Stopping counterfeiting is a goal shared by everyone in the electronics supply chain except for those benefiting from the illegal activity. However, threats of fines can't do the job of ridding the industry of the practice. I believe that changes in processes can. This requires that our senators and other lawmakers understand a bit more about the supply chain and the many ways parts enter the chain -- and that is the area around which new process-changing legislation could be written to attack the whole problem with greater effectiveness.
The most important thing that legislators can do at this point is to ask the private sector. The answer to solving counterfeiting may turn out to be fairly simple, and those of us who are in the trenches probably have many insights that could really make a difference. (See: Some Problems Can't Be Penalized Away, Part 1 and Some Problems Can't Be Penalized Away, Part 2.)
From the way I see it, there may be a number of process changers that could work specifically for military counterfeits. Here's one that can be jump-started with a simple flip of an executive pen: Write into law that government component procurement must be handled through certified sources -- suppliers that have the processes, equipment, and resources to verify and guarantee authenticity of the parts they sell. Purchasing agencies and companies can find these sources through organizations such as the Independent Distributors of Electronics Association (IDEA).
The independent distribution organizations that are members of this association adhere to high quality and ethical standards and are committed to ensuring that customers only receive quality parts and services. Check the IDEA site for specifics. It bears mentioning that independent distributors are accepted into membership in IDEA only after they meet all requirements and are confirmed by the IDEA board of directors. I'm sure there are other ways to effectively alter the purchasing process. What are your suggestions?
For me, the bottom line is this: Legislation may help, but there's more to be done. There's a need for process change. Agencies need to commit to procuring components only through certified sources. And responsible, ethical distributors that aren't already certified need to step up and put in place the equipment, processes, and resources to meet the requirements for certification. Startups and others that want to get certified but can't afford the costs involved could perhaps receive underwriting from yet unformed government agencies.
What are your thoughts? How much impact will the legislation, S. 1228: Combating Military Counterfeits Act of 2011, have on eliminating counterfeit components in the supply chain? Does certification help or is there a better way? I welcome your comments and opinions. And I urge you to write your congressional representatives to make your voice heard.
The Govenment can't get envolved it will take for ever, they have bigger problems.
According to the 2010 survey reported by jhowarth the buyers must buy diectly form OCM's, OEM's and authorized Disributors, not brokers, independent distributors or gray market. It has already beem evalauted, what more can be done, police your self, report the offenders.
I don't know, but it seems to me that the money would not quite flow in that way. I mean the ones who are losing money through counterfeit parts are not likely to volunteer to subsidize a government agency that will provide funds for companies that get certified.
You bring up great points, but I have to wonder if those start-up and operation costs wouldn't be offset by a reduced cost of business not having to deal with counterfeit parts? If companies are losing money through engineering costs, product failures, etc. might the extra expense (sorry bean counters, back off on this one) would be justified?
"Startups and others that want to get certified but can't afford the costs involved could perhaps receive underwriting from yet unformed government agencies." I'm wondering where the funds are supposed to come from for this. If whole agencies have to be formed, there would be quite a bit of cost for that component alone, but, on the upside, some jobs would be created.
I think the legislation is a step in the right direction, but don't think it is going to be enough to end counterfeiting. The legislators need to fully understand the process and specific organizations that are in place to help curb fakes. As long as the government doesn't rely on price alone, and chooses suppliers who are members of organizations designed to stop counterfeiting, there will always be criminals looking to make a buck. Unfortunately this time it comes from our tax dollars and at the possible expense of our defense.
At the request of the Naval /air Warfare Systems Command, the US Department of commerce Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Office of Technology Evaluation (OTE) conducted a survey on counterfeit electronics in the US supply chain.
This 2010 survey summarized 240 pages of analysis this way: "Buy parts directly from OCMs and authorized distributors, rather than from parts brokers, independent distributors, or the gray market."
Authorized Distribution should be used FIRST when looking for parts for military and hi-rel systems. Authorized is the lowest risk above all when it comes to counterfeit. I would suggest looking at http://www.authorizeddirectory.com for the TRUE AUTHORIZED SOURCES FIRST before looking to IDEA. This is the solution recommended by all semiconductor companies and the first place anyone should look in the supply chain, especially for millitary and hi-rel systems.
Perhaps the first thing Legislators should understand is that buying from Authorized FIRST before going to Independent Distribution should be required and will eliminate a good percentage of counterfeit by itself. Only once the Authorized Sources have been exhausted should the Independent channel be consulted for military and hi-rel systems. Once using Independent Sources, military and hi-rel systems should have 100% component test (on a tester, powered up) and not just the predominantly visual checking being done today being done by the Independent Sources.
Strong relationships between suppliers and customers is essential. In the event counterfeit parts turn up, channels of communications are open and issues are easier to resolve.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This