Digital Product Passports sound simple…
Until you try to deliver one in a real industrial supply chain.
Because the hard part is not publishing a passport and generating a QR code. It is getting the underlying data to show up on time, in the right structure, with evidence, and with access rights that do not accidentally expose sensitive product information.
ShareAspace helps you do exactly that. It acts as the governed DPP data backbone and collaboration hub, so you can define what “good” looks like, collect supplier inputs with control, verify what you have received, and keep everything traceable to the actual product.
Learn more:
* What happens next: We will reply to schedule a short call. You will get a recommended starting plan and a clear view of how to operationalise supplier collection, validation, and traceability.
If you’re in heavy industry, this will feel familiar
You are not dealing with one neat dataset.
You have:
- Multi-tier suppliers (and different levels of willingness to share)
- Variants and options that change what is true for the product
- Engineering change that keeps moving the goalposts
- Confidential content that cannot be shared broadly
- Different teams holding different pieces of the truth
So yes, DPP is a regulatory topic.
But the day-to-day work is a data and collaboration problem.
Start here: define the expected DPP, then manage the gap
Most teams approach DPP like a report they assemble at the end.
That is when everything goes sideways.
A better approach is to define the expected DPP early. This is your target set of attributes, documents, and evidence for a product, agreed internally, owned, and trackable.
Then, as suppliers deliver, you compare expected vs actual and manage gaps while you still have time.
That one shift turns DPP into a programme you can control, not a last-minute scramble.
What the EU means by a Digital Product Passport (quickly)
Under the EU’s Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), the Digital Product Passport is part of a framework to make relevant product information accessible electronically. The specific requirements are expected to vary by product group as detailed rules are developed over time. [1][2]
The practical takeaway: you need a way to define requirements per product, collect data across the value chain, and keep it current as products and supply chains change.
Who should lead DPP in your company?
If DPP sits only in ESG, it often stalls in the data.
If it sits only in IT, it often stalls in the business.
A workable ownership model looks like this:
- Programme lead (accountable): scope, timeline, decisions, cross-functional alignment
- Sustainability and compliance: what must be declared, what evidence is needed, what can be disclosed
- PLM and engineering IT: product structure, change control, integration, traceability
- Supply chain and procurement: supplier onboarding, requests, delivery governance
- Quality: validation discipline, review and acceptance, audit readiness
One simple rule: make one person accountable, but do not make one function responsible for everything.
Is there ROI, or is this just compliance?
Compliance is the forcing function.
But the same discipline that makes DPP achievable can also make operations less painful.
A strong DPP foundation tends to unlock:
- Less supplier chasing: fewer emails, fewer re-requests, less “wrong version” confusion
- Faster evidence retrieval: when someone asks “prove it”, you can actually prove it quickly
- Lower risk at deadlines: gaps are visible early, not when it is too late
- Better reuse of product data: stop rebuilding similar data packs for tenders, customer requests, and internal reporting
- More controlled transparency: share what is required, protect what is sensitive
No inflated promises. Just fewer avoidable fires.
How ShareAspace makes DPP work in practice
1) Define requirements as structured information
Define what you need as structured requirements, not a vague wish list:
- Categories of required information
- Specific attributes per category
- Guidance to suppliers on how to provide it
- What evidence documents are expected, and when
This is how you move from “we should collect DPP data” to “we know exactly what we need, from whom, and by when”.
2) Request supplier data with structure, not chaos
Run supplier collection as tracked requests, with clear responsibilities and delivery status.
You can see:
- What is requested
- What is delivered
- What is missing
- What is overdue
This matters because DPP fails most often on supplier data quality and coordination, not on the final publishing step.
3) Collaborate securely without oversharing
DPP requires sharing.
But not everything should be visible to everyone.
ShareAspace supports controlled collaboration and need-to-know access, so partners see only what you explicitly share.
This is critical in competitive industrial supply chains.
