Designing for Resilience: Why Supply Chain Strategy Starts at the CAD File

Design & Supply Chain Series - Blog #1

Finding the right suppliers is one of the most important steps in commercializing your product. Every nuance of your product design will need to be realized correctly and consistently from the product drawings (most likely in CAD files of some sort) into the physical reality. During his “sourcing” exercise, companies tend to focus more on finding trustworthy and reliable manufacturing partners, developing the right business relationships, and negotiation the best business deals. These are all necessary and important elements in sourcing, but companies might not understand they are far from getting their hands clean on the design aspects of their products even in this sourcing stage; as a matter of fact, the product design should be its starting point.

Why do companies want to start their sourcing exercise from looking into their product designs?

Every single element in your product design leads to some sort of consequences in production, whether it is positive or negative. Below are some of the key reasons why the non-separable relationship between design and manufacturing plays major roles in supplier sourcing.

Not every supplier, even if they serve the same vertical, is equal.

Experience is king in manufacturing. A typical supplier usually has to realize a large portfolio of different products for their clients even if the former fall into the same general category. For instance, in the consumer electronics sector, products are more or less homogeneous in terms of their physical construction, consisting of mechanical enclosures, electronics, and software. This similarity has been driven by the fact that hardware chipsets are extremely versatile these days and can be programmed to perform a wide range of product functions. Such a commonality leads to a misconception that most consumer electronics suppliers are on par in terms of their production capabilities, and the sourcing focus shifts to one on cost comparison. The case in point was a swimming wearable start-up who picked a supplier who has little experience on molded-in flexible electronics. The supplier does not have much experience in tooling up flexible mechanical parts, not to mention understanding the process parameters required for flexible PCBA (Printed Circuit Board Assembly) to remain stable in tools and not be damaged as the mechanical structure was molded around the former. The result is that the start-up spent most of their financial resources with this supplier on production trial-and-errors, leaving little or no resource for their subsequent marketing campaigns while delaying time-to-market.

Best for the business, or best for your product design?

Suppliers usually do what is best for their business, rather than that for realizing your products, or they simply default to the path of least resistance. A houseware start-up had a great idea on improving the garbage bag extraction experience through an innovative garbage bin design. This design contains two large stainless steel panels with various 90 degree bends on each, the angle tolerances of which have a significant impact of how the product performs and the resulting user experience. The chosen supplier, with no internal sheet metal fabrication capability, picked a cheap tier-2 supplier with little quality control process in place and less-than-ideal production floor management. Since the tolerance of the panels could not be controlled well, the production yield could only reach 80% which directly translated into a more expensive unit cost for the houseware start-up.

You might not want to hear it, but your product design is not ready for production!

Once you provide a product design to a suppler, the most experienced and process-oriented ones would provide a DFM (Design-to-Manufacturing) assessment in return, detailing what aspects of your product design will likely have negative consequences when produced. They might even further recommend design improvements to alleviate the associated production risks. Such a comprehensive DFM assessment helps set right expectations in terms of costs, schedule and risks, and if it is not done, surprises are almost always guaranteed which in turn leads to complications in funding cycles, product launch timing, field quality performance, etc. And yes, the assessment of the supplier and in turn theirs on your product design starts with the CAD files.

Consider not only the initial ramp-up, but the longer-term production.

Your electrical engineering team has meticulously designed and chosen the most appropriate components on the PCBA to ensure the best product functionalities. You then send the ECAD database to your chosen supplier and provide them a deadline of production ramp-up and set volume expectations. Only that after this initial ramp-up, the supplier informs you that there are shortages in a few of the key components on your PCBA design, and some of them are getting to the EOF (End-of-Life) status. You now have to tell your clients that your products are not going to reach their shelves in time, and scramble to find extra development funding for a re-design effort that is needed to incorporate alternative components. A supply chain resilience review should have been initiated once the PCBA design is transferred to suppliers, and the good ones will always provide comprehensive supply chain insights into the time horizon that compasses your production schedule and life-cycle requirements; such an important step of a wider supply chain strategy starts with the CAD files.

What if you do have a gap in the design-to-manufacturing transition?

There are lots of facets to be considered when sourcing the right manufacturing partner for your product, and starting from the product design and determining which supplier can best realize your product vision and design intent in the least risky manner is key. Of course, not every product company can speak both the design and manufacturing languages equally well, and can understand the intricate consequential relationships between the two arenas. This is where the deep, extensive and integrated experiences in product development, tooling and manufacturing of Amazing Lab can be valuable in your sourcing process. Let’s talk supply chain strategy together today!

Kevin Ko, Co-Founder & Chief Product Officer, Amazing Lab

#productdesign #CAD #supplychain #sourcing #startups #manufacturingforstartups #dfm

From Prototypes to Products: Why Hybrid Tooling Works for Wellness Startups

In wellness and personal care, no two customers are exactly alike. From skin types to supplement needs to fitness goals, personalization is no longer a luxury—it’s an expectation. But if you're a founder trying to launch a customized product, you’ve probably run into a major roadblock: traditional manufacturing just isn't built for flexibility.

