Do you realize that you lose control on engineering data that is produced by your company ?

Well if this is the case then poor Configuration Management practices are implemented and even worse, may be that they are not implemented at all. Recently, a prospect applied to us wondering, how come that we implemented a PLM system and still we face problems. In a short period our experts realized that PLM is not the issue, the issue is poor Configuration Practices. The company doesn’t have clear procedures for design freeze and baselines establishment, they use short cuts for documents and products approval (“we have no time for these long procedures”). The company does not force their subcontractors to implement proper Configuration Management rctices.   

PLM is not the ultimate solution, first you need to define the proper procedures and Configuration Management practices.

One of our customers (….. became a customer because of this event) claimed that technicians of the support team realized that the configuration at customers’ sites is not exactly the one they get from the software systems.

These events slew down the maintenance period, increased our customer’s expenses and the most important its reputation was challenged.

Usually companies lay emphasis on engineering impacts of the proposed change (ECP \ ECR) including thermal analysis, electromagnetic impacts etc. 

They are companies that ignore other impacts such as logistics impacts, potential for surplus stock and potential for shortage of an item that is required to implement the change. Other companies ignore impact on schedule, while some companies ignore impacts of the proposed change on ILS (Integrated Logistics Support), i.e.; they don’t consider the impact on manuals, training material ad training execution, spare parts and support equipment.

One of our customers was about to approve a change that would result with surplus stock of a few hundreds dollars. This was the trigger for a new change control process.

A story about a subcontractor who manufactured according to previous version of a TDP (Technical Data Package)

The purchasing department submitted the previous version of a TDP simply because the department was not informed about he latest version - the company lost $100,000 since the supplied items were useless (in this case workaround, rework etc. were not an option).

We recommended improved processes, which were later on implemented in a PLM system.

On many occasions the story is not that dramatic. Nevertheless the purchasing department aught to perform a research in order to make sure that the updated TDP is submitted.