Get Savvy about PLM

One business practice we get asked about frequently by our customers is what to do about part numbering and how PLM systems work with various part numbering schemes.

I won’t hide the fact that I am very biased about part numbering methodology. There are two primary forms of part numbers - “intellegent” and “sequential”.

Intellegent numbers have meaningful significance within the number - and in that they serve as a quick means for visual recognition of part type, product class, supplier, operation process, production phase, or other similar breakdowns. There is often some “sequential” component within the part number. The intellegent part number is a favorite in the small -mid sized businesses that have had to operate predominantly manual engineering practices and have a mid-ranged ERP system that is not particularly restrictive about part numbering. So the part number itself acts as a “database” of the part information. The problem that frequently arises is that a part may change “classification” but not really change form fit or function - such as switching from manufactured to procured so the company faces a process decision - change the part number just to keep the data “correct” or leave the number as is and live with the incorrect meaning behind the number.

Many years ago Hewlett Packard conducted a study on the role of intellegent part numbers in maturing businesses. The conclusion of the study was that as a business matures and grows - the viability of maintaining intellegent part numbers as a business practice became increasingly costly and in the end the companies with sequential numbers were able to more easily adapt and evolve as business entities. Businesses that have grown by merger and acquisition find the intellegent part numbers mire the business down as each entity brings a different “decoder” to the numbering scheme - making things more and more complex.

The benefit PLM brings is that part numbers are a unique identifier - the availabilty and access to all of the classifications that were being manipulated within the part number are actually captured as their own data fields. Changes to those data sets that are not changing form fit or function are not forced to remain faulty nor does a new part number have to be generated. Thus the sequential number is easy to leverage. Most PLM vendors will allow the enablement of using intellegent part numbers (in part because the customers demand it) but they will all acknowledge that intellegent part numbers are not a recommended business practice. In fact to implement automated generation of “intellegent” part number schemes in PLM systems often requires custom rule sets or even custom SDK code to deploy within some PLM systems.

The challenge exists for companies “converting” from intellegent numbering systems to sequential numbering systems. Some companies have hard coded integrations that parse the numbers for other systems - and that means to go to a sequential system some integrations may have to be reworked. But for many companies - it is not a requirement to renumber legacy parts - but rather to pick a time and move sequential from that time forward. For cultural acceptance it is often easiest to mark that “time” as being when the company deploys PLM for the first time - setting a best business practice in place along with the tools rather than forcing the tool to perpetuate a bad practice.

Copyright 2007, LR Hirr, All Rights Reserved