.png)
A pre-production meeting has one job: decide whether the factory has enough controlled information, evidence and authority to start the agreed work. The output is not “meeting completed.” It is a dated production-release record stating go, conditional go or hold.
Before the call, circulate the controlling documents and an open-issue list. During it, reconcile the product baseline, materials, tooling, process, quality, compliance, schedule and changes. After it, issue one record with decision owners, evidence, due dates and the exact production step each open item blocks.
If an unresolved item can affect safety, compliance, the approved product, site capability or a critical quality control, the order stays on hold. A friendly conversation cannot close a missing gate.
The meeting has one job: decide whether production can start
ISO 10005:2018 gives guidance on establishing, reviewing, accepting, applying and revising quality plans for products, processes, projects and contracts. ISO reports that the 2018 edition was confirmed in 2023. It does not require every importer to use one meeting template.
The useful principle is that the production plan must be explicit enough to review and accept. A pre-production meeting is the point where the buyer and supplier reconcile that plan for one order.
Decision rule: Do not release production because the meeting happened. Release only the scope whose controlling revisions, evidence, owners and start conditions passed. Everything else remains bounded by an explicit condition or hold.
Define production release in the meeting invitation. It is the authorised point after which the factory may begin the specified purchasing, setup, first-off or bulk-production step. If material purchasing can start before bulk production, record separate release points rather than giving one ambiguous “go.”
The meeting does not replace a factory audit, product test, sample approval, quality plan or inspection. It confirms that the right evidence exists, applies to this product and order, has an owner, and is reflected in the production plan.
Decide when a pre-production meeting is warranted
Not every unchanged reorder needs a long meeting. Use the gate when the consequence of a misunderstood requirement justifies a cross-functional release review.
Typical triggers include:
- a first production run or materially redesigned product;
- a new factory site, line, tool, critical process or sub-supplier;
- a safety-, compliance- or performance-sensitive product;
- new packaging, artwork, labels, firmware or market requirements;
- an order with complex components, subcontract operations or buyer approvals;
- a previous nonconformity, delay or failed release that changes the control plan; or
- an unresolved proposal to change material, process, test method or production source.
These are risk prompts, not a universal rule. A simple repeat order may use an asynchronous document read-back and short exception meeting. A complex regulated product may need multiple specialist reviews before the final release meeting.
Do not wait until the planned line-start day. Hold the meeting early enough to close evidence gaps without forcing the team to choose between delay and an uncontrolled release.
Invite people who can produce evidence and make decisions
Attendance should follow the decisions on the agenda. Sales can coordinate, but it should not be the only factory function representing production, quality and engineering.
| Role | Evidence or decision owned | Hold signal |
|---|---|---|
| Buyer product/engineering | Specification, drawings, BOM, function, approved exceptions | No authority to resolve technical conflict |
| Buyer quality/compliance | Test basis, quality plan, acceptance criteria, required specialist review | Applicable evidence or reviewer absent |
| Buyer procurement/operations | PO scope, commercial change, schedule, logistics hand-over and escalation | Order or schedule basis remains ambiguous |
| Supplier project/sales lead | Counterparty coordination, document register, action ownership | Cannot identify the actual factory decision-makers |
| Factory engineering | Tooling, process flow, settings, work instructions and first-off plan | Process owner has not reviewed current revision |
| Factory production/planning | Material readiness, line/capacity slot, staffing and output schedule | Capacity is only a general sales claim |
| Factory quality | Incoming/in-process/final checks, gauges, tests, records and nonconformity path | Acceptance criteria or measurement method missing |
| Specialist reviewer where applicable | Product-specific safety, regulatory, testing or technical decision | Material interpretation lacks qualified review |
One person can hold several roles in a small business. The test is not the job title; it is whether the person can show the evidence and make or escalate the decision.
List names and decision rights in the invitation. If the factory's production or quality owner cannot attend, decide whether written evidence and delegated authority are sufficient. Do not discover during the meeting that every material question must be taken away to an unnamed person.
Also state the working language, who owns any technical translation and which language/version controls the operational read-back. Translation does not resolve an ambiguous requirement, so compare identifiers, quantities, units, drawings and acceptance evidence rather than relying on a conversational summary.
Send a controlled evidence pack before the meeting
Issue an indexed pack with document IDs, revisions and owners. Ask participants to mark exceptions before the meeting rather than reading every document together on the call.