That’s where hybrid tooling comes in.

What Is Hybrid Tooling?

Hybrid tooling combines multiple manufacturing methods—like 3D printing, CNC machining, soft molds, and traditional tooling—into a smart, staged process. Instead of locking into one approach too early, hybrid tooling lets you:

• Launch faster – Iterate prototypes and test early runs without waiting for steel molds.

• Customize efficiently – Create personalized features or modular add-ons using 3D printing.

• Scale wisely – Shift to traditional tooling only when volume and design are stable.
  

Personalization Demands Flexibility

Let’s say you’re designing a supplement pod that delivers a tailored mix for each user, or a skincare tool that needs to fit different face shapes. You don’t want to invest in hard tooling for a design that might need 10 more tweaks.

3D printing allows you to test these personalized components quickly, with real users. And over time, as patterns emerge, you can shift standard parts—like enclosures or caps—to traditional tooling, while still 3D printing the personalized inserts or accessories.

In fact, many wellness products now never move fully to traditional tooling. They mix methods:

• A tooled base unit that’s mass-produced

• Interchangeable 3D printed parts for customization

• Soft tooling for packaging that changes seasonally

It’s smart manufacturing for a smart market.

Wearables Are a Natural Fit

Wearables—like posture trainers, sleep sensors, fitness bands, or menstrual health devices—must adapt to the body and often require ergonomic fine-tuning. With hybrid tooling, you can:

• Rapidly prototype and test fit/comfort across body types

• Use 3D printing for small-batch production of straps, clips, or enclosures

• Tool only the core structural components once the design is validated

This approach keeps your design user-centered, especially when comfort and daily use are key.

Why I Always Think Hybrid

As someone with both a manufacturing background and a business brain, I always look at cost, time, and quantity before choosing the most suitable production method. Thanks to years of reviewing P&L statements (and sometimes living in spreadsheets!), I know how fast early decisions can snowball into sunk costs and delays.

That’s why I’m such a believer in hybrid tooling: it gives founders room to breathe, test, and evolve—without blowing the budget before you even reach your first customer.

Case in Point: Smarter Tooling for a Smart Garden

One of our recent projects involved an indoor hydroponic herb garden system. The startup founders had a solid product idea and early traction, but when they sent the design to a traditional OEM manufacturer, the quote came back with an eye-watering $170,000 tooling cost, covering 12 molds for just 15 plastic parts.

We stepped in to conduct a hybrid tooling analysis. After reviewing the product’s cosmetic and functional requirements, part sizes, and target quantities, we reorganized the components into two strategic groups:

• Larger or more visible parts that require traditional tooling for durability and finish

• Smaller, lower-volume or internal components where 3D printing made more sense

By factoring in the size of each part, we also reduced the overall mold complexity and cost, since some bulky parts that didn’t require high cosmetic detail were shifted to additive manufacturing.

We collaborated closely with the startup team on both the product development and the go-to-market plan. In the end, we delivered a custom strategy that cut their initial tooling investment by 30%, allowing them to move forward with a small batch for user testing and investor presentations, without overcommitting too early. This kind of flexibility is exactly what hybrid tooling unlocks.

Don’t Let Manufacturing Limit Your Vision

If you’re building a personalized wellness or wearable product, you need a manufacturing strategy as agile as your design. Hybrid tooling lets you experiment early, refine often, and scale when the time is right. It’s not just about saving money—it’s about meeting your customer’s needs faster and better.

by Ami Sin, Founder Amazing Lab

#hybridtooling #healthtech #startups #manufacturingforstartups #dfm #smartmanufacturing #additivemanufacturing

Is my company designing the right products?

So now you have decided to embark on an illuminating journey of developing a product of your dream and feel ready to tackle the challenges of hardware entrepreneurship, what is next?

Before putting any time, effort and resource into development, I highly recommend you take a step back to answer the question: “Will I be developing the right product?”

Rushing a product to market often leads to disappointment for both customers and your company. Slow down, focus on real user needs, and you'll develop something people truly value.

So how would you do that? Start with empathy. Speak to potential users to understand their biggest pains and desires, NOT your own assumptions. Listen without judgment and the insights will surprise you. I often heard hardware entrepreneurs talking about the products of their dreams; if the latter are based solely on their own perspectives rather than the intended end users, one can imagine the probability of those products being developed meeting user and market expectations.

Brainstorm many ideas, however wild. Quantity always beats quality in the early stage of product conceptualization; don't edit early to filter out any potentially innovative ideas. Map concepts to user insights discovered, especially the unarticulated ones; this is usually where true innovations will arise.

Once product concepts are narrowed down, refine them through conducting user validation testing, not opinions. Understand user behaviour objectively with planned tasks and questions, not passive surveys. The iterative user-research-validation-refinement cycle drives the best product trajectory. The above is only the beginning. There happens to a highly structured and comprehensive product development process that Amazing Lab has been practicing with all our clients, and it is proven time and time again that it helps minimize development risks while shorten time-to-market. We will explore that together next.

Kevin Ko

#amazinglab #hardwarestartup #rightproduct #userinsights