Hi mg,

As Patrick wrote above, the “save as” feature is an equivalent to Create new. The reason this feature exists is to simplify the creation of objects and reduce errors (filling in the same fields). In my opinion, trying to restrict users to use only Save As while not enabling them to use Create New is incorrect process implementation.
I personally think that it would be more correct to implement the process of item creation correction within the organization rather to figure out how to implement within the IS criteria which disable a user the ability to use the basic create new option.

Best regards,
Ron Ziv

Hi Manju,

The BOM which you manage within side the PLM system should capture the lowest level of material used as raw material. From there on, your product should hold the information needed to achieve the final goods.
I’ve created a short diagram illustrating the above with 2 examples. One from the consumer electronics industry, and another example from the pharmaceutical industry.
Note, where an item has child items underneath, this represents a step in the production process and normally could be called as an assembly.
Hope this helps somehow.

Best regards,
Ron Ziv

Hi,
 
I’ll try to provide the background of these two terms, rather to explain how these forms should be used in a specific use case, and as Yuval wrote, policy will differ from one company to another, depending on the industry and regulations.

ECO, MCO, ECR, ect. are simply names of forms. Oracle decided to enter some of these form names as default when implementing a new PLM system based on best practice, though these names are not mandatory.
The real difference between these forms are what actions can a user perform, and in accordance to Oracle PLM architecture, the forms are split to the following categories:

1. Change Orders (Revision change mandatory)
These forms are used when there is a need to identify items BEFORE the change and AFTER the change. The method to do so, is via the identification of different revisions. Based on most industries regulations, modifying the following item data requires at the minimum a revision change:

1. Description
2. Attached documents (Drawings, Specs…)
3. Important attributes (e.g. Buy/Make)
4. Bill of Materials

 2. Change Requests
Do not modify a revision, only track the need for a change to occur.

3. Mfg. Orders
These forms are used to (1) modify the mfg. data associated with the item. (2) additional attributes/data which does is not revision controlled according to industry regulations or internal company policy (e.g. maybe page three attributes or lifecycle change).

Dual uses case:
In some case, a user will issue a new Change Order to modify… lets say the BOM of an item… while in the same time he/she also wish to modify for example Mfg. data. As we would like to simplify the process for the user, within Change Order forms exists also the capability to modify also the Mfg. data, and any other data which does not necessarily require a revision change.
In return, the user will not need to create and submit TWO forms, but only ONE to change data (e.g. Both BOM and Mfg. data in 1 form).

Hope this was useful,

Best regards,
Ron Ziv

Hi Divakar,

As Patrick implied within his answer, providing the users such a solution might introduce future problems. In my opinion, not all user requirements, especially those which are “save a click” should be implemented. Nevertheless, if you do want to implement such system behavior, I think a java script development is needed. I do not know of system settings which support such a feature.

Best regards,
Ron Ziv

Hello deshmukh2,

Speaking for IS management and administration side, normal end system users and also power users should not be granted the capability to load thousands of files in the same time. This user scenario normally happens when preforming data migration and first system set up.
To every day users, the ability to load files should (in my opinion) should be kept using the normal UI, and simply by teaching them to (1) zip all the files needed to be loaded (2) select unzip in the web interface when loading the files.
My own expectance is working on SoS projects which also include civil engineering and drawings.

Best regards,
RZ

Hi,

Once for a defined workflow (active/non-active), a form has been created (e.g. ECO, ECR, MCO, ect.), AND, the relevant workflow has been set, the settings of the workflow may not be modified with respect to statuses of a workflow.
To modify the existing statuses of a workflow, the IS architect (the function from IT which is responsible to manage the system, and make changes in the system…. or in simple words ADMIN) has three options I can think of:
1. Hard delete all existing forms (e.g. ECO) from the system. NOTE! If the forms have already been processed, this normally should not be performed.
2. Modify the ‘workflow’ field upon each form which uses that particular workflow, so it will not be assigned. Note! this can be done only in generic Pending status of a form to send it back to unassigned status.
NOTE! performing any of the suggested above is NOT recommended in case the IS has already went live and used by everyday users due to History retention!!!!
3.  *** The preferred method in case forms were already assigned and processed ***
3.1. Set the old workflow to inactive.
3.2. Modify the name of the old workflow to whatever makes sense to indication that it is the old/not used anymore workflow (important for searches and splicing of data)… example “old_[workflow name]”.
3.3. Create a new “copy” of the workflow, with the new statues which are required, and the desired name.

Best regards,
Ron Ziv