> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://med-techinsights.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Q&A: How Early Supply Chain Decisions Shape MedTech Success - URL: https://med-techinsights.com/qa-how-early-supply-chain-decisions-shape-medtech-success/ - Published: 2026-09-03T07:40:39.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-23T02:33:06.000Z - Description: Med-Tech Insights recently caught up with Veronica Mellen, a Senior Buyer/Planner at HiArc – a leading medical engineering, design, and manufacturing company. Before joining HiArc two years ago, Veronica was in purchasing and manufacturing for roughly 12 years within automotive lighting and MedTech. - Author: Oliver Johnson - Tags: Insights, Medical Device Manufacturing ![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/98/19/9819191a-690e-400b-bf27-720adfd33f45/content/images/2026/10/18556-1787067855944-edited.jpg) Veronica Mellen, Senior Buyer/Planner at HiArc Med-Tech Insights recently caught up with Veronica Mellen, a Senior Buyer/Planner at HiArc – a leading medical engineering, design, and manufacturing company. Before joining HiArc two years ago, Veronica was in purchasing and manufacturing for roughly 12 years within automotive lighting and MedTech. After several years of global disruption, supply chain has become a design issue rather than simply a procurement issue*.* Veronica advocates for bringing sourcing teams into design discussions earlier and building flexibility into products before designs become locked down.We kicked off by discussing the point at which component sourcing should begin influencing system architecture. ###### **MI: At what point in a program should component sourcing start influencing architecture?** VM: One of the biggest mistakes people make is treating supply chain as something that starts when the BOM is created. Component sourcing should start influencing architecture right at the concept stage. That’s when the big decisions are still being made around technologies and subsystems, and it’s exactly when supply chain input can have the most impact. A lot of organisations still bring sourcing in later; after schematic design or once there’s already a preliminary BOM. By that point, options are constrained, and teams end up reacting instead of planning. When supply chain is involved earlier, it shifts the mindset from just making something work to making sure it’s manufacturable, scalable, and resilient from the start. ###### **MI: Can you give a real example where a component choice made early in design ended up saving (or costing) a program months further down the line during procurement or manufacturing scale-up?** VM: I’ve seen programs in the past where an early component decision seemed like the right call at the time but created issues later. For example, one diagnostic program at a prior company selected a high-performance optical sensor early on because it met very specific requirements. It looked like the obvious choice during prototyping, but the problem showed up when they started thinking about scaling. The supplier had lead times over 20 weeks, limited capacity, and there wasn’t a viable alternative. Pilot builds were delayed which forced a late redesign, pushing timelines out by months. When sourcing is involved earlier, we can often flag those risks and suggest components that may not be the absolute top performer, but that has stronger supplier support and more reliable availability. That trade-off can make all the difference when you’re trying to move into production smoothly. ###### **MI: Complex diagnostics often rely on non-standard or single-source components. What’s the risk profile of designing around these versus more readily available alternatives, and how do you help clients weigh that trade-off?** VM: Non-standard or single-source components are sometimes unavoidable, especially in diagnostics where performance requirements are tight. But they do come with a very concentrated risk that needs to be understood upfront. The biggest concern is supply chain vulnerability. If something changes with that supplier: capacity, manufacturing priorities, lifecycle-you don’t have many fallback options when you have single-source. Lead times are usually longer and less predictable and switching later can mean significant re-validation. That doesn’t mean these components are the wrong choice, in some cases, they’re necessary. The key is being intentional about understanding the trade-offs, and where possible, building in some flexibility or identifying backup paths early. When it makes sense, second-source and even third-source options should be considered. It’s common for teams to select a specialised component without fully understanding how its supply profile changes at scale. Something that’s easy to get during prototyping can look very different in production volumes. I saw a case where a team chose a niche electromechanical component that worked well early on. But as they moved toward production, lead times stretched past 30 weeks, and the supplier prioritized larger customers. Since the design didn’t allow for alternatives, they had to go back, modify it, and then re-test and revalidate. They did recover, but it added months and drove costs up significantly. The issue wasn’t necessarily the part itself; it was not having that supply visibility early enough. ###### **MI: What does it look like in practice to bring supply chain or sourcing expertise into the room during architecture and detailed design?