“Today, the Indian Tooling industries have the necessary infrastructure, machines, and technologies to meet stringent international requirements. Certifications, quality benchmarks, and adherence to global practices are no longer barriers for us. We are confident in our ability to manufacture as per world-class standards and deliver moulds that can compete in any international market,” says Opinder Singh Baddhan, Founder & Chairman, Om Galaxy Limited, in conversation with Neha Basudkar Ghate.
In your opinion, what should toolmakers focus on to remain competitive in today’s industry?
I believe toolmakers must invest in equipping themselves with most of the critical facilities in-house. Many companies already have CNC machines, but that alone is no longer enough. Having a complete range of facilities under one roof enables a company to deliver faster and with greater reliability.
While outsourcing may seem like a feasible solution, it also brings along its own set of challenges. For instance, the timelines of external vendors often depend on their own priorities, which may not necessarily align with ours. Outsourcing also increases costs because the vendor’s profit margins are included in the final price. These factors make it challenging to stay competitive in the market.
In our case, we have already established all the necessary facilities in-house, which I believe has made us more competitive. It not only helps us ensure timely deliveries but also maintains cost-effectiveness. That is why I strongly believe toolmakers should adopt such an approach. Without it, staying competitive becomes increasingly difficult.
With the rise of automation and advanced software, what role do you see skilled manpower playing in the toolmaking industry?
The role of skilled manpower will always remain crucial. I often compare it to the medical field. The compounder may do most of the routine work, but it is ultimately the doctor who diagnoses the problem and makes the right decisions. Similarly, in toolmaking, automation and advanced software are essential for efficiency, but it is the skilled workforce that ensures precision and quality.
When assembling moulds, issues will arise, no matter how advanced the technology. This is where skilled manpower comes in. Their experience allows them to troubleshoot, make small but necessary adjustments, and deliver a flawless product. Automation can speed up processes, but machines and software cannot fully replace the judgment and expertise of skilled technicians. In fact, even after a mould is created using the most advanced systems; it is skilled manpower that provides the final touches, ensuring the product meets the required standards. Their ability to decide where small changes are needed makes all the difference. That is why I strongly believe that while adopting automation is a must for growth and faster delivery, skilled manpower will always remain at the heart of toolmaking.
How important is quality assurance in toolmaking, and what practices help ensure it?
Quality assurance is non-negotiable in our industry. Customers always expect precision and reliability. Therefore it becomes necessary for us to make the manufacturing more predictable in this kind of arena. To meet these expectations, toolmakers must ensure that proper inspection and measurement facilities are in place.
In our factory, for instance, we use advanced scanners and CMMs (Coordinate Measuring Machine). Every part, including core and cavity components, is thoroughly inspected during various stages of manufacturing. These technologies enable us to identify discrepancies early on and rectify them promptly. As a result, when the mould goes for its first trial run, i.e, the T0 stage, it is already close to a ‘first-time-right’ product.
With robust scanning, CMM inspection, and prototyping tools in place, errors can be minimised and rework time significantly reduced. Ultimately, these quality assurance systems enable us to deliver reliable, high-performance moulds that meet customer requirements right from the start.
How important is collaboration between toolmakers and end-users in the mould-making process?
In our industry, collaboration is not optional; it is essential. Toolmakers and end-users must work closely together right from the start. While the end-user defines the product’s requirements, it is the toolmaker’s responsibility to translate those requirements into a functional mould. During this process, modifications are often needed, but the toolmaker must ensure that aesthetics, fit, and functionality are not compromised.
Unlike other industries, our collaboration is ongoing and very hands-on. It goes beyond just delivering a mould; it is about being constantly available to the customer, addressing changes promptly, and ensuring that timelines are met. For example, in automotive moulds, design modifications are common, and we need to adapt quickly to accommodate them. Discussions about costs and adjustments can follow, but meeting the customer’s requirement on time must always remain the top priority.
We also employ design tools such as mould flow simulations to identify 80-90% of potential issues before the mould is even manufactured. Sharing these insights with customers allows them to see what is achievable and what may pose challenges. This proactive approach aligns both sides from the beginning, preventing delays later.
Moreover, collaboration also gives us opportunities to suggest improvements. There have been occasions when we have advised our customers that a design could be made sturdier or more efficient if approached differently. This exchange of ideas fosters innovation and results in moulds that not only meet requirements but also perform better. From day one, collaboration is the foundation for efficient, high-quality mould production.
What are the major challenges you face with raw material procurement?
Raw material procurement is a growing concern for us. With the introduction of BIS regulations and other formalities, the supply chain has become more restricted. Currently, only a few importers manage to supply seamless material flow and in this case we are often dependent on their stock. This means that at times, the specific materials we need are not always available, leading to delays in our work.
