Since 2021, xcPEP has been constantly upgraded incorporating needs of home appliance makers - tackling higher percentage of proprietary parts, large number of SKUs, shorter product lifecycles and competition from vertically integrated Chinese brands.

Cost Models
Used in calculation of of PCB manfacturing processs.
And more products torn down and costed
And more products target costing done in last 5 years.
And more data points
Mapped for a typical split AC.

Below are turnkey services where we collaborate with home appliance makers on focused cost initiatives. All services are delivered using xcPEP and xcPROC.

We build full product or part-level should-costs for assemblies like compressors, motors, PCBs, and housings using CAD, teardowns, and supplier RFQs.

We benchmark your appliance with competitor across cost drivers to generate cost reduction ideas.

We configure xcPEP to your products, suppliers, and locations, building custom raw material, MHR, and LHR datasets.

We set up a cost lab, create SOPs, train your team on live projects, and ensure it's fully operational.

Deployment & Cost Lab BOT are services where ASI Engineering team ensures xcPEP is configured and used effectively.

ASI vs. Management Consultants vs. Benchmarking Companies
Approaches to Cost Optimization for Home Appliance Manufacturers
ASI – Engineering-Led Cost Transformation Management Consultants Benchmarking Companies
Engineering-led cost transformation using xcPEP & xcPROC, tailored for Home Appliance makers. Focus on sustainable, structural cost reduction across full product lifecycles. Strategy-focused consulting aimed at solving isolated problems. Engagements are billable-hour driven and often lead to recurring cost challenges. No pre-existing home appliance database. Deliverables based on expensive, one-off teardown or reverse-engineering projects.
Transparent Should Costing for every part, adapted to each manufacturer’s supply base and production process. Highly detailed, data-driven simulations enabling targeted cost-reduction initiatives. Relies on SME expertise and generic industry data. Often produces incremental changes without addressing systemic cost drivers. Costing often based on simplistic formulae from limited teardown samples. Insights rarely capture the nuances specific to home appliance manufacturing like large number of SKUs, global supply chains, relatively smaller production volumes and shorter product lifecycles.
Proprietary platforms:
  • xcPEP – high-detail part costing & simulation
  • xcPROC – procurement intelligence & sourcing support
Optimized for the home appliance makers with high number of SKUs with relatively smaller production volumes environment.
General financial models and operational frameworks. Lacks manufacturing-specific cost simulation capabilities. Uses ad-hoc analysis tools for each engagement. No scalable platform for repeatable, accurate cost estimation.
Measurable, sustainable cost reductions with direct impact on margin and competitiveness. Recommendations improve current state but may not deliver optimal or lasting results. Outcomes are slow, costly, and often fail to justify the investment.
Rapid portfolio-wide analysis with live costing tools – weeks, not months. Multi-month projects from start to final report. Slow, custom project timelines with long lead times for any usable insights.
Engineering Led Cost Transformation
Of Home Appliance Makers
Challenge ASI Solution Value
Key Challenges
  • Opaque cost structures for high value parts
  • Volatile input costs
  • Scattered data across teams
  • Limited visibility into drivers
Our Framework
  • Part-level costing using xcPEP
  • Supplier cost mapping via xcPROC
  • Should Costing of each and every part
  • Unified data layer for decision-making
Business Impact
  • EBITDA uplift
  • Faster time-to-insight
  • Improved exit multiples
  • Sustained competitive edge
Core Technology Platforms
xcPROC
Procurement Intelligence
xcPEP Costing Engine
Precise Should Costing
xcPEP Idea Module
Automated Design & Commercial Idea Generation
Build - Operate - Transfer Engagement Model
Phase 1: Build
Detailed Should-Costing Foundation
Phase 2: Operate
Idea Generation & Implementation
Phase 3: Transfer
Cost Engineering Function Handover
  • Data mapping from drawings and teardown
  • Teardown analysis of proprietary and competitor products
  • Alignment of cost models with company's reality
  • Development of raw material, LHR, MHR databases aligned to company’s products and supply chain
  • Supplier & route mapping
  • Should costing of everything the company makes and buys
  • Engineering idea generation: design / material / supplier / process / packaging changes
  • Engineering idea implementation
  • Commercial idea generation: negotiation gaps, alternate suppliers, import/export data
  • Commercial idea implementation
  • Cost Engineering Function is created inside the company
  • Full handover of platform and processes
  • Training, documentation, and continued support
Deliverables & Outcomes
Immediate
  • Baseline costing
  • Quick-win ideas
Medium-Term
  • Operational improvement
  • Margin expansion
Long-Term
  • Exit readiness
  • Value creation