Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1544155
20 SMT007 MAGAZINE I APRIL 2026 We would build our first articles or prototypes, and then we'd encounter errors like missing parts, parts that didn't fit, and so on. The result would be a delay of months. Compromises would have to be made, even quality compromises, because the schedule sometimes took precedence. This challenge has only grown as our world moves to- ward more electrified, autonomous, and software- driven systems. Wire harnesses now carry far more signals and higher current loads, and operate within tighter packaging constraints than ever before— making them among the most complex physical systems in modern machines. The complexity of these systems means the traditional approach of manually interpreting drawings simply cannot scale. Wire harnesses are becoming increasingly critical in the hardware realm, so we need to solve these challenges. In many cases, preparing a quote for a medium- complexity harness requires 20 to 40 hours of engineering effort just to construct the bill of materials and validate the design before sourc- ing even begins. That work is largely manual and often repeated multiple times as design issues are uncovered. Across the industry, this amounts to thousands of engineering hours spent translating incomplete data rather than focusing on engineer- ing or manufacturing improvements. You use the idea of "The Perfect Tues- day," to describe an ideal environ- ment for quoting. What does that look like for a wire harness manu- facturer? Monesh Singh: I serve as a senior manager for supplier industrial- ization, responsible for bringing multiple electronic components for electric vehicle programs from design to scalable production across global suppliers. In parallel, I'm also a prin- cipal investor and strategic advisor to an elec- tronics design and manufacturing company, which gives me a unique perspective on both the OEM and supplier sides of the industry. Seeing both perspectives has given me a deeper appreciation for the operational realities, tradeoffs, and pres- sures that each side faces. To illustrate that perspective, I often think about an "imperfect Tuesday" I had recently. Recently, the team at the company I advise received an RFQ package from a customer that included 19 different harness drawings. As their engineering team began reviewing the documen- tation to start the quotation process, it quickly became apparent that most of the drawings were missing critical information like connector details, wire specifications, layout dimensions, or complete BOMs. In the end, not one of the 19 drawings could be fully quoted. Situations like this highlight a broader industry challenge. Quoting a harness is not simply attach- ing a price; it requires detailed engineering review, identifying gaps in the documentation, sending clarification requests back to the customer, and waiting for responses before progress can be made. Sometimes those responses come back quickly, but other times it can take weeks. During that time, engineering resources remain tied up while programs wait to move forward. What is happening here? Why is this such an issue? Singh: What's happening here is a lack of engi- neering discipline and structured documentation at the beginning of the process. When RFQs are issued without complete drawings, BOMs, connec- tor details, or specifications, suppliers must spend time clarifying basic information before they can even begin preparing a quote. Earlier in my career, I found myself addressing these gaps repeatedly with individual suppli- ers, aligning on documentation expectations, and trying to bring more structure to the process. At some point, the question became obvious: If this is a recurring issue, why not standardize the requirements up front? For a wire harness manufacturer, a perfect Tuesday is receiving a complete data package. When the documentation is clear and organized, suppliers can quickly define the supply chain, build an accurate quote, and move the program forward efficiently. Monesh Singh