ITP vs Method Statement: Different Jobs, Shared Project Controls

Compare purpose and user action

The documents answer different questions. The method statement sets out the proposed sequence, resources, interfaces, controls and execution approach for the activity. The ITP identifies how conformance will be inspected or tested, by whom, against which approved requirement and what evidence will be retained.

Neither document automatically approves the other. A method statement may be a referenced input to the ITP; the ITP can identify checks that must occur at stages in that method.

Connect the documents with controlled references

Reference the approved method statement title, number and revision in the ITP where it informs the inspection sequence or method. In the method statement, identify the related ITP steps or inspection records where the project workflow needs the crew to stop, notify, inspect or retain evidence.

If the method changes, review whether the inspection sequence, access to inspect, test method, criteria source, control points or required evidence also change. Route both documents through the project’s revision and approval process.

Keep technical decisions in the right place

The ITP should point to the governing drawing, specification, adopted code pathway, approved product instruction or test method rather than copy uncontrolled excerpts. The method statement should not create new acceptance criteria or grant release authority unless the project documents assign it.

Neither is a substitute for engineering design, regulator/certifier decisions, permits, safety plans or completed inspection records. Link those documents where the project requires them.

Resolve coordination questions before work starts

When an ITP inspection cannot be performed at the stage proposed in the method, revise the sequence or arrange access before the work conceals the evidence. If documents conflict, raise a request for information through the project route and identify the affected activity. Do not proceed on an assumed interpretation where the contract requires a release.

Fictional example: coordinate before a concealed finish

Fictional teaching example only. A hypothetical contractor method proposes a sequence for an internal wet-area membrane, while the ITP contains a pre-cover inspection. This is not a real approved procedure or a universal hold point.

1. The method statement identifies the surface preparation, product system and intended sequencing using the approved project details.
2. The ITP row references the method revision and separately cites the project criteria and inspection evidence needed before covering.
3. The supervisor checks whether the method leaves access for the inspection; if not, the sequence is clarified before starting.
4. The ITP control type and release route are copied from the contract/project quality plan, not inferred from the example.
5. A revision to the product or sequence is routed for review in both documents where it changes verification or acceptance.