A BOM sourcing request should distinguish the exact required part, alternatives already approved for the application, and new candidates that still need review. Keep the complete manufacturer part number (MPN) for each option and link every approval to the requirement it covers. This gives suppliers a clear basis for quoting while preserving the buyer's control over changes.
The distinction matters when a hard-to-find line produces several possible solutions. A supplier can identify an available candidate without knowing whether it is suitable for your board revision, operating conditions or customer requirements. Clear records let the sourcing work continue without presenting a suggestion as an accepted substitute.
Separate the required part from each alternative
Start with the current BOM revision and a stable line reference. Preserve the required manufacturer's name and full orderable MPN. Add each alternative as its own linked option, rather than putting several part numbers into a single cell and leaving the supplier to choose.
A useful record separates:
Field | What to record |
|---|---|
Requirement reference | BOM line ID and the current BOM revision |
Required part | Manufacturer and complete approved orderable MPN |
Alternative | Manufacturer and complete proposed orderable MPN |
Decision state | Approved within stated scope, review pending, or rejected |
Applicable scope | Product or board revision, application and any build or quantity restriction stated in the decision |
Decision evidence | Approval reference, date and responsible decision maker |
Conditions | Any required qualification, documentation, packaging or other acceptance condition |
These fields are a practical record structure. Use your existing engineering change or approved-parts system where it already holds the decision, and reference it from the sourcing sheet. Avoid maintaining a second approval list that can drift away from the authoritative record.
The broader BOM sourcing guide covers the initial request. The purpose here is to make the status and limits of each alternative understandable at line level.
Preserve what a cross-reference result actually says
A cross-reference can help identify a candidate, but its classification needs to remain visible. TI distinguishes its pin-for-pin category, where parameters can differ, from categories that can also differ in pinout. Record the manufacturer's actual classification and the supporting link instead of reducing every result to a general “equivalent” label. TI cross-reference types.
The application still matters. Analog Devices discusses cases where parts described as pin-compatible behave differently in a particular circuit and recommends evaluation in the intended application before production approval. A cross-reference result therefore belongs with the review evidence; it does not replace the buyer's application-specific decision. Analog Devices cross-reference guidance.
Keep the data sheet revision and any comparison used by the reviewer with the decision record. If the supplier proposes a different suffix, package or revision from the one reviewed, identify that difference explicitly and refer it back to the responsible reviewer.
State the scope of an existing approval
“Approved alternate” is useful only when the recipient knows where that approval applies. An acceptance for a prototype, a particular board revision or a limited build should retain those limits when the part appears in a later RFQ.
Before sending the list, check the decision against the current requirement:
Does it name the exact alternative manufacturer and full MPN being offered?
Does it cover the current product, board or BOM revision?
Are any required qualification steps complete, or is acceptance still conditional?
Does a build, quantity, customer or other restriction affect this purchase?
Has a later decision withdrawn or replaced the approval?
Record restrictions that actually exist. Do not invent an expiry date or a standard quantity limit for every alternative. If a decision's scope is unclear, ask its owner to clarify that point before describing the option to a supplier as approved for the current order.
Give suppliers a separate place for new suggestions
The request can allow suppliers to quote approved options and propose additional candidates, provided those two tasks are clearly separated. Ask the supplier to preserve your line reference and identify the complete part number it is actually quoting.
For an approved option, request the quantity, offered packaging and the evidence needed for your acceptance conditions. For a new candidate, request its manufacturer, full MPN, stated differences and supporting manufacturer information. Keep its price and availability attached to that candidate rather than copying them into the exact-part offer.
A concise RFQ note could read:
Quote the required MPN or the alternatives listed as approved for this BOM revision. Show any other proposed part separately, with its full MPN and supporting information. New proposals remain subject to our review before ordering.
This is wording to adapt to your process, not an approval of any particular part. If no alternatives are permitted, say that directly and request the exact specified MPN.
Update the request when a decision changes
When a candidate is accepted, link the written decision to the relevant requirement and issue an identifiable update. Show the accepted MPN, its applicable scope and any conditions that remain. Tell affected suppliers which earlier instruction the update replaces.
When a proposal is rejected, retain the reference so the same candidate is not repeatedly presented as a new solution. Keep the rejected option out of the choices a supplier may select for the order.
If the BOM revision changes, review whether the previous approval still applies. Preserve the earlier decision as history and record the current instruction. A file name containing “approved” cannot explain which line, revision or application was accepted.
Before placing the order, reconcile the supplier's final offered MPN and delivery format with the selected approved option. If the response introduces another change, resolve it before issuing an order for that different part.
Keep approval separate from supply coverage
An approved alternative does not establish that a supplier holds the required quantity or that material has been reserved. Confirm the offered stock, delivery and commercial terms separately.
Likewise, a candidate awaiting approval should remain outside your accepted supply plan. Once an alternative is approved and selected, it serves the linked requirement; it does not create an additional requirement alongside the original part. The partial BOM quotation guide explains how to track eligible offers and remaining gaps without double-counting them.
Send a BOM with clear alternative instructions
Send your BOM to StockWake with complete MPNs, quantities and the requirements for the lines you still need. Identify the alternatives already approved for the current application, retain any restrictions, and list new candidates separately for review. That gives the sourcing request a clear boundary while leaving technical acceptance with the responsible buyer and engineering team.