Comments on: Dassault Systemes and IBM put right the PLM Ecosystem

By: Jim Brown

Jim Brown — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:01:57 +0000

Paul,
Aren’t all of the same people in IBM PLM today going to be in Dassault tomorrow? Don’t they all want their commission checks or bonuses? I am not sure that I understand how this interim period will negatively impact them. Who is not motivated to sell? Or do you think the customers will be reluctant to buy? And deals like this fall through, so everybody should be motivated to keep things going in the interim. Or do you think people will be concerned about their jobs and jump ship? Please help me understand your point of view.
Thanks for your comments,
Jim

By: Jim Brown

Jim Brown — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:57:11 +0000

Andy,
I think we agree on your point about IBM. I didn’t mean to suggest that the IBM PLM organization has access to executives, but the rest of “Big Blue” IBM. For that reason, Dassault did not acquire this access. So the argument would be that they (Dasault) will not be able to sell effectively without it. My point is that they have other partners with this access, including Deloitte, Accenture, and others. Being separate from IBM will help them expand these relationships.
So now Dassault can be a software company and IBM can be – well IBM. That is why I think this is such a win-win.
Thanks,
Jim

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:59:23 +0000

It is a mis perception that IBM PLM division opened doors for anyone into the boardroom, Big Blue IBM definitely does have access but not IBM PLM. So from that perspective it really is a non starter in terms of an argument. IBM non PLM guys are least interested in moving PLM into their deals as deal size of PLM is very small as compared to the larger services and consulting deals that are out there. Same was the case with EDS and UGS, same struggle, services company trying to sell software and vice versa.

By: Paul Grayson

Paul Grayson — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:43:44 +0000

Evan has a very good point that is largely overlook by everyone covering this story, “what will happen during the lame duck period?” I think this is going to be ugly, see http://alibre.typepad.com/.

Paul

By: Dassault Buys Big Blue’s PLM Sales Forci | Kenneth Wong's Virtual Desktop

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:41:35 +0000

[...] Jim Brown, PLM analyst and founder of Tech-Clarity, wrote, “For many, this is the dissolution of a long-standing marriage that they are comfortable with and makes sense … To me, this is just the final correction to a legacy relationship that has served its time and purpose” (read Brown’s commentary in full here). [...]

By: Jim Brown

Jim Brown — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:00:43 +0000

Evan,
You ask some important questions. I will share my thoughts, and welcome your response on them:

- Who had access to the Boardroom? IBM. But as much as IBM does, I would say that Accenture, CSC, Deloitte, Kalypso, and other management consultants / systems integrators (SIs) do. DS has been expanding their SI relationships much in the same way that Siemens has expanded theirs after being spun out of EDS. In some places, DS got access to boardrooms through IBM. But in other ways, they needed to get access to the boardrooms that didn’t count IBM as their trusted adviser.

- Who will IBM bring to boardrooms now? It could still be DS, and probably will be in many scenarios. But it may also be Siemens or PTC. Isn’t that the way it should be? Shouldn’t a trusted adviser be independent of the software they are advising on? I don’t think IBM will be less likely to bring DS to the table, they are good at winning deals together. But they now have options (and have been moving in that direction for some time).

- What will happen in the interim? I think both IBM and DS are motivated to keep selling together. They are long-standing partners, and have had a lot of success together. It will take a while before these two organizations untangle themselves, and in the end there are a lot of strong relationships that will last beyond the acquisition. Siemens and PTC have been wanting to work with IBM, and IBM has wanted to work with them. Hopefully it will not be up to the customers to choose which SI and which Vendor to bring to the table – and those choices an be made independently.

Maybe it is because I am more of an “enterprise software for manufacturing guy” in the way I view PLM and I don’t bleed triangles like a born-and-bred “CAD guy,” but this move seems to put things back the way that markets work best. SIs and vendors are partners, but not exclusive partners. I think it is best for the SI, best for the vendor – and most importantly best for their mutual customers – the manufacturers.

Sorry, short questions and long answers. I look forward to peoples’ thoughts on this.