For example, in pipe fitting moulds, we require 2316-grade material. While suppliers exist, we often face issues with both quality and availability. So, even if we have large orders in hand, the lack of material supply holds us back. In these circumstances, cost-effectiveness becomes secondary; we are no longer in a position to choose. Instead, we are forced to request and negotiate for whatever material is available only to keep production running.
Beyond raw materials, are there other industry challenges that concern you?
Yes, there are! A major challenge arises from the software side. The shift to subscription-based software licensing has made things extremely difficult for toolmakers. A few years ago, software companies promised affordability through subscriptions. At that time, the annual cost was around INR 65,000-70,000. Today, it has increased to nearly INR 1,70,000 a year!
The problem is not just the cost; it is the lack of alternatives. Many professionals learn software independently, and the industry has largely standardised around such platforms. As a result, we are completely dependent on them. Each year, renewal negotiations become increasingly difficult. We end up paying because there is no equally viable substitute backed with good training support. Addressing this imbalance may ultimately require either government intervention or strong representation from within the industry.
What role do you think the government should play in addressing the challenges of software pricing and raw material availability?
The government needs to adopt a more consistent approach in regulating raw materials and addressing software pricing challenges. We often see software companies impose steep price hikes, ranging from 50% to 100%. This creates a huge burden for toolmakers like us. We manage around 45-50 software seats in-house. For a large operation with several machines, this difference in cost becomes significant and difficult to absorb.
On the raw material side, BIS regulations are important, but their implementation has created many hurdles. Certain metals, which were earlier available freely, now have rigid requirements. Vendors, who are not always manufacturers, face difficulties procuring licences for compliance, particularly when the original manufacturers are based abroad. This has led to delays and shortages, and hampers our ability to deliver on time.
In my view, the government should adopt a more practical stance. Pricing, whether of software or raw materials, should be consistent. A gradual increase is understandable, but sudden and steep hikes can have damaging consequences. Similarly, BIS certification should be implemented with a clear understanding of industry requirements, so it facilitates quality without causing unnecessary disruption.
Apart from these external challenges, what internal practices can help toolmakers avoid delays and failures?
Many challenges in toolmaking can be addressed through proper planning and a clear understanding of the customer’s needs. So, if there’s an error in a customer’s specifications, the same error gets replicated during mould development. This eventually leads to problems once the mould is built, resulting in costly delays and rework.
To prevent this, toolmakers must study the customer’s requirements thoroughly before beginning mould design and manufacturing. During the initial stage, proper planning is critical. Toolmakers must evaluate feasibility, raise the necessary questions, and ensure clarity regarding specifications. Similarly, customers must also provide clear and accurate drawings to avoid ambiguity.
Proper planning and communication at both ends can prevent failures and ensure a more efficient delivery. Collaboration at the initial stage itself helps eliminate delays later in the process, which is vital to staying competitive in today’s market.
How do you see the role of modern manufacturing technologies in today’s toolmaking industry?
Today, most toolmaking jobs are performed by machines using modern methods. Conventional machines are still used for minor jobs or making small adjustments. However, they are no longer sufficient for mainstream production.
To be competitive and deliver moulds quickly, toolmakers must adopt smart manufacturing practices. This means relying on CNC machines, CAD-driven processes, and adhering strictly to precise drawings. This approach can help them achieve speed, accuracy, and consistency.
If smaller tool rooms continue to rely heavily on outdated methods, they may eventually struggle to survive. Today, having a modern, well-balanced tool room equipped with advanced technologies is no longer optional; it has become a necessity to meet industry demands and timelines.
How well is the Indian toolmaking industry aligned with international standards?
In terms of international standards, I believe the Indian industry is now fully capable of competing on a global scale. In the past, we often felt challenged by countries like China, especially when it came to meeting delivery timelines and accessing advanced manufacturing facilities. But today, the scenario has changed significantly.
Today, we have the necessary infrastructure, machines, and technologies to meet stringent international requirements. Certifications, quality benchmarks, and adherence to global practices are no longer barriers for us. We are confident in our ability to manufacture as per world-class standards and deliver moulds that can compete in any international market.
Beyond industry-specific issues, what broader challenges do industrialists face in India?
Running an industry in India has always presented its own set of unique challenges. Over the past four decades, I have observed that one thing remains constant: we have to manage everything ourselves. Whether it is dealing with government agencies, managing workers, or coping with local issues such as poor infrastructure and bad roads, the burden always falls on the industrialist.
Entrepreneurs always find little external support; that’s the unfortunate reality. When we earn, we are expected to pay very high taxes. But when we incur losses, nobody steps forward to help us. At the end of the day, the industrialist is left to fight his own battles. Success attracts attention and demands, while failure brings no support. That has been the nature of this journey, and unfortunately, even today, nothing much has changed. The system itself remains the same.
This interview was published in TAGMA Times
COMMENTS