The pack should include, as applicable:
- purchase order or pro forma invoice, quantity by SKU and commercial release conditions;
- factory-ready product specification, drawings and bill of materials;
- approved samples from the relevant sample stages and the identified golden sample;
- packaging specification, artwork, labels, instructions and carton marks;
- applicable test reports, declarations, certificates and open specialist reviews tied to the exact product revision;
- quality-control plan, defect definitions, acceptance criteria and inspection protocol;
- process flow, tooling/jig/gauge status, work instructions and first-off plan;
- material/component/sub-supplier readiness evidence;
- dated production schedule with approval, material, setup, production, test, inspection, correction and hand-over gates; and
- open change requests, deviations, nonconformities and action register.
For Australian consumer products, the ACCC's sourcing and testing guidance tells suppliers to examine factory controls, raw materials, assembly processes, quality checks and pre-shipment arrangements. It also stresses that test evidence must relate to the correct product and applicable requirement. The meeting should therefore identify the report, product revision and decision—not merely mark a box labelled “compliance.”
Use the product's actual requirements. The meeting organiser should not invent tests or decide regulatory interpretation outside their competence.
Run the agenda as a sequence of release gates
Run the agenda in dependency order. Spend time according to the order's risk and the exceptions found in the evidence pack; a fixed meeting duration is not evidence of readiness.
| Gate | Questions that must be answered | Minimum output |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Scope and authority | Which order, SKUs, quantity, site and release step are in scope? Who can decide? | Confirmed scope, language/version and decision owners |
| 2. Baseline read-back | Which specification, drawing, BOM, sample, packaging and artwork revisions control? | One document register; conflicts held |
| 3. Materials and supply | Are critical inputs approved, sourced, received or still assumed? Which sub-suppliers matter? | Readiness evidence and gaps |
| 4. Tooling and process | Are tools, gauges, work instructions, first-off and external processes ready? | Process-release actions |
| 5. Safety and compliance | Which requirements apply, what evidence covers this revision, and what is unresolved? | Specialist decision or hold |
| 6. Quality controls | What will be checked, by whom, when, how and against which acceptance criteria? | Reconciled control/inspection plan |
| 7. Schedule and changes | What starts each milestone? What open change, approval or recovery path can move it? | Dated dependencies and owners |
| 8. Decision and read-back | What is go, conditional or held? What evidence closes each condition? | Accepted release and action register |
Do not spend the meeting re-presenting supplier marketing or audit information. Confirm the exact production site and line, then use the existing audit record to decide whether a missing capability issue is already resolved or remains a hold.
Keep open issues in a hold register
Minutes describe discussion. A hold register controls what happens next.
| Field | Required entry | Weak entry to reject |
|---|---|---|
| Item | Exact missing decision, document, evidence or action | “Confirm quality” |
| Classification | Hold, bounded condition or information only | Priority colour with no production meaning |
| Affected step | Material order, setup, first-off, bulk run, packing or shipment | “ASAP” |
| Owner | Named person with authority to close or escalate | Department name only |
| Evidence to close | Specific revision, report, sample, result or approval | “Supplier to advise” |
| Due date | Date/time in an agreed timezone | “Before production” |
| Closure authority | Person/role that accepts the evidence | Same person who merely supplied it |
| Status | Open, evidence submitted, accepted, rejected or overdue | Deleted when inconvenient |
Use three decision classes.
- Hold: the affected production step cannot start.
- Bounded condition: another unaffected step may proceed, but the affected step is mechanically blocked until named evidence is accepted.
- Information: an update is required but it does not control release.
Do not label an unresolved safety, compliance, baseline or site-capability question “information.” Do not use “conditional go” when the condition can be bypassed by schedule pressure.
For example, plain-carton material purchasing might proceed while final artwork approval remains held if the material will not be made obsolete and printing cannot start without the released file. Record both release points. If artwork changes the carton construction, mandatory label or ordered material, that separation may not be valid.