** VM: In practice, integrating supply chain into design isn’t about a single checkpoint, it’s more of an ongoing collaboration, involving regular engineering meetings, design reviews and supplier conversations. Supply chain should be involved in early architecture discussions, help review key component choices, and stay engaged throughout the process. It turns into a continuous dialogue between engineering, sourcing, manufacturing, and quality. As the design evolves, supply implications are evaluated in parallel. That also includes early conversations with key suppliers to understand capacity, lifecycle, and risks. When it’s working well, supply chain isn’t a separate step, it’s just part of how decisions are made. ###### **MI: Are there particular design decisions where supply chain risk is especially easy to overlook until the BOM stage?** VM: There are a few areas where supply chain risk is often underestimated. PCBA components are a good example, particularly microcontrollers, FPGAs, memory devices, power management ICs, and other semiconductors. These components are frequently sourced from a limited number of manufacturers, making them vulnerable to supply disruptions, capacity constraints, and end-of-life announcements. In addition, geopolitical factors, changing trade regulations, and concentration of semiconductor manufacturing in specific regions can create unexpected supply challenges. Even when a component represents only a small percentage of the overall product cost, a shortage can delay an entire production build if no qualified alternate exists. That’s why it’s critical to evaluate component availability, lifecycle status, and alternate sourcing options early in the design process rather than after the design is locked. ###### **MI: Given the supply chain pressures the MedTech sector has faced over the past few years, how has that changed the way HiArc approaches component selection compared to, say, five or ten years ago?** VM: Over the past 5–10 years, and especially after recent global disruptions, supply chain has become much more central to how we approach design. What used to be considered later in the process is now treated as a core design input. There’s more focus on understanding component lifecycles, qualifying multiple sources where possible, and engaging suppliers earlier. We’re also more intentional about designing flexibility into systems upfront instead of trying to add it later. Overall, the mindset has shifted to designing not just for performance, but for availability and long-term sustainability. ###### **MI: What strategies do you recommend for building flexibility into a design from the start and how do you balance that flexibility against performance or regulatory requirements?** VM: Building flexibility into a design really comes down to anticipating where constraints might show up. That can mean choosing components with viable alternatives, avoiding overly proprietary solutions, and structuring systems so higher-risk elements can be swapped out more easily. In MedTech, timing is critical because making changes later can trigger major revalidation efforts. So, the challenge is balancing flexibility with performance and regulatory requirements, but when it’s done well, it significantly reduces downstream risk. Flexibility doesn’t come for free, but it’s almost always cheaper than redesign. ###### **MI: Is there a project HiArc has worked on where getting supply chain thinking right early on made a visible difference to time-to-market or production scalability?** VM: I’ve seen programs where bringing supply chain in early made a clear difference. In one case, the initial design included manufacturer-specific callouts on several drawings. While those selections met the technical requirements, they limited the supply chain team’s ability to source equivalent components from multiple qualified suppliers. By involving supply chain early, the team reviewed those requirements and identified opportunities to broaden the approved supplier base without impacting product performance or quality. That gave us greater flexibility to balance lead times, cost, and availability while reducing dependence on any single supplier. Because those decisions were made upfront, the team avoided sourcing constraints that could have delayed production and scaled manufacturing much more smoothly. It also allowed us to leverage strategic sourcing practices and strong supplier relationships to secure capacity, identify alternate sources, and respond more effectively to changing market conditions. One of HiArc’s strengths is that we bring those sourcing strategies and supplier relationships to the table from the start. Our team has deep experience managing supply chain risk and a well-established supplier network, which allows us to identify potential constraints early and build flexibility into the design before they become production issues. It’s a good example of how early alignment between engineering, supply chain, and suppliers can directly improve time-to-market and production scalability. Often the biggest success is the problem that never materialises because the right decisions were made at the beginning.