All that's old is new again.

I have been covering electronics manufacturing for nine years this month. One issue that the industry was talking about back in 1993--and well before that--is seeing a resurgence in these lean, mean times. I'm talking about DfM, design for manufacturing.

Will we ever get the concept right?

By the early '90s, many large OEMs had implemented solid DfM practices within their organizations. DfM consisted of elaborate, detailed strategies that involved both the design and manufacturing arms of a company. Enter contract manufacturers, though, and the DfM equation became fuzzy.

Are these solid DfM practices now being transferred and discussed by all involved in the design, fabrication and assembly of a specific product? From what I'm hearing, some contract assemblers are feeling left out in the cold when it comes to design and design changes. Sure, some EMS providers are allowed in at the design phase of their OEM customers' new products, but that's the exception right now, not the rule.

Depending on who you ask, you get a different opinion as to why DfM is still an issue. Some would blame the designers. Not as familiar as they could be with how their designs really affect manufacturing, some designers are laying out PCBs that can't be built or require many changes before production.

Manufacturers of PCBs aren't entirely innocent either. Instead of flowing corrections to schematics back to designers, fabricators have been content to make the alterations on their own, time after time.

But lest we in the assembly industry shake our heads at our designer and fabricator brethren, remember that we also have hot little hands in the bone pile of defective boards. Many assemblers have not forced the issue of DfM within their companies or customers. And, unfortunately, silence often equals acquiescence.

Just think how much time and money would be saved if product development had input from all three camps at the very beginning of the process--designers, fabricators and assemblers all working together to build the best quality product at the lowest cost. Communication flowing up and down the manufacturing chain in an orderly fashion. Products produced with fewer defects in less time for reduced cost. Cue the "I have a dream" speech now?

Sarcasm aside, I haven't proposed an original, radical concept. It's basic, logical DfM. Why are we still struggling with it?

In the glory days of too many orders and not enough employees, the excuse had been time and management shortsightedness. Companies were too pressed to deliver goods to worry about developing a corrective process with their suppliers. And some company executives were too myopic to realize the benefits of developing solid manufacturing relationships up and down the supply chain.

In these days of too few orders, however, this nonchalance toward communication is beginning to change. I witnessed this new mindset in July at our annual Editorial Review Board meeting. Our magazines--Circuits Assembly, Printed Circuit Design and PC FAB--bring in readers every summer to discuss the industry mad our publications. This year, we decided to turn them loose on each other as well: two roundtables had all the

editors and ERB members in the same room discussing the same issues.

In one of the roundtable sessions, one of the designer ERB representatives asked: "Is surface finish specification a development issue of design?" The answer, coming from an assembler, was: "It's something that design and manufacturing need to work out together."

Need to work out together. That sounds promising.

Another comment, coming from an assembler and garnering many head nods from designers and fabricators, was: "Assemblers and designers need to communicate on a regular basis to go over product design and figure out the best way to build."

Assemblers and designers need to communicate on a regular basis. Now we're getting somewhere,

Comments were also heard from all three factions on the importance of "design for x"--designing for test, designing for manufacturing, designing for outsourcing, the list goes on and on.

What's refreshing is that these statements about communication were coming from chief technology officers, presidents and senior-level employees at both OEMs and contractors. Rattled by the past two years' economy and forced to do more with less, management teams are exploring all possible avenues to cut costs while improving quality. And one of those previously neglected paths is DfM.

Let's face it, DfM starts at the top. If management isn't behind the concept and supports it through both lean and good times, it might as well be the Dark Ages of "throwing the design over the wall."

Lisa Hamburg, Editor-in-Chief

e-mail: [e-mail]