A blog by Oleg Shilovitsky
Information & Comments about Engineering and Manufacturing Software

Do we need multi-faceted BOM compare?

Do we need multi-faceted BOM compare?
olegshilovitsky
olegshilovitsky
10 July, 2009 | 2 min for reading

bom-compareThe following blog article by Anurag Batra drove my attention today – “Comparing BOM Structures: a multi-faceted need”. The author is asking if “BOM comparison” is needed function in the PLM system and especially interested in the “multi-faceted” Bill of Material comparison. He is asking these questions in the context of enhancements made in the new Agile 9.3. He wrote – “Most PDM, PLM and ERP systems offer the ability to compare Bills of Material structures side by side. Agile have had a BOM Comparison report for many years – it allowed for comparison of multiple BOM structures side by side. With 9.3, we’ve enhanced the report greatly – focusing on the use case of deep multi-level comparison between two BOM structures”. Later in this article Anurag explains new features, how possible to compare multiple levels of multiple release changes etc. According to him, Agile 9.3 version provides excellent features that improve the capability to compare Bill of Materials in multiple ways. I’ve been a bit confused in the end of Anurag’s post by his question to readers, how they actually compare BOMs and what can be possible use cases for newly introduced reports…

Here is my Think Tank question… Do we really want to compare the Bill of Materials? Except for the fact that we always excited by the features and capabilities of our software, I guess the comparison is a very complex task. Each time I’m trying to compare structures, I feel unsecured. To compare multi-level structures that include multiple changes is very complicated, in my view. I’d be very interested to see examples of multi-faceted BOM comparison Anurag is talking about…

Here is my view:
1.  Bill of Material comparison is a very complicated task.

2. Designers and Engineers are less interesting “to compare”, but more interesting to find the difference between two versions of designs of product structures.

3. Maybe we need to think about functions in our software that provide “results” and not put users in complicated scenarios of comparing multiple structures?

I’m looking forward to your responses and open discussion…

Best, Oleg

Disclaimer: I’m co-founder and CEO of OpenBOM developing a digital network-based platform that manages product data and connects manufacturers and their supply chain networksMy opinion can be unintentionally biased.

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
12 January, 2011

There is one topic that always raises lots of controversy, in my view. I’m talking about integrations or even more...

19 November, 2023

To continue sharing what I learned at AU2023 earlier this week, in this article I want to speak about Design...

13 January, 2024

In my earlier article How to bridge PLM and ERP Systems To Support Modern Product Development and Digital Thread I...

17 May, 2015

I’m in Dallas, TX for the next few days to attend Siemens PLM Connection 2015 conference. Teamcenter is one of...

27 October, 2010

Almost 2 weeks ago, I wrote about De-confusing of PLM Collaboration. Today, I want to suggest a different angle and...

7 August, 2019

Remember old days of engineering software? It was the time of proprietary data formats and interoperability solutions. These days aren’t...

22 August, 2012

Migration. This is a word any IT and PDM/PLM manager is afraid to hear. In my view, it is one...

14 February, 2018

It took me few days to catch up on my writing about Solidworks World 2018. But I’m not done yet....

19 April, 2017

I’ve been following F8 conference for the last few days. An annual Facebook gathering is usually a good place to...

Blogroll

To the top