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

Existing data prevents companies to improve Part Numbers?

Existing data prevents companies to improve Part Numbers?
Oleg
Oleg
15 August, 2014 | 2 min for reading

historical-part-numbers

Part Numbers is a fascinating topic. I’m coming back to blog about what is the best approach to manage Part Numbers. My last post about it was – Part Numbers are hard. How to think about data first? was just few weeks ago. In that article, I outlined few principles how to keep PN separate from surrounding data focusing on different aspects of parts – description, classification, configurations, suppliers, etc.

Yesterday, my attention  was caught by ThomasNet article – Are Part Numbers Too Smart for Their Own Good? The article nailed down a key issue why companies are still having difficulties with management of Part Numbers. Nothing works from scratch in engineering companies. Complexity of characteristics and history of existing Part Numbers and products are making real difficulties to adopt new PN management concepts. The following passage explains the problem:

Another problem with descriptive numbering is that the description can become out of date and irrelevant over time. Individual parts can have their own life cycles; if a part has been identified according to the product, what happens if that product is discontinued but the part continues to be used in a newer product? Or what if a manufacturer changes vendors and the part number contains the name of the vendor that originally provided the piece?

Gilhooley admits that some Ultra Consultants clients have decided that switching from descriptive to auto-generated numbering would require too much organizational change. Some companies stick with old systems, and some opt for hybrid systems that perhaps retain descriptive numbers for existing parts but use auto-generated numbers for new parts.

It looks like there is no single solution or best practice to solve the problem. The “traditional” engineering approach to keep options to manage a diverse set company configuration looks like the only possible way to solve this problem in existing PLM/ERP systems.

What is my conclusion? History keeps customers from moving forward. There are two aspects of complexity in Part Numbers: 1/ complexity of definition and data classification; 2/ historical records of PN in every company including catalogs and existing products. Together, they create a block to make any changes in existing PN schema and prevent companies from migration towards new approaches. New data modeling technologies must be invented to handle existing data as well as supporting customers to migrate into modern PLM and ERP solutions. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
8 April, 2010

I’d like to come with questions about the topic of PLM and Data Modeling. The idea of this discussion came...

26 September, 2010

I’ve been running the working group “New Trends in PLM” on COFES Russia / isicad-2010. I had no idea how...

8 May, 2019

Data is a new oil. Nobody is surprised when you say it these days. My previous company Inforbix was collecting...

22 October, 2014

How do you move to the cloud? This is one of topics I’m discussing on my blog for the last...

24 February, 2009

Lately, I’ve seen a growing number of applications introducing the idea of real-time collaboration online on the same document. This...

7 December, 2015

Platform. It is a very confusing term. What is platform and how to define it. Is it just about the...

30 April, 2021

Yesterday’s SaaS PLM comparison article triggered great sparring with my long-time PLM industry colleague, Marc Lind, SVP of Strategy at...

22 July, 2017

   by  kosmolaut  For many years, midsize manufacturing companies were underserved by PDM and PLM vendors. First it was about CAD...

21 May, 2008

Hello!  In this blog I will share with you my thoughts about technologies and user experience around Product Lifecycle Management...

Blogroll

To the top