Using BOMs to Guide Manufacturing Processes

The Importance of Good BOM Structures, or Why EBOM and MBOM are Different Much is being written and talked about BOMs. Should there be one BOM or many BOMs? What, if anything, is the difference between EBOM and MBOM? Who and/or what owns the BOM? What is usually omitted in these conversations is the question how a BOM should be structured and why. But answering this question is key to answering the other questions. So let's dive into it... The EBOM and MBOM are different because they serve fundamentally different purposes: The EBOM defines what the product is, and the EBOM structure reflects the product's functional composition, architecture, and configurable options. The MBOM on the other hand defines how that product is built, with the MBOM structure reflecting manufacturing sequence, operations, plants, and procurement realities. Keeping them separate allows companies to manage platforms, modularity, and variants at the engineering level while independently optimizing manufacturing execution, cost and procurement timelines. A well-structured EBOM is therefore function-oriented and architecture-driven. Its levels should represent systems, subsystems, and functional modules, not assembly steps or workstations. Assemblies in the EBOM are not just CAD groupings, they are modules that encapsulate functionality, define clear interfaces, and support reuse across product platforms. Especially in CTO environments, the EBOM should represent the full product family (often a 150% structure), with options, variants, and alternates managed through configuration logic rather than duplicated BOMs. Lastly, a good EBOM structure is not manufacturing-driven, but manufacturing-informed. It captures functional intent while respecting the realities of how products can be built, tested and maintained. The MBOM, by contrast, is process- and execution-driven. Its structure is organized around manufacturing and procurement realities: Assembly sequence, operations, work centers, plants, and installation timing. The same EBOM may result in multiple MBOMs depending on where and how a product is built. MBOMs also include items that don’t belong in engineering structures: Packaging, labels, consumables, kits, and manufacturing-only components, and explicitly support strategies like postponement, late-point differentiation, and long-lead item management. Confusing or collapsing these two structures leads to brittle architectures, poor configurability, and constant rework. Treating them as complementary but distinct views of the same product, connected through a clear EBOM-to-MBOM transformation, is what enables scalable platforms, efficient manufacturing, and resilient supply chains. In short: EBOM = what the product is. MBOM = how the product is built. And good product organizations are intentional about structuring both to support their respective purposes. Questions? Contact us at results@plmadvisors.com #BOM #PLM

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕��𝗠 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗿𝘂𝗺: 𝗜𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗱? If you’ve worked in manufacturing, you know the Bill of Materials (BOM) is both the backbone of product development and one of its biggest headaches. Many “flavors” of BOM exist: 𝗘-𝗕𝗢𝗠 – what is designed 𝗠-𝗕𝗢𝗠 – how it will be built 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗕𝗢𝗠 – what gets assembled 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗕𝗢𝗠 – what must be maintained 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗕𝗢𝗠 – logical groupings engineers love, but production can’t always interpret On paper this looks neat. In practice? Messy. I’ve seen: Sales request a 10-year-old product variant → Manufacturing scramble across PLM, ERP, and spreadsheets to reconstruct the BOM. Procurement in warding materials against obsolete revisions. Phantom BOMs causing confusion between engineering and production. Multi-level BOMs (17–21 deep) where a single change rippled into chaos. The outcome? 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀, 𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸, 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗕𝗢𝗠 𝟰.𝟬 Here’s where the future is headed: 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝘄𝗶𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗯𝗼𝗻𝗲 – one living product model, synchronized across views 𝗔𝗜 𝗮𝘀 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁 – detects mismatches, validates substitutions, speeds reconciliation 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗕𝗢𝗠𝘀 – replace 20-level hierarchies with reusable modules 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 – every unit carries its own as-built record 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺𝘀 – engineers keep groupings, but operations see real parts 𝗕𝗢𝗠 𝟰.𝟬 𝗶𝗻 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Old way: a Level 6 change, procurement buys the wrong part, production builds from outdated instructions. New way: Digital Twin flags downstream impacts instantly Procurement sees real-time alternatives Production gets updated work instructions Service knows exactly what was built That’s the difference between firefighting and flow — between reacting and anticipating. Companies moving this way report 20–50% faster change cycles, with case studies showing 28% gains in engineering change implementation. 𝗠𝘆 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆 The BOM’s evolution mirrors manufacturing: paper → ERP → siloed PLM/ERP. Now, with Digital Twin + AI, the BOM is no longer a document — it’s a living digital thread, dynamic, traceable, and accessible decades later. The real transformation? From a list of parts to a system of knowledge, alive across the lifecycle. Ref:https://lnkd.in/dxRK2M7j

