Which sample did we approve?
You are developing a new product with a factory. The first sample was wrong in colour. The second had the right colour but the stitching was weak. The third was nearly right, and someone approved it by email with 'OK, but make the handle a bit thicker'. A fourth sample arrived by courier and is in a box in the office.
Production has started. The factory says the approved version was the third sample. Your buyer thought it was the fourth. The inspection company is checking against a spec sheet from before the second round. When the goods arrive, they match none of them exactly.
Why sample history goes missing
Sampling happens over weeks or months, across several people and channels. Comments are made in email, chat, calls and on the physical sample itself. Photos are on phones. The approved sample might be in your office or at the factory, with a label or without. There is no single record that says 'this is the approved version, with these notes'.
- Sample rounds tracked in email threads.
- Photos and comments scattered across devices.
- Approval given informally, sometimes with conditions.
- Inspection companies working from old specifications.
- Physical golden samples not labelled or logged.
What that confusion costs
Production that does not match what you expected means rework, disputes with the factory, and stock you may struggle to sell. Arguments about what was approved are hard to win without a clear record. New products launch late because sample rounds drag on. And the knowledge of why a spec was changed disappears with the person who asked for it.
Repeat orders suffer too. When you reorder a product a year later, the factory may work from its own records, which include changes you never approved or leave out ones you did. If your side has no clear approved version to point to, the second production run can drift from the first without anyone noticing until customers do.
The sample tracker we build
- Each new product or change has a sample record, linked to the factory and the specification.
- Each round is logged when it arrives: photos, measurements, comments from each reviewer, and a result (rejected, approved with changes, approved).
- Comments are tied to photos, so 'handle thicker' points at the handle.
- Approval is a deliberate step by a named person, and conditions are written as changes to the specification, not a line in an email.
- The approved specification, with photos and a golden sample reference, is sent to the factory and to your inspection company as the production reference.
- Physical samples are labelled with a code linking them to the record, so the box in the office means something.
| Email and chat | Sample tracker | |
|---|---|---|
| Sample rounds | Scattered threads | Logged per product |
| Comments | Separate from photos | Pinned to photos |
| Approval | Informal | Named person, recorded version |
| Inspection reference | Whatever spec they have | Approved version sent to them |
How development runs after
Everyone looks at the same record of a product's development. The factory knows exactly what was approved. The inspection company checks against the same version. When goods arrive, you can compare them with a clear approved reference, and disputes are shorter because the record is clear.
Is this your development process?
- You have argued with a factory about which sample was approved.
- Sample comments are in email and chat.
- Inspection companies work from old specs.
- Golden samples are in boxes without labels.
- New products are delayed by long sample rounds.