Furniture quality plays a vital role in the physical and mental well-being of users. Ensuring high-quality furniture is essential, and one effective way to achieve this is by requiring suppliers to provide furniture inspection reports as part of the bidding process. These reports serve as critical evidence of product safety and compliance with industry standards.
In terms of testing categories, furniture inspection reports can be either entrusted inspections or supervision inspections—essentially, spot checks. Regarding the objects tested, reports can include raw material testing or finished product testing. In terms of test items, they may be full tests or partial tests. However, current bidding documents vary widely in their requirements for the form and content of these reports, leading to inconsistencies across regions.
"Enterprises often choose only high-quality furniture for testing, which makes the results not fully representative," said Beijing Yu Xiusu, vice chairman of the Furniture Association. "In contrast, random inspections conducted by quality control departments are more objective and authoritative." Therefore, in government procurement, it is recommended that random inspection reports be required to ensure reliability.
Some projects have added extra points for random inspection reports. For example, during the relocation of the new campus library at the Beijing University of Political Science and Law, the bidding documents allowed for additional points if a random inspection report was provided. According to Xiusu, this approach is reasonable and should be encouraged.
However, many companies still opt for commissioned inspections, where they select products they believe are of good quality. This method lacks objectivity, as the samples are not randomly chosen. In contrast, random sampling initiated by regulatory authorities ensures a more accurate reflection of product quality.
According to Zhang Hui, deputy director of the Shenzhen Furniture Development Research Institute, most companies submit for inspections rather than random sampling, with a ratio of about 2:1. This suggests that companies prefer controlled testing environments over unpredictable random checks.
There are also instances where companies use furniture from other manufacturers for testing, which undermines the integrity of the process. As Yan Hu, design director of Ningbo Chaoping Modern Furniture Co., Ltd., noted, some companies exploit these loopholes when random inspection reports are not required.
Tang Yuxun, director of the Zhejiang Furniture Product Quality Inspection Center, explained that while large enterprises often conduct regular inspections to ensure product quality, the primary purpose is not just to meet bidding requirements but to maintain their own standards. These reports carry significant value as they reflect a company's commitment to quality.
In most government procurement projects, reports from authoritative organizations are accepted. For instance, in the 2013-2014 central government office furniture procurement project, suppliers could provide either raw material or random inspection reports, depending on the buyer’s requirements. While many projects do not specify whether the report should be a commissioned or random inspection, some explicitly require the latter.
Finished product testing reports also hold value, as they demonstrate a company’s ability to produce safe and compliant furniture. Although some procurement officers argue that such reports may not directly apply to the specific products being purchased, Tang Yuxun believes that these reports indicate a company’s overall capability and commitment to quality.
Test reports are time-sensitive, so it is important to include the date of the test. Most furniture companies conduct annual inspections, as changes in materials, processes, and personnel can affect product performance. While reports older than a year may still be valid, those over three years old are generally considered outdated.
In government procurement, the acceptable period for test reports varies. Some projects accept reports up to two years old, while others require them to be within six months or one year. The general consensus is that reports within one year are most valuable, as they reflect the current state of production and quality assurance.
Jiangsu Jiajie Special Screw Co., Ltd , https://www.jiajiescrewcompany.com