Good evening Queseanians,
What do you think is more effective, to do in-house plan approval or to outsource it to a third-party technical consulting company?
2 Likes
In my opinion, plan approval carried out by in-house technical team will be surely better.
If carried out by third-party technical consulting team, scope will be better minimized.
This will be a matter of man-holding capacity in the shipping company…
2 Likes
I agree with @DCKim. The quality will be better.
The in-house plan approval team will be more determined compared to a consulting firm. In-house plan approval teams have the advantage that they know the company standards and trading requirements. Furthermore, they can implement upgrades based on lessons learned as well as practical experience gained from real-life problems encountered in the operation of ships. Whereas, a third party consulting firm operates in a “sterilized” environment without much practical experience.
In fact, an in-house plan approval department can be the factor for keeping a company involved in regulatory and technological developments. It can also be a “talent pool” for future superintendents or managers.
Of course, it makes sense to consult experts when it comes to “sensitive” matters that require a certain expertise e.g. structures or shafting but it is not recommended to subcontract the entire plan approval procedure of a newbuilding project to a consulting firm.
The development on an in-house plan approval team, if set-up correctly, is a value for money investment. It can define the future of the company.
1 Like
To provide some counterargument, consultants can do the job at perhaps up to half the cost.
Also, for minor (low importance) quality items, local inspectors are probably more effective than owner-side inspectors as they have much more specialised experience and know the ins and outs of each shipyard.
Since a consultant company may be reluctant to cause major disruption in shipyard schedule, having eyes on the project is crucial to allow for a deep dive whenever necessary. Sending superintendents during critical periods and the senior officers a month before the delivery of each ship are practices that can keep the incentives balanced.
Of course, it goes without saying that the optimal for large companies is to keep a newbuilding team permanently employed and transition them into superintendent roles after enough infield experience is gained.
1 Like