Clarity on PLM

You have probably heard by now that Autodesk has announced that they are entering the PLM market with the announcement of Autodesk 360 Nexus. I had the opportunity to hear about this in a “behind the scenes” look a while back and attended Autodesk University this week to take in the launch. Autodesk put a lot of emphasis behind the announcement, with CEO Carl Bass bringing up his famous anti-PLM rap where he said the only companies with a PLM problem were Dassault (Sytemes), PTC, and UGS (now Siemens PLM). His message now is that “we did not want to do PLM until we could do it right” and that the time has come. So welcome to the PLM community Autodesk!

What’s the Big Deal? Who Cares?

Autodesk promised that “everything would change” in PLM when the announcement was made. You can read Evan Yares’ view on what has (or hasn’t) changed. I believe that Autodesk meant that everything changes because they offer PLM in the Cloud. It is a software as a service (SaaS) and will offer a different way to buy PLM. The other reason they say things will change is that, as Steve Bodnar says, the solution is “insanely configurable” so manufacturers will not need to change their existing business processes. Those are both very interesting and potential game changers. For more of my thoughts on those, see the questions section below.

Whether you believe that cloud and configurability will really change PLM, one fact it clear. Autodesk has one of the biggest engineering user bases on the planet, and this will change the PLM market. They are serious about PLM. Having another player with the size, user base, and ability to deliver that Autodesk has will have an impact on the market. Will it take away business from competitors? I am not sure how much of that will happen in the near term. But will it get more Autodesk customers started down the path with PLM (with a lower risk model and a vendor they already know)? You bet. Will there be responses by other vendors? Of course, and the response will be based on what kind of traction Nexus gets.

So What will they Offer?

First, the solution is not available yet. You can learn more from Autodesk’s official PLM press release. Second, I will tell you that the solution looks really good based on some limited views. The interface is clean and modern, there are some benefits from starting a design from the ground up for use on the cloud (and on different devices over time). Third, for some more details I don’t want to recreate what others have already posted, so for a nice overview (with screenshots and all!) take a look at Al Dean’s take on D3D. Note that viewing the AC/DC video at the end is entirely optional.

So with that backdrop, let me share my thoughts on Autodesk’s PLM entrance. They are taking a different approach. They believe PLM has been too difficult and too expensive (see Steve Bodnar’s PLM Non-Starter Picture) and believe that a cloud offering is the answer. Applications designed and built for the cloud are very different, although there are others (including their largest competitors) that are also figuring cloud out. Autodesk sees themselves more like Salesforce.com competing with PLM vendors that are more like Siebel.

Autodesk also believes that changing business processes is a big challenge for companies, and develop Nexus to be highly configurable. I believe this is a double-edged sword. On one hand a company that has well-defined processes can simply model their existing processes in Nexus’ workflow. That sounds great to me. The problem with a lot of companies is that they either don’t have processes, they have poor ones, or they have lots of them. The difficulty in standardizing on a process is an organizational change issue, not a software issue. In fact, from my experience too much flexibility can lead to some really hairy problems for vendors and customers alike. I am not going to get too far up on my soap box right now, but there is a lot more to be said here and I have some learning to do first. I have some follow up planned with Autodesk to understand how much Nexus is application and how much is infrastructure on which you can build a process. For now, let’s just say that Excel and SharePoint are highly configurable too – and what most companies end up with is a lot of non-integrated islands of information and process that don’t fit well together. Flexibility works well for those with very small companies or good information architects to oversee design. Wait, I thought I said I wasn’t getting up on my soapbox? OK, stepping off it now. I even delete another paragraph I wrote while I was up there.

Some Open Questions

The bottom line is that we all have a lot to learn about what Autodesk really delivering and how it will perform. The announcement will clearly have an impact, but also raises some interesting questions:

• Autodesk has a lot of architect and construction customers. The “AEC” industry (E for Engineering) is evolving to BIM (Building Information Modeling) – what are the positives and negatives of sharing ideas and capabilities between PLM and BIM users? It’s interesting to note that their link for lifecycle management solutions is the same but with two tabs – one for PLM and one for BIM. Of course their are other solutions in the suite than Nexus (Vault for one, which is the PDM solution), and those still appear differently. This is not a concern for me, in fact I think it opens up some interesting opportunities. It will be interesting to watch.
• Autodesk is known for shrink-wrapped tools, not enterprise applications. How will their business model and partner network adapt to this new paradigm? Clearly they will need some new partners with PLM expertise. These partners will also need to know how to implement enterprise change and not just tools.
• What will an integrated PDM system behind the firewall look like with a PLM system in the cloud? I think this opens up some interesting questions on its own. There are some advantages and disadvantages of this model, and it will be interesting to see how Vault evolves.
• Where is the support for software-driven (mechatronic) and systems-oriented products? Vault is primarily for mechanical designs, to my knowledge. Does an integrated (versus a single solution) PLM-PDM open up opportunities to add an application lifecycle management (ALM) tool to the suite to manage software development? Kinds of likes my model from Software and Systems Driven Innovation below. Hmmmmmmm.

