Choose the operating model, not the sales pitch.
Compare six implementation approaches by responsibility, constraints, and the evidence to request.
These are operating models, not vendor rankings. Features and responsibilities vary by contract. Ask each supplier to demonstrate your required workflows using the same test data before comparing price. A hybrid design may combine several rows.
Select a column header to sort.
| Approach | Useful when | Owner to identify | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud-managed MES | You want hosted application operations | Who maintains edge services and plant connectivity? | Loss-of-connectivity and data-export demonstrations |
| Plant-hosted MES | Local control is a hard requirement | Who patches, backs up and restores the stack? | A restore into a separate test environment |
| Hybrid cloud and edge | Local execution must continue during WAN loss | Who reconciles queued events after reconnection? | Ordered replay, duplicate handling and outage limits |
| ERP execution module | Your ERP already covers much of the workflow | Who owns gaps in dispatch, genealogy and operator UX? | A real production order with partial completion |
| Focused production app | One bounded workflow needs improvement | Who maintains interfaces as scope expands? | End-to-end reconciliation with systems of record |
| Custom application | A distinctive workflow justifies ownership | Who supports the code after the original team leaves? | Tests, release process, documentation and exit plan |
No approach is universally cheapest or safest. This is Lineproof’s decision framework, not a certification or measured product review. For OT security planning, consult NIST SP 800-82 Rev. 3. Confirm the final guidance and any newer revision before procurement.