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
14 December, 2012

Relational databases is a very mature set of technologies. We use RDBM (Relational databases) practically everywhere these days. It is...

18 February, 2010

I’d like to put some thoughts about user identity management in the enterprise. In the beginning, you may think the topic...

1 September, 2010

There are few terms in enterprise software and specifically in engineering software that was completely overused. In my view, collaboration...

23 November, 2024

How to make PLM more than just a buzzword? An article Make PLM Great Again written by Lionel Grealou in his blog...

15 August, 2014

Product Data Management (PDM) isn’t a new domain. The first PDM systems were invented 20-30 years ago with a simple...

29 June, 2018

Who will win cloud war? BOLD business article brings an interesting comparison between vendors and the funny picture I reference above....

17 November, 2019

It’s that time of the PLM development again – vendors have started to pay attention to small and medium-sized manufacturing...

9 June, 2024

The reality of every engineering team or manufacturing enterprise is multiple systems. For the last 20+ years, the question of...

20 March, 2013

Social hype is getting down. I can say it about PLM industry too. We can see less “social startups” and...

Blogroll

To the top