✈️ EBOM vs MBOM — the invisible bridge between Engineering and Manufacturing In aerospace manufacturing, success isn’t just about great design — it’s about how effectively that design becomes a reality on the shop floor. That’s where EBOM (Engineering Bill of Materials) and MBOM (Manufacturing Bill of Materials) come into play. 🧩 EBOM defines what the product is: every washer, bolt, and bracket that forms the certified configuration of the aircraft. ⚙️ MBOM defines how the product is built: the actual materials, tools, consumables, and sequences used during assembly. In short: EBOM = Product as designed MBOM = Product as built When these two worlds are aligned, production flows, quality improves, and costs drop. When they’re not — you see rework, NCRs, and confusion on the shop floor. That’s why digital integration between EBOM and MBOM (through PLM and ERP systems) is no longer optional — it’s essential for modern aerospace manufacturing. Bridging that gap is where true operational excellence begins

SAP VC Integration with Production Planning (PP) Key Integration Steps: 1. Configuration Profiles: • Define Profiles: Set up configuration profiles in SAP VC to manage configurable products. • Create Dependencies: Establish dependencies and rules linking product configurations to BOM and routing. 2. Master Data Setup: • Material Master: Configure materials with necessary views (SD, MRP, Production). • BOM: Create a super BOM with all potential components. Use dependencies to select components based on configuration. • Routings: Develop super routings covering all operations. Dependencies determine necessary operations for each configuration. 3. Variant Configuration in Sales: • Sales Orders: Configure products in sales orders to specify characteristics. The system selects appropriate BOM components and routing operations. 4. Transfer to Production Planning: • Planned Orders: Sales order configurations transfer to planned orders in PP, generating production orders with specific components and operations. • Production Orders: Convert planned orders to production orders, tailored to customer configurations. 5. Integration Points: • MRP Run: MRP considers configurations to generate planned orders. • Capacity Planning: Ensure capacity planning accounts for different configurations. • Shop Floor Control: Use production orders to manage and control shop floor operations. Benefits of Integration: • Customization and Flexibility: Extensive customization without separate BOMs and routings for each variant. • Efficiency: Streamlined manufacturing process with production orders linked to customer configurations. • Accuracy: Reduced errors through automated BOM component and routing operation selection. • Cost Reduction: Fewer master data records needed for different product variants. Implementation Tips: • Testing: Test integration scenarios to ensure configurations influence BOMs and routings correctly. • Training: Train sales and production planning teams on handling configurable products. • Monitoring: Continuously monitor the integration to ensure smooth operations and address issues promptly. By following these steps, SAP VC can be effectively integrated with PP, enhancing manufacturing processes and meeting customer-specific requirements efficiently.

