The agreed processes for managing changes to the service package should be defined in all contracts, except the simplest contracts. From a supply perspective, these would generally include the impact on costs and investment commitments of both parties in order to control changes in the volume or markets provided by the initially agreed markets. The quality contract may be the element of the contract, due to frequent changes in standards and regulations, which are unlikely to remain in its original form for the duration of a contract, even if the services provided remain unchanged. This is a persuasive argument in favour of the fact that the quality agreement is a stand-alone section, the terms of which can be changed by mutual agreement without opening the main agreement where changes are necessary to comply with the rules, and not to change the scope of the content of the “Quality Services” package. However, as IBM and other companies have learned, contract manufacturing is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, a CM is the intellectual property of an equipment (IP) that it transmits to other customers or arrogate. On the other hand, an ambitious and emerging CM can claim the benefits it offers to an OEM. Once the product of an OEM is fully manufactured, the CM may decide to create its own brand and build its own relationships with retailers and distributors, including those of the OEM. If these things happen, the OEM could face not only more dangerous established companies, but also a competitor of a new type: the formerly underestimated CMs. Added to this is an offence to counterfeit if the OEM had not given its activity to the manufacturer of betrayable contracts, the CM`s income and knowledge might have remained so meagre that it could not enter the market of its patron. A specific risk of complexity to accept the concept of insupply thirds in the supply chain is the question: “How do you control the third party?” The acceptance of third parties in the supply chain also implies the explicit acceptance that, although the donor is responsible for the acts or omissions of the third party, the control is transferred to the third party, since they are the only ones with direct access to the contractual activity available to the executive.
Contract Giver is limited to surveillance and influence; Therefore, the criticism of choosing the right third party, in whom one can trust, that it works in a manner consistent with the standards and regulatory obligations of the Contract Giver. The strategic process of the potential giver contract should also provide a list of the requirements and risks necessary for management. This list contains the nature and location of the required third-party services, the lifespan of a proposed third party, the expected benefits and the timing of the availability of these benefits. Part of the declaration of requirement will focus on the technical transfer, quality and regulatory impact of transferring elements from the supply chain to third parties. Potential risks of increased complexity should be quantified and ways to manage them effectively to ensure safety of care, patient safety and compliance with regulatory expectations should be clearly identified.