This is the fun part, watching and wondering what comes next. From what I hear from Autodesk a big part of their plan is to watch how customers adopt the solution and use that to help guide direction and strategy. Autodesk realizes they are on a journey and that they (and their customers) have a lot to figure out. That recognition and a willingness to listen to customers gives me some comfort that Autodesk will be a real player in PLM. Time will tell.

So those are my thoughts. Agree? Disagree? Think I am just stating the obvious? Think I am an idiot? Let me know what you think. OK, but if you think I am an idiot please be gentle with your criticism. Stay tuned for more, the Autodesk PLM story is just beginning to unfold.

I had the chance to talk with … Robert Roy of CDC Software following the 2011 Spike Summit. Amy Kenly of Kalypso presented CDC Software with the Spike Award for Technology based on their use of social strategies, processes and supporting technologies to improve innovation, product management, and product development. Rob provided some great insight on the processes that CDC Software uses to get product feature ideas from their customer base for release planning as well as how they use social computing tools to collaborate during their agile development process.

Note: You can also listen to my interview with Spike Award winner for CPG Justin Winter and my interview with Manufacturing Spike Award Winner Madison Electric Products.

The CDC presentation (along with mine and a number of others) is still available for replay by registering and attending the virtual event via the Spike Summit Expo. The entire virtual event was a great experience, and between the speakers and the award winners we all heard some great examples of social computing can help improve product innovation and product development.

Let us know what you think of their program. Do you like it? Have a similar example to share? Please feel free to check out the blog for more on social computing and product development or read a report on social computing and innovation.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

I had the chance to talk with … Justin Winter of Diamond Candles following the 2011 Spike Summit. Amy Kenly of Kalypso presented Diamond Candles with the Spike Award for CPG (consumer packaged goods) based on their use of social strategies, processes and supporting technologies to improve innovation and product development. Justin provided some great insight on the program they used to get new product ideas from their customers.

Update: You can also listen to my interview with CDC Software for winning the Spike Award for Technology and my interview with Manufacturing Spike Award Winner Madison Electric Products.

I enjoyed hearing Justin’s presentation at the Spike awards. His presentation (along with mine and a number of others) is still available for replay by registering and attending the virtual event via the Spike Summit Expo. It’s a pretty cool experience. I was impressed with the way that Diamond Candles was able to share information with their customers, receive new product ideas from them, and then introduce the new products back to the customers. It was an interesting way to combine outbound marketing with crowdsourcing and gathering voice of the customer (VOC).

After talking to him, I even bought a candle. Wish me luck,  I hope I get one of the $5,000 rings in mine! If you don’t know what I am talking about, take a look at the Diamond Candles web site, their goal is to “make buying candles fun again.”

Let us know what you think of their program. Do you like it? Have a similar example to share? Feel free to look around the blog, you will see a lot of information on the use of social computing to improve product innovation, product development, and engineering.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

I had the chance to talk with … Prashant Jagtap, CEO of Trayak, about designing products for sustainability. Prashant is a veteran of the PLM industry, and he and I had a great discussion about how design for sustainability fits into PLM. This post will share a bit of that discussion as well as a bit about Trayak.

Why is PLM the Place for Sustainable Design?

First, I want to share some of my discussion with Prashant on a general basis. I am a big proponent of getting compliance and sustainability right during product design. Why? Because like so many other product attributes, sustainability is really hard to accomplish once the design is locked in. Material choices and manufacturing process decisions clearly have a significant influence on the environmental impact of a product. They are also very difficult to change after a product has bee designed because late product changes often sub-optimize a lot of previous design decisions which can increase cost, degrade product performance, or at a minimum cause a lot of disruption through engineering changes (ECOs).

So earlier is better. But why in PLM?  Simply put, PLM is where the product data is. PLM has the bill of material (BOM) early in the product lifecycle. As PLM has matured it has extended to capture the manufacturing processes in a bill of process (BOP) as well. That is the right core of information required to conduct an effective lifecycle analysis (LCA). As the Tech-Clarity compliance/sustainability diagram above shows, making the right decisions requires a combination of product information and impact data. To me, this is an obvious extension of PLM. In fact, environmental compliance and sustainability is the example I use most frequently when I discuss the four dimensions of PLM expansion.

What does Trayak Do?

So other than sharing some common philosophy about how manufacturers can design more sustainable products, Prashant was excited to tell me about the progress Trayak is making. Their goal is to “make sustainable product design mainstream.” The idea is to put the right tools and information into engineers’ hands (or at least their desktops) so they can understand the environmental impact of their design decisions. Trayak believes that the current LCA tools are too complex, too expensive, require experts, and are too separated from the design process. I believe changing that could have a profound effect. Engineers would love to make more eco-friendly products, but face a myriad of tradeoffs and typically don’t have the right information at hand. How can you optimize what you don’t understand? How can you design for sustainability when you don’t know the impact of your decisions until after the fact? To me, solving those problems is the value Trayak has to offer.

What do they Offer?

