Building and deploying a bilingual MES that connected a changing NPI operation with a mass-production floor in another country.
My roleSr. Manufacturing ManagerFocusManufacturing systems · deployment · adoption
Concept illustration of a PCBA; not a factory system screenshot.
2Production plants · US and Mexico
EN / ESBilingual operator experience
1Shared production database
01 / THE CHALLENGE
Different rhythms. The same need for traceability.
The operation combined new-product introduction in Texas with mass production in Mexico. Spreadsheets, shared drives, and informal handoffs connected the two floors, while the NPI process continued to change.
I designed, built, and deployed an end-to-end manufacturing execution system. The leadership challenge included deciding what to own, earning operator adoption, and releasing changes without disrupting the other plant.
02 / THE DECISIONS
Own the system that holds the process.
Build a system the manufacturing team could change+
The tradeoffThe commercial options we evaluated involved license and integration costs, with a change-request process between our engineers and process improvements.
My responseBuilt the MES in-house so the people owning the manufacturing process could also change its system of record.
What supported the decisionThe NPI line changed weekly, and process-system changes could deploy in days.
Treat bilingual readiness as a launch gate+
The tradeoffA shared system still has to work for operators on both floors. Language support could not be deferred until after launch.
My responseReleased English and Spanish screens together, enforced through the release process.
What supported the decisionThe system served both production plants with the same workflow coverage and a shared database.
Release while the other factory is running+
The tradeoffTwo live sites on one database make deployment a manufacturing-continuity problem as well as a software task.
My responseUsed backward-compatible schema changes and retained historical records when retiring inputs.
What supported the decisionExisting production records remained readable while the system evolved.
03 / THE OPERATING SYSTEM
Follow the unit through the factory.
The system covered the production flow, from work orders through execution and genealogy. Explore the operating responsibilities below; this is a conceptual view of the system’s scope, not a screenshot of proprietary software.
01 Release the work
Production orders and line release connected to the ERP so orders, completions, and inventory could stay in sync.
02 Execute at the station
Shop-floor execution, controlled documents, and labels supported the operator’s workflow in English and Spanish.
03 Capture the evidence
Measurements from test, inspection, and process equipment were tagged with part, station, and recipe.
04 Act on the signal
Serial-level genealogy, quality records, and SPC reaction plans connected production data to investigation and response.
Adoption came station by station: replacing disliked paperwork and letting operators see their own data before asking them to trust more automation.
04 / THE IMPACT
Make the manufacturing record usable.
Before
Reconstruct the answer
Quality investigations depended on finding and connecting spreadsheets, shared files, and local knowledge.
After
Query the unit’s history
Serial genealogy linked production and quality records across both plants, with timestamped evidence for customer and audit questions.
The result was a production system running across two plants, with bilingual execution, ERP integration, direct measurement capture, and traceable unit histories. Process changes could deploy in days.
