Status

Owner
Stakeholders

GERVAIS, Pascal ROSSE, Jean-Luc Lorena Baggio, Alain Theoret

Issue

Several Manufacturing Plants in the current scope for project Sy-Way are not using AVEVA PI nor Aspentech. Therefore, we must define a common solution for Manufacturing Control and Actual Production Postings for these plants.

The list of plants includes:

Specialty PolymersNEWARK
Specialty PolymersRheinberg
NovecareDhaymers(Taboão)
NovecareMéréville
NovecareLevin
NovecareRoha
Composite MaterialsRock Hill SC
Composite MaterialsOrange CA
Composite MaterialsKalamazoo MI


 As per the information collected in Conceptual Design

 Newark plant is currently in SAP ECC, but it is not using any Manufacturing SAP functionality.



Recommendation

The Project Team recommend Option 2: use one single Production Confirmation Dashboard to fulfill with one object three requirements coming from different directions:

  • Provide a flexible and easy to use tool for production confirmations. This is going to be the new Syensqo standard for all production operators who need to book their time tickets and the goods movements directly in S4/HANA, either because they do not have an MES system or their MES is not integraed yet.
  • Subsitute the current IPA custom development in Composite with a new Dashboard that provide the same functionalities with a better user experience and a modernized technology
  • Provide a Validation/Confirmation Tools for the plants and production lines served by the MES integration, to allow the supervisors to check, edit, validate the proposals from MES interface.


Background & Context

Explain the context in which the decision is being made.


Assumptions

Clearly describe the underlying assumptions which informed or limited the choices available, or impacted the decision: cost, schedule, regulatory requirements, business drivers, country footprint, technology, etc. Include links as necessary. This section is important because a future change in circumstances might invalidate some key assumptions, which then prompts a decision to be revisited. 


Constraints

Capture any constraints or limitations inherent to the recommended option. This could be aspects which, if changed or removed in future, could cause the decision to be revisited or invalidated. For example, a constraint might be that a new product has significant gaps in important functionality, which caused an older alternative to be recommended. If those gaps are closed in future, this might cause the decision to be invalidated.


Impacts

Describe the impact of the decision on other aspects such as other processes, infrastructure, other SAP modules or systems, data cleansing and migration, developments, automations, interfaces, in-flight projects, etc.


Business Rules

The decision may translate into business rules which enforce the decision and will require configuration. List these business rules here. For example, "An Outline Agreement cannot be created via the RFQ process. An awarded RFQ can only result in a Purchase Order". 


Options considered

List the options (viable options or alternatives) you considered. These often require a longer explanation with diagrams, or references to other documents (links are best, but attachments are also possible). Use enough detail to adequately explain what you considered so that a project or business stakeholder reviewing this decision will not come back and ask "did you think about...?"; this leads to loss of credibility and questioning of other decisions. This section also helps ensure that you considered enough suitable alternatives rather than just copy/pasting SAP's recommendations.

Option A: Option Title

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly


Option B: Option Title

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly


Option C: Option Title

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly


Option D: Option Title

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly


Evaluation

Outline why you selected a position. The best format could be a pro/con table (sample below), but is up to you as the author. You must consider complexity, feasibility, cost/effort to implement, but also ongoing operational impact and cost. You must consider the program principles and explain any deviations in detail. This is probably as important as the decision itself.



Option A

Option B
Option C
Option D
Criterion 1

(plus)Pro

(minus)Con

(plus)Pro

(plus)Pro

(plus)Pro

(minus)Con

(plus)Pro

(minus)Con

Criterion 2

(plus)Pro

(minus)Con

(minus)Con

(plus)Pro

(plus)Pro

(minus)Con

(minus)Con

Criterion 3(plus)Pro(minus)Con(minus)Con(plus)Pro

See also

Insert links and references to other documents which are relevant when trying to understand this decision and its implications. Other decisions are often impacted, so it's good to list them here with links. Attachments are also possible but dangerous as they are static documents and not updated by their authors.


Change log