3 Things Every Manufacturing Team Needs to Get Right from Day One After working with hundreds of manufacturing teams, I've noticed that the most successful OpenBOM implementations share three things in common. Not the same industry. Not the same product complexity. Not the same team size. But the same three early decisions, made intentionally and made before the data scaled. 1- Part Numbers 2- Revisions 3- BOM types The teams that get these right early treat part numbers as identity, not labels. They define a clean, stable numbering strategy before any significant data import. They keep part numbers and revisions separate from day one, because they understand that revisions are interchangeable by definition — and when two versions of a part are no longer interchangeable, that is a new part number, not a new revision letter. The teams that get these right understand that revision control is a philosophy before it is a feature. They establish consistent naming conventions across all BOM levels. They gate revisions with an ECO process so the history captures not just what changed but why and whether it was authorized. They choose their revision strategy — top-down, bottom-up, or hybrid — deliberately rather than letting it emerge by accident. And the teams that get these right invest in BOM types early. They recognize that engineering, manufacturing, service, maintenance, and procurement are not the same question asked by different people. They are fundamentally different questions that require different views of the same product data. eBOM, mBOM, service BOM, maintenance BOM — these are not complexity. They are clarity. Part numbers define identity. Revisions define controlled change. BOM types define how the same product data serves every function across the lifecycle. When these three are aligned, OpenBOM scales naturally. The rest of the implementation builds on a foundation that holds. I wrote a detailed article covering all three — the decisions behind each one, the concrete patterns that work, and how they connect into a product data architecture that supports the full lifecycle. Curious what did your team prioritize first when you started your data management, PDM or PLM implementation?

Imagine your parts arriving only to discover engineering updated the design last month, and these parts are unusable. This scenario happens constantly, and it's because manufacturers think of their Bill of Materials as one static document. It's actually several different versions that don't talk to each other. A Bill of Materials starts as an engineering document listing the parts, quantities, and where each component goes in the product. But making the product requires additional information from other departments, like where to buy each part, how it needs to be handled, and when it ships. So each department typically creates their own version. Design has a BOM, purchasing has a BOM, manufacturing has a BOM, quality has a BOM - you get the idea. The problem is that many times, departments build their versions in parallel while engineering is still developing theirs, giving you multiple living documents that should match but don't. The worst part, however, is that companies treat these multiple BOMs as if they're one unified document. They assume they're in sync, but the versions drift apart. When engineering changes a part in their BOM, that change doesn't automatically flow to the other BOMs. Then procurement has no way to know a change has been made until the wrong parts arrive. At that point, they have to try to return them - or eat the cost. At Cofactr, we help our customers avoid these costly issues by making the engineering BOM the single source of truth and layering everything else on top of it. Not as separate versions or forks, but layers of integrated data. When engineering updates a part, that change ripples through to procurement, inventory, and manufacturing automatically. Before the wrong parts show up.

This week I've been talking a lot about the MBOM and its critical place in your business Many people assume the EBOM captures most of a product’s cost. In reality, for complex assemblies; think aircraft, fighter jets, automobiles, or heavy machinery - the EBOM can be just 40–75% of the total cost What’s often ignored are the consumables, tooling & fixtures that can add another 10–30% If these aren’t in your MBOM, it’s not a true reflection of total product expense   The MBOM as an Operations Hub When the MBOM resides in ERP, integrated with MRP, every department gains clarity Procurement knows precisely what to purchase & at what intervals Production lines see the exact requirements for both parts & supporting materials Finance gets real-time insight into true costs—including tooling wear, fixture replacements & overlooked expenses   The Invisible Costs What happens to all those costs that never make it into the MBOM? They drift, usually handled in ad-hoc ways on the shop floor Operators or supervisors buy consumables from separate budgets, or they borrow from adjacent cost centers This leads to hidden expenses & messy financial reports. Without a complete MBOM, your final cost structure is off, your forecasting is unreliable & your margins at risk   Why It Matters Realistic Demand Planning MRP runs off a more accurate BOM, factoring in not just part counts but also the supplies needed for each operation. This prevents painful shortages & overstock Better Supplier Coordination When tooling or fixtures require lead times, an up-to-date MBOM triggers earlier communication with vendors. No last-minute orders or idle lines waiting for parts Improved Cost Control Finance can spot the true drivers of product cost. If consumables are spiking, you can renegotiate supplier terms or explore alternative materials How to Fix the Gaps Define Clear Ownership Someone needs to own the process of adding all non-EBOM items into the MBOM. This might be a collaborative effort between engineering, manufacturing & supply chain Set Up Structured Data Processes Use your PLM/ERP system to create a standardized method for capturing consumables, tooling & fixture details. Manual entries lead to errors. Automation & digital checklists help Run Regular Cost Reviews Pull reports that show aggregated expenditures for all items linked to production, not just engineering components The Bottom Line A fully fleshed-out MBOM is one of the most effective ways to see your true costs & keep operations humming. It bridges the gap between design specs (the EBOM) & day-to-day manufacturing needs It saves headaches in procurement, aligns your entire supply chain & boosts confidence in your financial models   When EBOM covers only a fraction of total expenses & you leave the rest to guesswork, you increase the chance of hidden costs, disruptions & supply chain chaos. Elevate the MBOM within your ERP & let MRP leverage that insight - your teams & bottom line will thank you.

