Part reuse

Existing Parts should be reused i new products or functions.

It has happened quite frequently that the top executives suddenly find out that there must be a lot of parts used in the different Product that could have been the same if only "they" had known about it from the start and have had the tools to find the suitable parts for reuse. 

This often starts a project with the objective to find the best solution for this and at no or very low operational cost: "we just want the benefits". After spending a lot of money they finally find out that this calls for "Parts Classification", a database to store the classified Parts and an application for retrieval of the Parts we want to reuse instead of developing new similar Parts. The top executives then asks: What will it cost? 

It the turn out the there will be an initial cost to classify the Parts most likely to be reused. However, there is no need to classify the Standard Parts if these are already existing in the Corporate Hardware Standards. 

Concentrate on the parts slightly outside the Hardware Standard: Parts with a fair probability for reuse. Parts that will have a chance to be reused. Part that are pretty generic. 

  • Once we have started, we will have to continue to classify all new parts being developed that falls within the classification system and we will have to follow up changes on all already classified Parts. We will have to hire someone to do this. This will cost money. 
  • We will have to admit that the introduction of a new (unnecessary) Part will cost a certain sum of money and that it will continue to cost a certain sum of money per year to maintain as an active Part within the Enterprise. There will have to be a "Price List" to which the Enterprise will have to fully committed, even when an employee turns in a proposal to save one or several Parts. The Enterprise will also have to use the costs they admit for "New Part introduction" when they calculate possible saved costs related to proposals from employees. 

If the top executives still think it is doable and feasible, it is great! I believe in it but I have never been able to convince the executives that it is good investment and a decent way to save money. Perhaps I am not good enough in convincing people.

There are actual companies that have done this and there are companies who live by helping out with classification and selling the necessary software.

However, there may be an easier way out: 
Provided you have managed a strict Naming Convention.