Your Engineering Change Is Released. Is Manufacturing ...

Full announcement (unchanged)

Blog Your Engineering Change Is Released. Is Manufacturing Ready? Leigh Young | November 9, 2026 Share this post: Once an engineering change gets the green light and a new revision is out, engineering usually steps back and lets manufacturing take over. Manufacturing isn’t always in one place. Maybe one factory makes its own sheet metal parts with robots and has plenty of extras, while another buys them, works by hand, and rarely has anything on the shelf. Even if both plants get the same update at the same time, they’ll probably handle it differently. Nor should they. Problems begin when each plant tracks its choices in spreadsheets, email threads, or conversations that aren’t documented. At that point, it becomes hard to tell the difference between an authorized adaptation and an uncontrolled deviation. Engineering knows which revision it released, but often can’t see how each site has changed that revision. The gap is bigger than an EBOM-to-MBOM handoff Here’s a quick refresher: The engineering bill of materials (EBOM) shows the product as designed by engineering. The manufacturing bill of materials (MBOM) is what the plant needs to build it, including details that only matter on the shop floor. These two should be connected, but you can’t just swap one for the other. Equipment, sourcing, and assembly methods all affect what “buildable” means at each site. A lot of businesses rely on product lifecycle management (PLM) systems to keep track of engineering data and share updates. These systems are great for managing the official design, but when it comes to how and when a change hits the factory floor, it’s often up to each site’s routines and tools. This creates a gap in the digital thread . While the design has a detailed record, what happens on the plant floor often isn’t documented as carefully. Where the disconnect shows up The first sign of trouble is usually lost context . A revision might be correct on paper but difficult to build on an existing line, so one site adds a manufacturing part or uses an approved substitute. That’s fine, but if the reason is only recorded in a local MBOM or someone’s notes, the next site won’t know why their bill is different. Over time, this leads to a set of practices that no one can fully explain. Timing can also become complicated. The new component might be available at one location but delayed at another. One plant may want to use up old inventory before switching, while another is ready to switch right away. Without a good way to manage manufacturing effectivity, people end up tracking dates by email, one site at a time. Approved isn’t the same as ready to build. There’s also a lot that the rest of the company never sees. Manufacturing engineers often make practical local decisions, like using a substitute part, changing the order of assembly steps, or making a temporary deviation when needed. No one is saying they should stop doing this. The problem is that these choices often aren’t included in the official product record, so later it’s hard to know who approved them, which configuration was affected, or if another plant could have used the same solution. The goal is controlled divergence, not forced uniformity It might seem like the solution is to make every plant follow the same manufacturing definition. But that’s usually not the best approach. Forcing a single MBOM on plants that operate differently often leads to more friction, extra manual work, and added risk. What matters more is whether every difference is known, signed off, and easy to find—and whether someone double-checks when engineering makes a change. You can work with what you can see; it’s the surprises that pile up. Extend the digital thread into manufacturing decisions If you already use Aras Innovator®, the engineering side is taken care of. What still needs attention is turning those managed definitions into something each plant can actually build. That’s where Manufacturing Engineering, a template for Aras Innovator, comes in. It provides a managed place for plant-level definitions and decisions, and matches them with engineering changes before moving on to manufacturing planning . In practice, it adds: • Manufacturing parts that hold the build definition • MBOMs aware of plant and configuration • Side-by-side EBOM/MBOM authoring • Manufacturing effectivity, so each site’s switchover is explicit Plants still have the freedom to make their own production decisions. At the same time, the business can see how those decisions match up with what engineering planned. Faster BOM comparisons are nice, but the real win is less back-and-forth every time there’s a change, catching production snags sooner, and not losing site-specific know-how when people move on. When someone wants to know which definition is in play at a plant, you’ll have the answer. If your products are complicated and changes happen a lot, you’ll notice the difference even more. A question worth taking back to your team Here’s a quick test: Find a recent engineering change that affected more than one line or facility and try to answer four questions: • Which manufacturing definitions did it affect? • What did each site decide? • Who approved those decisions? • When was each operation actually ready for the new revision? If you need to make phone calls, check spreadsheets, and do some detective work to answer, you’ve probably found your starting point. If you already use Aras, we suggest starting small: pick one complicated change scenario and discuss what it would take to manage the manufacturing decisions involved. In our next article, we’ll explore where that managed definition fits between engineering and manufacturing planning. ← Back to Blog Category: Aras Insights Digital Engineering Digital Thread About Leigh Young Leigh Young is Director of Solutions at Aras and has spent nearly 20 years working at the intersection of engineering, technology, and product lifecycle management. Starting in hands-on product development before moving into engineering systems, consulting, and product management, Leigh brings a practical perspective to solving complex industry problems. He works with customers, partners, and teams across Aras to shape scalable solutions spanning digital manufacturing, quality, supplier collaboration, and the digital thread. He is particularly interested in simplifying complex engineering processes, connecting information across the product lifecycle, and exploring how AI can make PLM more useful and accessible. Leave a Comment Cancel reply More Blog Posts November 5, 2026 | Jason Kasper Most Digital Threads are Wired Backward Read Now → Read Now →