) are spending quite some valuable time on gathering information on status, capturing it in Excel etc., updating work in progress reports & management information and sending out communication – although their added value should be directed more on the content of the project rather than administration


  • Lack of real time (graphic) reports, and if available usually without trend or decent perspective
  • Delivery of the product/ship/plant mostly badly documented
  • Not clear when tests are performed or outstanding issues are solved, so essentially progress in unclear
  • Reports are delivered after a request is submitted (pull). No automatically processed report (push)


  • Often no central SharePoint is used. When available, a SharePoint is mostly poorly managed by lack of rules and authorization levels, creating uncertainty if you use the correct document resp. revision
  • Once an outstanding issue is solved, history disappears and the decision process leading up to fix is no longer reducible
  • Warranty issues during warranty period are not reducible with engineering and commissioning issues
  • Maintenance issues not reducible with former issues
  • Measured data is often only available paper and not online, providing no basis for (indepth) analyses

Quality Control

  • QA/QC not incorporated in commissioning process
  • Mostly not a closed system for testing, solving outstanding issues and re-testing
  • No uniformity in users and their role / responsibility
  • No segregated roles in solving outstanding issues and checking validity of solved status