Issue one signed production-release record
Close the meeting by reading the decision back on screen. The record should contain:
| Release field | Required content |
|---|---|
| Identity | Supplier legal counterparty, factory site, buyer entity, PO/order and meeting date |
| Released scope | SKUs, quantity and exact purchasing/setup/first-off/bulk-production step released |
| Controlling baseline | Specification, drawing, BOM, samples, packaging, artwork, quality plan and test-document revisions |
| Approved exceptions | Every deviation, limit, condition and expiry |
| Open items | Register IDs, affected steps, owners, evidence, due dates and closure authorities |
| Schedule | Material-ready, start, first-off, production, inspection, correction and cargo-ready definitions/dates |
| Change rule | No unrecorded change; any proposal returns to the authorised change process |
| Decision | Go, bounded conditional go or hold, with reason |
| Authority | Names, roles, date/time, working language/version and method of acceptance |
Australian Government supplier guidance recommends recording core supplier terms such as the goods, price/payment, timeframes, delivery, quality and warranty matters. The production-release record does not replace the contract or purchase order. It reads the operational version of those commitments together so the factory does not start from a different scope.
Here, signed means traceably accepted by the named operational authorities, whether through a signed document or a controlled electronic approval. It does not, by itself, decide contractual enforceability or cure an unresolved legal, safety or compliance issue.
Issue the record promptly and preserve the evidence pack that was actually reviewed. If someone sends a changed drawing after the meeting, reopen the affected gate; do not quietly replace the attachment beneath an old approval.
After the meeting, verify closure before the affected step
Assign one coordinator to maintain the master action register, but keep closure authority with the relevant decision owner.
After the meeting:
- distribute the signed release, document index and open-item register;
- release only the documents listed in the decision and withdraw obsolete copies from the working pack;
- collect evidence against each action rather than accepting status messages;
- confirm the actual material, line, site, tool and first production reference match the release;
- update dates when a condition moves the schedule;
- apply a documented change process to any new material, process, site, artwork or test proposal;
- use the selected quality inspection stages to verify production at the risk-appropriate point; and
- keep shipment held until any shipment-release evidence passes.
The meeting's sign-off is not the last quality record. It authorises defined work to begin. First-off, in-process, test and inspection results still need their own acceptance decisions.
If the supplier starts affected production while a hold is open, record the unauthorised state, identify and segregate the affected units, and reassess rather than retroactively changing the status to go.
Pre-production meeting checklist
Before
- [ ] Define the exact order, site and production step to be released.
- [ ] Name participants, decision rights and escalation contacts.
- [ ] Issue an indexed evidence pack with revision identifiers.
- [ ] Mark document conflicts and missing evidence before the meeting.
- [ ] Confirm the factory production, quality and engineering owners will attend or delegate authority.
- [ ] Circulate the draft agenda, hold register and release template.
During
- [ ] Read back the controlling specification, drawings, BOM, samples, packaging and artwork.
- [ ] Reconcile materials, critical components, sub-suppliers and inventory readiness.
- [ ] Confirm tooling, gauges, work instructions, process flow and first-off controls.
- [ ] Identify applicable safety/compliance evidence and unresolved specialist decisions.
- [ ] Confirm quality checks, acceptance criteria, inspection booking and nonconformity path.
- [ ] Reconcile milestone start conditions, dates, evidence owners and recovery allowance.
- [ ] Classify every open item as hold, bounded condition or information.
- [ ] Read back go, conditional-go or hold scope and authority.
After
- [ ] Issue the signed release, document index and open register.
- [ ] Withdraw superseded working documents.
- [ ] Accept closure evidence before the affected step begins.
- [ ] Reopen the gate for any new proposal or changed file.
- [ ] Verify first implementation and preserve traceability to the released order.
Use this message when arranging the meeting:
Please review the attached indexed evidence pack before the pre-production meeting. The meeting will decide release for the named order and production steps. Bring the factory owners for production, engineering and quality, plus evidence for materials, tooling, process, tests, quality controls and schedule. We will record controlling revisions, open holds, owners, due dates and closure evidence. No affected production may begin until the signed release or bounded condition authorises that step. Any later change must return through the documented approval process.
What to do next
Build the release template before scheduling the call. Populate the document index and open-item register, then ask each participant to submit exceptions and evidence in advance.
During the meeting, spend time on conflicts and decisions—not reading files aloud. End by naming exactly what can start, what cannot, who closes each gap and what evidence counts as closure.
The strongest pre-production meeting is not the longest or best attended. It is the one that leaves the factory with one unambiguous production baseline and leaves the buyer with an attributable reason to release or hold every affected step.
Sources
- ISO 10005:2018 — Quality management: Guidelines for quality plans
- ACCC Product Safety — How to source and test products
- business.gov.au — Suppliers
Sources retrieved 15 August 2026 Australia/Sydney. This article provides general operational information, not product-specific legal, contract, safety or regulatory advice.