[Community] Supply chain information
Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
hns at goldelico.com
Mon Mar 10 09:40:01 CET 2014
Am 05.03.2014 um 18:33 schrieb Sebastian Beschke:
> Hi Oliver,
> Am 04.03.2014 20:37, schrieb wonderphone at posteo.de:
>> Is it possible to group the parts into parts that can be easily
>> purchased at another location and parts that we do have to accept as
>> they are? Can we for instance group the resistors and regard them a
>> one general item or are they all individually special?
Well, some resistors come from Panasonic, some from others. Same
for capacitors. Generally there are a handful of "standard" suppliers
a production company is purchasing from. Which one is used in detail
in a specific production week is a little random.
Unless it is a very special component (very rare for resistors, sometimes
for capacitors, more often for inductors) the component name is unique.
Let's formulate it differently: there is a gradual scale between "standard"
and "special" components. The more "standard", the more interchangeable
it is and the more randomly the supplier can be chosen. And the more
the differences are.
> While I cannot answer the second question, I agree that prioritizing
> parts in the way you suggest is going to be helpful.
>> @Sascha: Did you already have the chance to take a look at the list?
>> Does it look like something that you can feed into your tool? What
>> will the tool be able to do what a big spread sheet table cannot do?
> I think you mean me. Well, our goal is to provide visualisation and easy
> management. A spread sheet table is not very accessible to the end user.
> Especially as a supply chain is really tree shaped, and Nikolaus’ BOM
> only covers the first level of the tree.
> Well, our tool is obviously still in the making (though it’s coming
> along fairly well). The main difference I see with NagerIT’s data (which
> is our main target) is that the GTA04’s supply chain is much larger. But
> it shouldn’t be a big problem to design towards that.
>> @ Nikolaus: How would we need to proceed when we talk to suppliers? We
>> probably have to avoid to make you a laugh in their eyes ;-)
The key point is that we need a reason to talk to them. Just for asking for
additional information may work, but it would be better to ask them when
we want to buy something. This means the "door opener" is that we want
to buy something. The more specific and the more we can explain that it
is a running project with big future projection the better.
> I think we should work out some kind of “telephone script”. We need to
> make the supplier understand what we want, and need to figure out how to
> get that information out of them. Even before that, we need to know what
> information to ask for in the first place. :) All this considering we
> have a pretty weak position towards the supplier as we don’t represent a
> large buyer (don’t represent anyone, really…).
> I’d like to draw on Susanne Jordan’s (of NagerIT) experience with this.
> I’ll try contacting her again.
More information about the Community