🔷 BOM in SAP:- BOM (Bill of Material) is a structured list of all components required to manufacture a finished product. 👉 In simple words: If you want to produce 1 Finished Product, BOM tells SAP: Which raw materials are needed In what quantity In which unit At which level 🔷 Real Example (Manufacturing Scenario) Let’s say your company manufactures Steel Table Finished Good: Steel Table (FG) Required Components: Steel Sheet – 20 KG Nuts – 40 PCS Bolts – 40 PCS Paint – 2 Liters All these components together form the BOM of Steel Table. 🔷 Why BOM is Important? BOM is mainly used in: ✅ Production Planning (PP Module) ✅ MRP Run (Material Requirement Planning) ✅ Costing (Product Costing) ✅ Production Order ✅ Backflush at time of Goods Issue Without BOM, SAP cannot calculate raw material requirement automatically. 🔷 Types of BOM in SAP 1️⃣ Material BOM Used for manufacturing a product. 2️⃣ Sales BOM Used in Sales (SD Module). 3️⃣ Equipment BOM Used in Plant Maintenance. 4️⃣ Variant BOM Used when product has multiple variations. 🔷 BOM Structure (Levels) 🔹 Single Level BOM Shows only direct components. 🔹 Multi-Level BOM Shows components inside components. Example: Steel Table → Frame → Steel Sheet → Legs → Bolts This is multi-level. 🔷 BOM in SAP S/4HANA – Main Transaction Codes Purpose T-Code Create BOM CS01 Change BOM CS02 Display BOM CS03 BOM List CS11 Where Used List CS15 🔷 BOM Creation Process (Step-by-Step – Consultant Level) Step 1: Material Master Ready Finished Good (FERT) Raw Materials (ROH) Semi-Finished (HALB if any) Step 2: Go to CS01 Enter: Material Plant BOM Usage (1 = Production) Alternative BOM (if needed) Step 3: Enter Components Add: Component Material Quantity Item Category (L = Stock Item) Storage Location (optional) Step 4: Save BOM number will be generated. 🔷 Important BOM Fields Base Quantity Component Quantity Scrap % Valid From Date Alternative BOM Status 🔷 BOM Integration Flow (End-to-End Cycle) Material Master ↓ BOM Creation ↓ Work Center ↓ Routing ↓ Production Order ↓ Goods Issue (261 Movement Type) ↓ Confirmation ↓ Goods Receipt (101 Movement Type) 🔷 Important Movement Type Related to BOM 261 – Goods Issue to Production Order 101 – Goods Receipt of Finished Goods 🔷 Practical Example Based on Steel industry: Example: Finished Good: Steel Coil Raw Materials: Iron Ore Coal Limestone When MRP runs, SAP explodes BOM and generates PR automatically for raw materials if stock is insufficient.

