Suppliers demonstrate effective configuration control by being able to prove, with evidence, that every part and assembly delivered matches the authorized configuration at the time it was built, and that changes are systematically controlled. In practice this means showing the OEM that you have robust governance around requirements, design data, process documentation, and as-built records, not just stating that a procedure exists.
1. Start from a clear configuration baseline
OEMs expect suppliers to show how they establish and maintain a clear baseline for each part number or contract:
- Formal identification of the governing definition: drawing/3D model, specifications, bill of material, and approved exceptions.
- Documented capture of the initial baseline when the purchase order or contract is accepted (e.g., drawing issue, spec revisions, model authority, associated process specs).
- Configuration item structure: how top-level part numbers, subassemblies, and key components relate to each other, including COTS items where relevant.
To demonstrate this, suppliers should be able to pull a configuration baseline report or package for a given part/lot that shows exactly which design and specification revisions applied.
2. Show disciplined document and version control
Effective configuration control depends on controlled technical data and shop-floor documentation. OEMs will look for:
- A documented document control procedure aligned with AS9100 expectations (ownership, review cycles, approval authorities, and change triggers).
- Centralized storage of released documents (PLM, QMS, DMS, or similar) with unique IDs, revision levels, and clear status (draft, released, obsolete).
- Controlled distribution to the shop floor: how you ensure operators only see current work instructions, drawings, and models.
- Prevention of uncontrolled local copies: rules for printed work instructions or screenshots and how they are stamped, time-limited, or otherwise controlled.
In brownfield environments this often means a mix of systems: legacy file shares for drawings, a QMS for procedures, and paper routers. Demonstration requires showing how those pieces are tied together and governed so obsolete information cannot be used by mistake.
3. Trace change control from request to implementation
OEMs will probe how you control changes once the baseline is established. You should be able to demonstrate:
- A formal change initiation process (e.g., ECO/ECN, PCN, or similar) that captures the reason for change, impact analysis, and affected configuration items.
- Change impact assessment: evaluation of technical, quality, risk, tooling, software, test, FAI, and training impacts, not just a drawing update.
- Approval workflows with defined roles (engineering, quality, manufacturing, program management, sometimes OEM notification/approval as per contract).
- Change effectiveness checks: verification steps that confirm the new configuration is correctly implemented at the shop floor and in supporting systems.
Evidence could include a sample change package that traces from OEM change notice or internal engineering change through to updated work instructions, requalification (where required), and first article or delta FAI.
4. Prove linkage from requirements to as-built records
Configuration control is not just about documents; it is about proving that what you shipped matches what was required. Suppliers should be able to show:
- Clear linkage from the OEM contract and specifications to internal part numbers and routing (PO to WO mapping, controlled customer requirement lists).
- Routing and traveler control: how operations, inspection points, and special processes are tied to the right revision of instructions and parameters.
- As-built traceability down to serial/lot level where required: material batch, special process certifications, test records, nonconformance and concession records.
- Evidence that work orders cannot be released or completed under obsolete configurations (e.g., system checks or manual review steps).
In mixed MES/ERP/PLM environments, this often relies on manual configuration checks at order release combined with system rules where available. OEMs will expect to see both the procedural control and the actual records for recent builds.
5. Control special processes, software, and tooling configurations
For aerospace parts, special processes, software, and tooling are part of the effective configuration and must be controlled:
- Special processes: heat treat, NDT, coatings, welding, etc. must be tied to approved procedures, parameters, and qualified suppliers, with clear revision control.
- Manufacturing software: CNC programs, test stand software, PLC parameters, and measurement programs must be versioned, controlled, and linked to part revisions.
- Tooling and fixtures: identification and revision control for jigs, fixtures, and gauges where they influence product configuration or characteristics.
To demonstrate this, suppliers should be able to show how a part revision change drives corresponding review or updates to CNC programs, CMM routines, and process recipes, and how old versions are prevented from being used.
6. Show how you prevent and manage obsolete configurations
OEMs place significant weight on how you prevent obsolete configurations from leaking into production. Typical expectations include:
- Formal obsolescence rules: how and when documents and programs are marked superseded or obsolete, and who approves that status change.
- Physical and digital controls: removal of old prints from workstations, rev-controlled binders, system logic that blocks use of obsolete items.
- Training and communication: how operators, planners, and inspectors are notified of configuration changes and what confirmation is required.
- Detection and response: process for identifying when incorrect configurations were used (e.g., during internal audits or escapes) and for assessing affected product.
This is an area where full system replacement can be high-risk in aerospace. Replacing MES/PLM without rigorous migration, validation, and parallel run often introduces configuration gaps that are hard to detect and expensive to remediate. OEMs will often probe how you controlled the transition during any major system changes.
7. Provide audit-ready evidence trails
Configuration control is proven through evidence, not claims. Suppliers should be ready to demonstrate:
- Sample configuration histories for selected parts/serial numbers: which revision was built, when changes occurred, and what approvals were captured.
- Audit trails from digital systems (PLM, MES, ERP, QMS): who changed what, when, and under which change authorization.
- Consistent alignment with AS9100 and, where applicable, AS9102: e.g., how FAI packages reflect the current configuration and show updates after changes.
- Internal process audit reports that specifically test configuration control on the shop floor (e.g., spot checks of documents at workstations vs the controlled master).
In brownfield environments, OEMs do not expect perfection, but they expect to see that gaps are understood, risk-assessed, and being systematically closed, rather than ignored.
8. Address system coexistence and integration
Most aerospace suppliers operate with multiple legacy systems and manual steps. OEMs are less concerned with system elegance and more with whether the configuration logic is clear and consistently executed. To demonstrate this in a mixed environment:
- Map where configuration “truth” lives for each artifact: design data in PLM or OEM portal, routings in ERP or MES, documents in QMS or DMS, NC data in CAM systems.
- Show how references are synchronized: part and revision identifiers, effectivity dates, and how conflicts are resolved.
- Explain compensating controls where integration is weak: mandatory manual checks at order release, checklists for engineers and planners, layered process audits.
- Demonstrate change control across system boundaries: when a drawing rev changes, how does that propagate into ERP/MES, CNC, and inspection programs?
Attempting a big-bang replacement of MES or PLM solely to “fix” configuration control often fails in this context due to qualification burden, validation costs, high downtime risk, and the complexity of reconstituting the historical configuration record. Incremental tightening of governance and traceability within and across existing systems is usually more credible to OEMs.
9. Make configuration control visible in your management system
Finally, OEMs look for configuration control to be embedded in how you run the business, not treated as a paperwork exercise:
- Key risks, escapes, and near-misses related to configuration are captured in your risk register and management review, with clear mitigation actions.
- Nonconformances caused by configuration issues are analyzed to root cause, with changes to procedures, training, or systems where needed.
- Configuration control effectiveness is tested in internal audits and, when possible, via targeted mock OEM or regulatory audits.
By combining sound procedures, controlled systems, and demonstrable evidence trails that work across your existing IT/OT landscape, suppliers can give aerospace OEMs credible assurance that configuration is controlled over the full lifecycle of design, manufacture, and change.