4) Turn “provided” into “trusted”
A passport is only as credible as the evidence behind it.
A robust DPP workflow needs:
- Validation after delivery and before acceptance
- Optional rule-based checks for completeness and quality
- Approval flows where responsible people review, comment, accept, and record decisions
- Evidence management linking documents and metadata to delivered attributes
5) Keep traceability to the real product and survive change
You need traceability from:
- DPP requirements and templates
- Supplier deliveries (attributes plus evidence)
- Product structures and designs
- Product instances where relevant (including serialised items)
Because requirements change. Designs change. Suppliers change.
If you cannot see impact, you end up rebuilding your passport repeatedly.
Model, batch, and item-level passports (why this matters)
Some product groups will demand deeper traceability and updates over time.
Batteries are a well-known example. The European Commission has described access to battery information via a QR code linked to a digital passport. [3] Many industry summaries cite 2027 as a key milestone for certain battery passport obligations, noting that details depend on follow-on rules. [4][5]
The practical implication is broader than batteries: for many complex products, you may need to manage passports at different levels over time, and you need a system that can cope with that without becoming manual rework.
Interoperability matters, because your DPP will not live in one system
Here is the uncomfortable truth: your DPP programme will touch lots of systems.
PLM. ERP. Supplier portals. Compliance tooling. Customer requirements. Partner networks and external endpoints you do not control.
The safest strategy is to build a foundation that:
- Consolidates and governs DPP-relevant data internally
- Keeps traceability back to source and evidence
- Shares the right information to the right party, with access control
- Connects outward through APIs and standard exchange, so you stay flexible as requirements evolve
This is the opposite of vendor lock-in. It is about making your DPP programme resilient to change.
A quick self-check: are you DPP-ready yet?
If you can answer these quickly, you are in a strong place:
- What information do we need for this product group, and who owns each part of it?
- Which suppliers hold critical DPP data, and what do we need from each of them?
- Do we have a structured request for attributes and evidence, not a free-text email?
- Can we validate data quality before we accept it as true?
- Can we prove decisions and evidence later, without a scavenger hunt?
- Can we share what is required while protecting IP and confidentiality?
- When something changes (design, sourcing, requirements), can we see the DPP impact?
If you are stuck on any of those, you are not behind. You are normal.
Your fastest path to DPP progress
If you are building DPP readiness in:
- Automotive and EV
- Energy and power equipment
- Defence and aerospace
- Complex industrial manufacturing
We can help you shape a practical approach that fits your supply chain reality, protects sensitive information, and builds a trusted data foundation.
About Eurostep
Eurostep helps manufacturers and operators go from DPP intent to day-to-day execution by connecting people, systems and suppliers with governed data sharing.
Founded in Sweden in 1994 and now part of the BAE Systems family, we deliver ShareAspace. This proven, COTS collaboration layer dismantles information silos and enables secure sharing of product lifecycle data across enterprises, contracts, and supply chains. ShareAspace enforces access rights, traceability and configuration change control so you can share the right data with the right stakeholders through-life.
Trusted by engineering and operations teams at leading Nordic and European manufacturers for secure, multi-enterprise product data collaboration.
References
[1] European Commission, Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) overview: https://commission.europa.eu/energy-climate-change-environment/standards-tools-and-labels/products-labelling-rules-and-requirements/ecodesign-sustainable-products-regulation_en
[2] European Commission, Consultation on the Digital Product Passport (news item): https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-launches-consultation-digital-product-passport-2025-04-09_en
[3] European Commission, Batteries regulation news item referencing a QR code and a digital passport: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/new-law-more-sustainable-circular-and-safe-batteries-enters-force-2023-08-17_en
[4] Intertek, EU Battery Regulation explained: https://www.intertek.se/kunskapsbank/blogg/eu-battery-regulation-explained/
[5] Flash Battery, EU Battery Regulation obligations and updates: https://www.flashbattery.tech/en/blog/eu-battery-regulation-obligations-updates/