Electronics manufacturing services
Findings

EMS subcontractor · PCB assembly and box build for industrial customers · 1 site, 3 SMT lines · 180 employeesThis War Map shows how we turn an operational review into an implementation plan. The dates show a possible sequence; the scope and schedule of a real engagement are agreed with you.

Findings

Where work gets held up, who has to step in, and what it costs in this example.

Slow quotes lose business

9 days on average to answer an RFQ. Quotes sent within 5 days win more than twice as often as those sent after 10.

Shortages handled line by line

85 open lines checked by hand every week. 23% of jobs start with an incomplete kit, and €640K of kits and WIP waits on missing parts.

Obsolescence found late

31 end-of-life or not-recommended parts sit on active boards with no approved alternate. Customer sign-off on an alternate takes 34 days.

Returns analysed without history

Test results for 2 of 5 benches are not linked to serial numbers. The same failure at two customers went unconnected for five weeks.

Illustrative time allocation for 11 interview roles

Searching and re-keying component data
29%
Engineering and costing work
24%
Chasing suppliers and customers
21%
Replanning and partial-kit work
14%
Decisions
12%

These scenario percentages total 100%. They describe the 11 interview roles only and are not extrapolated to the 180 employees.

64% of the time goes to component data, chasing and replanning. 36% remains for engineering, costing judgement and decisions.

Key Insight: Component data work is the largest block, and most of it repeats: the same part looked up for a quote, a shortage and an EOL check by three different people.

SOP vs. Reality

RFQ CostingSOP: 5 steps → The Reality: 12 steps, 4 handoffs
The SOP
RFQ received
BOM loaded
Components priced
Labour estimated
Quote sent
5 steps, linear
The Reality
12
Steps
4
Handoffs
9 working days average
Cycle time
~35 RFQs/month, ~140 BOM lines each
Volume

Every RFQ starts with a BOM in a different format. Mathieu cleans it, matches the parts, then prices each line on distributor sites for three quantities. Labour comes from his memory of similar jobs. The quote leaves after 9 days on average, and the reason for a loss is rarely recorded.

The Gap
BOM cleaning takes 1.5 to 4 hours per RFQ before any costing starts.
Pricing is done line by line across four to six sites. Prices are not kept, so the same part is looked up again next week.
Lifecycle is not checked on every line. Two quotes last year included parts already end of life.
Quotes sent within 5 days won 27%; after 10 days, 12%. 343 quotes lost, a reason logged for 41.
Shortages and AllocationSOP: 4 steps → The Reality: 10 steps, 5 handoffs
The SOP
MRP proposes
PO placed
Supplier confirms
Goods received
4 steps, linear
The Reality
10
Steps
5
Handoffs
List rebuilt every Monday (about 6 hours)
Cycle time
~85 open shortage lines
Volume

The shortage list is rebuilt every Monday from a Sage X3 export and a tour of distributor sites. Confirmed dates live in Excel, so the ERP plans on old dates. When a part is short, the line often starts anyway, and the missing parts are fitted by hand after reflow.

The Gap
85 open lines, 14 on allocation above 40 weeks. Each line checked by hand on several sites.
€260K bought from brokers in 12 months at about 3.5 times the franchised price.
23% of jobs started with an incomplete kit last quarter. Hand-fitting after reflow adds rework and inspection risk.
€640K of kits and WIP waiting on missing parts at month end. This is cash tied up, not lost revenue.
EOL Notice + Alternate ApprovalSOP: 3 steps → The Reality: 10 steps, 6 handoffs
The SOP
EOL notice received
Impacted products identified
Customer informed
3 steps, linear
The Reality
10
Steps
6
Handoffs
34 days average to customer sign-off
Cycle time
~60 notices/month; 8-12 affect active BOMs
Volume

Notices arrive in a shared mailbox and are sorted by hand. The where-used search only works on manufacturer part numbers, so parts stored under distributor references are missed. The alternate is often ready in days; the customer's engineering approval takes over a month.

The Gap
About 60 notices a month, 8 to 12 relevant. Sorting depends on Claire reading each one.
31 end-of-life or not-recommended parts sit on boards built in the last 12 months with no approved alternate.
11 alternate requests open, the oldest at 71 days. Follow-up depends on Sébastien's reminders.
Late detection leads to unplanned last-time buys and broker purchases.
Returns (RMA) AnalysisSOP: 4 steps → The Reality: 9 steps, 4 handoffs
The SOP
Return authorised
Analysis
Repair or replace
Report sent
4 steps, linear
The Reality
9
Steps
4
Handoffs
17 working days average to report
Cycle time
~22 returns/month
Volume

The analysis itself is skilled work. The delay comes before it: finding the test log on the right bench, then pulling traceability from the MES. Each return is closed on its own, so patterns across customers stay hidden.

The Gap
2 of 5 benches not linked to serial numbers. Finding a test log means searching folders by date.
Report in 17 working days on average. Customers' contracts ask for 10.
The same capacitor failure at two customers went unconnected for five weeks.
Returns are logged in Excel with free-text causes. No trend by part, line or supplier.
Key Insight: The four sample comparisons show 140%, 150%, 233.3% and 125% more steps, respectively: (actual ÷ documented − 1) × 100. Several extra steps are sound engineering practice; the rest repeat the same component lookup in a different place.

Work that needs attention

SalesBOM cleaning and line-by-line pricing: 52 person-hours/month; 52 × 12 ÷ 52 = 12.0 h/week12h
PurchasingShortage list: Monday rebuild (6 h) plus daily distributor checks (4 h)10h
PurchasingEOL notices sorted and where-used searched by hand5.5h
EngineeringAlternate-part approval files prepared and chased with customers4h
ProductionPartial kits: missing parts fitted by hand after reflow, plus re-inspection7h
QualityTest logs searched on bench PCs for each return3.5h
Customer ServiceDelivery dates re-sent by email after each shortage update4.5h
EngineeringFunctional test programs held by one engineer; no trained backupongoing
46.5 person-hours/week across 7 quantified rows; 1 unquantified risk46.5 h
Key Insight: The register converts 52 hours of monthly RFQ data work to 12.0 hours/week; other rows are weekly person-hours. Each row covers a distinct task, so none overlap. Some of this time stays, because pricing and failure analysis need judgement. The released share is measured after go-live.

Risk Register

Single Point of FailureCritical
Antoine Leroux, Test
He wrote and maintains the programs for the three functional benches. No second engineer is trained. A long absence would stop shipments for several customers.
Single Point of FailureHigh
Mathieu Caron, Costing
Labour estimates come from his memory of past jobs. No costing rules are written down.
Supply IntegrityHigh
Broker purchases under pressure
€260K bought from brokers in 12 months. Approved brokers and incoming inspection exist, but inspection records are incomplete for 2 urgent lots.
CustomerHigh
On-time delivery at 81%
Two key accounts review supplier performance in the first quarter. Both contracts come up for renewal next year.
ObsolescenceHigh
31 parts without alternates
End-of-life or not-recommended parts on boards built in the last 12 months, with no approved alternate on file.
Working-capital timingHigh
€640K waiting on missing parts
Kits and work in progress blocked at month end. This is cash tied up longer, not lost revenue.
TraceabilityMedium
Test results not linked to serials
2 of 5 benches store results by date only. Customer audits increasingly ask for serial-level test records.
CommercialMedium
No lost-quote reasons
343 quotes lost in 12 months, a reason logged for 41. Pricing decisions rest on impressions.
Next Chapter
Implementation plan

Strategy Session · 30 min

A real engagement is scoped in the Strategy Session and may begin with a War Map or a bounded Feasibility Sprint.

Request a Strategy Session