DPP: Beyond the QR Code, 4 IT Workstreams to Prepare
Let's start by demystifying the Digital Product Passport. Contrary to popular belief, this digital identity card, better known as the DPP, is not just a QR code. What's really at stake is quite different: as a three-way interface serving authorities, brands and consumers, the Digital Product Passport requires you to collect, validate and structure a large volume of product data.
Composition, material origin, suppliers, certifications, declarations of conformity and environmental characteristics: all this information is needed to build a DPP. Yet it is far from centralised in a single interface. Today, it is scattered across multiple tools (PLM, PIM, ERP, etc.) used by teams with very different objectives.
And while the QR code gives your customers access to part of this data, it is only the final step in a long and complex process: building a complete, reliable and interoperable product database.
This raises several questions. What challenges will IT teams face from 2027? What first steps should you take to be compliant on time? Will the DPP force you to overhaul your entire tool stack?
To answer them, we propose a three-step approach: diagnose, anticipate, then act.
Like any cross-functional project, preparing for the Digital Product Passport is a step-by-step process. Step one? Take stock of your data ecosystem and estimate the effort required to meet DPP compliance standards.
While the end interface may take the form of a QR code for some, your top priority is to make sure of three things: that your data is complete, up to date, and linked to the right product and the right supplier.
Assessing your maturity on these three dimensions is nothing complicated. Six questions are enough to establish an initial diagnosis:
Your answers to these six questions will give you a clear picture of how your product and supplier data is structured internally. The goal? Avoid creating yet another siloed database dedicated to the DPP without addressing the underlying issues of data quality and data flow.
With this diagnosis in hand, the next step is to identify the IT workstreams to prepare for.
Whether it is single (known as a Single Source of Truth, or SSOT) or multiple, the source of truth for each piece of data must be identified and accessible to all your teams. And to keep the data they hold reliable, these sources must be updated regularly. Without this mapping, your teams run several risks:
But identifying your sources of truth is not enough. The data also needs to flow from one to the next, without re-entry or loss of information. That is what the second workstream is all about: connecting your systems.
A new regulation doesn't necessarily mean replacing the tools you already have. With the Digital Product Passport, however, the sheer variety of required data means your systems have to talk to each other. Whether through APIs, SFTP or automated imports, your tools' interoperability must:
But while well-connected systems are essential for the DPP, they don't guarantee reliable data: incorrect information will travel just as fast as accurate information. This is where the third workstream comes in: data quality control.
With the DPP, as with most European Union regulations, obligations apply to the outcome, not to the means used to achieve it. In this context, publishing incorrect data can cost your company just as much as publishing no data at all.
Your challenge? Guarantee the quality of the data collected from your various stakeholders. Your tools should allow you to:
Once validated, this data will serve far more than regulatory compliance alone. Provided, that is, you have anticipated all its possible uses from the outset: that is the purpose of your final workstream.
Collecting data solely for the Digital Product Passport would mean falling into the trap mentioned earlier: creating yet another siloed database, costly to maintain and quickly outdated. Keep in mind that most of the information required by the Digital Product Passport is already requested by other teams, for other purposes.
Your challenge? Design, from day one, a data collection process capable of supporting all your teams' use cases. Collected only once from your suppliers, the same data can feed:
This means thinking about your data models beyond the scope of the DPP: planning the fields each use case needs, making exports to different formats easy and opening access to the relevant teams. It takes more effort upfront, but it will save you from going back to your suppliers every time a new requirement emerges.
Sources of truth, system connections, quality control, anticipating uses: these four workstreams might suggest that a complete overhaul of your information system is inevitable. It isn't. The detailed requirements of the Digital Product Passport are not all known yet: they will be specified, product category by product category, in delegated acts from the European Commission. Transforming everything today would therefore be premature.
Conversely, waiting for every requirement to be published would shrink your room for manoeuvre accordingly.
To get the project off the ground with confidence, a gradual approach will help you limit risk while preparing to scale.
"Being DPP-ready" doesn't mean the same thing for every company. Your target depends on your product categories, your markets, the complexity of your supply chain and your short- and medium-term goals: expanding internationally, bringing part of your supply chain back in-house, etc. This target will determine the scope of data to cover.
The pilot you launch should not be a purely operational test, built to work on a narrow scope and then abandoned. Its architecture should mirror the one you will ultimately deploy. The four workstreams described above must therefore be defined upfront:
The goal? Guarantee a complete data chain of custody, from collection to publication, which the pilot will then put to the test.
Your current tools usually cover part of the need. PLM, PIM and ERP systems manage internal product data effectively, but they are not designed to collect data from tier-1, tier-2 and lower-tier suppliers, store the associated evidence or track updates. Today, these functions require a complementary solution specialised in supplier data collection and traceability, whether external or built in-house. If you choose the former, you will need to identify the existing solutions, the part of the problem each one addresses, and how well they integrate with your architecture.
To keep your pilot under control, it is best to start with a narrow scope: one product category, one collection and a handful of tier-1 suppliers. Within this scope, the aim is to collect the data required by the DPP, distinguishing what is already available internally from what needs to be obtained from your suppliers. The pilot then allows you to:
The lessons learned from the pilot allow you to fine-tune the architecture before rolling it out. Once validated, it can be gradually extended to other product categories and suppliers, without calling its foundations into question.
At IKKS, the architecture that will power the DPP tomorrow is already in place. The project was driven by three pressures:
In response, the brand opted for an automated approach, built in four stages: scoping business needs, connecting its PLM to a traceability layer, validating the integration before go-live, then replicating the architecture for new use cases.
Before any technical integration, the project began with business scoping, led jointly by the CSR, procurement, IT and sales teams. Three objectives were set: reduce business risk, anticipate and secure regulatory compliance, and boost team productivity. The starting point was clear: feeding the traceability tool and generating QR codes were entirely manual, and the data used for the carbon footprint lacked reliability.
Rather than recreating product data in a new platform, the team chose to restructure the Lectra PLM and keep it as the product source of truth. Its key data is now sent automatically, every day, to Trace For Good, which acts as the complementary layer. Double entry and reprocessing are gone, and information stays consistent across the PLM, the traceability tool and the product passports.
Before the final switchover, the old manual process and the new automated flow ran side by side (double run). This allowed the teams to compare the data sent through both channels, check its consistency and fix discrepancies before go-live. The tool was refined through rapid iterations based on real-world use, while the procurement and product teams were trained in parallel, without removing any existing software.
Product sheets, QR codes and product books for sales teams and retailers are now generated with no manual intervention. The data can be used for life cycle assessment, environmental labelling and eco-design management. Above all, the architecture can be replicated across other scopes and business needs, including the DPP. An architecture that will be rolled out on a larger scale once the Digital Product Passport requirements come into force.
The DPP, just a QR code? As you will have gathered, far from it. While the QR code is its visible part, the Digital Product Passport rests first and foremost on a product, supplier and document data infrastructure: identified sources of truth, connected systems, controlled quality and data collection designed to serve far beyond compliance alone. Which makes it, above all, a matter for your IT teams.
Yet there is no need to transform everything to get ready. The roadmap comes down to three steps:
As the IKKS example shows, the foundations you lay today to meet your current challenges will be those of your DPP tomorrow. The sooner they are in place, the more confidently you will approach future regulatory and commercial requirements.
Your first step? The diagnosis.