Tim Elliott, the chairman of the Component Obsolescence Group UK, talks to EW about the industry’s continuing need to source obsolescent copmponents and their susceptibility to counterfeiting. 

Q. Is obsolescence more or less of an issue than 10 years ago?

Tim Elliott: There is certainly a greater awareness of obsolescence, whether in components, materials, software or skills. There is also more support available, not only from the Component Obsolescence Group (COG), but also from companies offering obsolescence management services and prediction tools.

Changes in the commercial market are also having an effect. In the military sector, for example, the Ministry of Defence has adopted a smarter approach to acquisition with fixed-price tenders which pass responsibility for the long-term sustainability and affordability of projects to the OEM. This forces OEMs to factor all potential costs into their original bid, giving a sharper commercial focus to assessing obsolescence risks.


Q. What about the threat from counterfeit components?

Tim Elliott: Counterfeiting affects all types of components, but sourcing obsolete parts is particularly risky. Whilst component manufacturers may insist that customers should only buy from authorised channels, they are failing to maintain long-term availability within those channels. This gives their customers little choice but to source on the open market.

Obsolescence management plays a part here because it provides a comfort zone in which pre-planned mitigation strategies can eliminate the need for knee-jerk reactions in the event of a component or material obsolescence.

A number of counterfeit avoidance initiatives have been established between companies and agencies, such as the programme developed by Texas Instruments and the FBI in North America. It is clear, however, that the industry has to take a coordinated and shared approach to securing the supply chain against counterfeit products.


Q. How well is the industry responding to obsolescence issues?

Tim Elliott: In sectors, such as rail, defence and aerospace, obsolescence management is already a central part of the design philosophy. These sectors are continuing to develop new techniques and procedures which increase the return on their investment in obsolescence risk assessment. Other sectors, such as utilities and even the NHS, are also beginning to realise that, rather than being a luxury, obsolescence management is a vital long-term cost-reduction strategy.


Q. How important is it to have a coordinated European/global approach to obsolescence?

Tim Elliott: OEMs have been quick to adopt a cross-national business model, with design in one country and manufacturing in another, so there is a real need for a consistent approach to managing obsolescence. As yet, however, there is no single global organisation to support industry or lobby governments on obsolescence issues.

In Europe, the Component Obsolescence Group (COG) has member groups in the UK and Germany, with solid plans for groups in France and Italy, whilst Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) is the equivalent organisation in North America. Currently, the annual COG International Conference is the only global platform for discussions on obsolescence-related issues.

Q. What role will COG play in 2008?

Tim Elliott: Just as value-added services was the buzz-word for competitive advantage in the eighties, so obsolescence management can be today’s profit-driving mantra. Even sectors with relatively short product life-cycles can find that managing obsolescence reduces the risk and cost of unplanned re-designs. Every engineer and buyer, in every electronics and industrial sector, is a potential COG member. Our role, therefore, will be to extend awareness and support throughout these sectors.

On a wider scale, COG will continue to work with organisations such as Intellect and the UK Electronics Alliance (UKEA) in lobbying government to raise awareness of obsolescence as a major issue and to influence new initiatives and legislation.