𝗕𝗢𝗠𝘀 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀. 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗱𝗼. Teams think a BOM is just a parts list. In reality, it’s a multi-layer system that touches engineering, manufacturing, sourcing, compliance, suppliers, and every downstream workflow. When assumptions replace structure, production failures follow. What the infographic highlights: 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸𝘀 𝗕𝗢𝗠 𝗶𝘀: ‣ A simple list of part names, quantities, parent-child structure, Excel sheets, and one-time ERP uploads. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗕𝗢𝗠 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘀: ‣ BOM Types & Ownership: EBOM, MBOM, SBOM, procurement BOM - each owned by different teams. ‣ EBOM ↔ MBOM Alignment: Structures differ; manufacturing rearranges for routing, stations, and plant flow. ‣ Change Propagation: One ECO can impact multiple sites, tools, documents, and downstream systems. ‣ Revision Control & Traceability: Knowing what changed, who approved it, and which revision shipped. ‣ Effectivity Management: Date-based, lot-based, plant-based, region-specific validity. ‣ Alternates & Substitutions: Approved alternates, priority rules, form-fit-function checks. ‣ Compliance BOM: ROHS, REACH, conflict minerals, export rules — unavoidable in global manufacturing. ‣ Supplier Linking & AVL: Lead times, MOQ, preferred suppliers, price changes. ‣ BOM Validation: Detect duplicates, missing quantities, wrong units, incorrect revisions. ‣ Multi-System Sync: PLM → ERP → MES alignment; if sync breaks, the entire chain breaks. A BOM isn’t a document, it’s an infrastructure. When teams oversimplify it, factories absorb the cost. For a deep dive into PLM, MES, or CAD and to elevate your understanding of PLM, connect with us at PLMCOACH and Follow Anup Karumanchi for more such information. #plmcoach #plm #teamcenter #siemens #3dexperience #3ds #dassaultsystemes #training #windchill #ptc #training #plmtraining #architecture #mis #delmia #apriso #mes

𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝘽𝙊𝙈 𝙞𝙨𝙣’𝙩 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙫𝙚. 𝙄𝙩’𝙨 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙚𝙩𝙚. The money usually isn’t hiding in the obvious line items. It’s hiding in the “small stuff” nobody measures: seam tape meters, seam-seal minutes, pack-out rules, and quiet spec drift. Here’s the pattern I see across outerwear: Most teams build a BOM like a shopping list. Factories price it like a process. So the surprise shows up later as: “Seam sealing is extra.” “Tape usage is higher than expected.” “Retail pack-out requires inserts, extra labels, different cartons.” “Waterproof zipper spec changed.” 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝘅: 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝟱 𝗯𝘂𝗰𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀 (𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲-𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗼𝗻𝗲) Use this structure on every style: 𝗙𝗮𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗰 (face, membrane/laminate, lining, reinforcements) 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗺 (zippers, tape, cords, labels, adhesives, thread) 𝗟𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿 (cut/sew + seam sealing) 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗱 (testing, inspection, scrap/rework, compliance, development) 𝗣𝗮𝗰𝗸 (hangtags, polybags, cartons, inserts, barcodes) 𝗔 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮-𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝘀𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 (𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗰𝗸 𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀) For technical outerwear, if you see something wildly outside these bands, it’s a flag to investigate: •Fabric: ~45-65% of FOB •Trim: ~10-20% •Labor: ~15-25% (seam sealing can move this fast) •Overhead: ~5-10% •Pack: ~2-5% (Varies by product, region, complexity. These are “smells-like-a-problem” ranges.) 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗢𝗠 𝗦𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝟱 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝘂𝘁𝗲𝘀: 1. Start with 𝙏𝙖𝙧𝙜𝙚𝙩 𝙁𝙊𝘽. 2. Fill $/unit for each bucket (not percentages). 3. If you have a gap, that gap is your hidden cost - go find it. 4. Pressure-test trim + labor first (that’s where surprises usually live). 5. Lock specs, then re-check % of FOB after every revision. I made a clean 𝘽𝙊𝙈 𝙎𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝘾𝙖𝙡𝙘𝙪𝙡𝙖𝙩𝙤𝙧 𝙋𝘿𝙁 (cost allocation template + hidden-cost checklist + detailed tables). Attach it to your next BOM review and you’ll catch cost creep before it hits the quote. If you want it, comment “BOM” and I’ll share it. Follow me, Gerard Smith for more apparel industry content ♻️ reposting appreciated if you think it will help others!