Trayak offers three products:

• EcoDesigner – helping engineers design for compliance using LCA techniques
• EcoLabel – a tool to help grade BOMs and provide labeling information for compliance (for EPEAT regulations)
• EcoScore – a broader solution that collects a wide range of factors/criteria about environmental impact (which could include LCA results) which could also be used to create scoring mechanisms to rate their product portfolio as they evaluate greener design options

Who do they Work with?

Here, to me, are two valuable facts about Trayak:

• They understand CAD and PLM, and have integrated into Siemens PLM tools (including Teamcenter and Solid Edge) – Prashant’s history and experience play a big role here
• They are LCA agnostic – Trayak does not believe that there is one right way to do LCA. In fact, they believe that some companies may already have a source of LCA information. Trayak is partnering with EcoInvent for data, but is built with the expectation that they will work with multiple sources of information. A very interesting approach. As more OEMs start to demand LCA information, what are the chances that suppliers will have to support more than one set of LCA calculations? Pretty good, I bet.

So that’s what I hear from Trayak, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them? Do you think the open approach to LCA will make a difference?

My final thoughts from the Siemens PLM analyst day are focused on the state of Siemens PLM in 2011. Maybe a bit too ambitious, but I wanted to add some more perspective on Siemens after posting on my PLM market takeaways and the great PLM customer case studies presented at the meeting. Even as I start I will share my first observation: Siemens PLM has such a broad set of offerings that I don’t know where to start. So as usual, I will just dive in.

• Note: For the market progress report, see the first post in this series where Chuck talks about some impressive financial results.
• Note 2: Yes, that has got to be the most ridiculous picture I have posted on this blog (or anywhere) – my apologies to all (especially Eric)

Generalities

The theme of the conference as “Smarter Decisions, Better Products.” This follows on from a strong statement by GM at PLM Connection saying they viewed developing a car as making a series of thousands of decisions. It is a pretty interesting way to look at the job of developing a product. Of course it only gets interesting when you couple that with the question – “what can PLM do to help companies make the right decisions as they develop products, and make they efficiently?” The short answer is a lot, and Siemens is starting to frame a lot of their product investment and development decisions around this question. How can they help individuals make decision large and small, and how does that aggregate to big advantages for the enterprise. The way Siemens says they will do this is by:

• Making the right information available and easy to retrieve at the right time (to support the decision)
• Put information in the context of the role the user is playing, and the product they are working on

How important is this vision? Siemens PLM President Chuck Grindstaff said “every piece of software we write is part of a decision making toolset.” Some see this statement as profound and others as obvious – maybe that is good sign. Things that work are usually obvious once stated. What I can say is that Siemens is paying attention to this concept in what they are doing (which leads me to the next topic, I am sure you are happy to know).

My Take on Siemens PLM’s Progress

Again, where should I start? There are some great innovations in Teamcenter, NX, Solid Edge and Tecnomatix. There isn’t enough room to share all of the details about those, but suffice it to say that Siemens has been very busy in the incremental innovation arena and is moving their products forward.

So let’s talk about major, strategic initiatives. Here are a some that struck me as important:

• HD-PLM – This is where “smarter decisions” becomes real. The most tangible progress here is with Active Work Space (AWS). Active Work Space is a central solution for Siemens PLM that aims to bring all of the information, tools, and product context together in one place for a user. This holistic view of the product is intended to serve as the central location that decision makers access product information and the tools to create and share it. One of the key points Siemens makes is that this should put all of the tools Chuck talks about above in the context of the product and the decisions being made. At a minimum, it simplifies the view into the products for a user and provides a fresh interface to the PLM solution suite. Over time, this has the potential to develop into much more (I will share more of that as plans are made public).
• Systems Engineering – Still with me? Another key theme that surfaced throughout the conference was systems engineering and developing mechatronic products. This is clearly a big focus for Siemens PLM. Siemens described how Siemens PLM solutions “support the full lifecycle of a mechatronic product,” including a detailed session sharing some of the tools that Siemens offers. There is no one solution in the suite that addresses systems engineering it its entirety, of course, but rather a mapping of tools (including the new Teamcenter Mechatronics Concept Designer) into how they support the process. More to come here, I am sure.
• PLM-MES Integration – Following the acquisition by Siemens, UGS (now Siemens PLM) had a very interesting opportunity to close the gaps between PLM and MES. The two organizations in Siemens are closer than ever, and two different customer presentations discussed the integration. Most notably was Rolls Royce, who arguably has taken PLM-MES integration further than any other company I know. The short story here is that this is progressing from a Siemens’ capability perspective, and there are some interesting examples of companies that are taking advantage of it.
• Social Innovation – OK, this one was noticeable because it didn’t take center stage. What happened to social computing in PLM? What is the priority? I know this hasn’t gone away, but it wasn’t front of mind either. I still believe that social computing techniques will continue to pop up in PLM, but it appears that it will show up incrementally for Siemens PLM (by extending existing products) rather than becoming it’s own initiative. Given the difference between the interest in the market (high) and the adoption rate (low), this seems like a pragmatic approach.

There was obviously a lot more discussed, but these are some of my key takeaways. What do you think? Did I miss anything? Did I misinterpret anything? Do you have a different perspective? Please share.

I had the opportunity to talk with the team at Siemens PLM at their recent analyst conference in Boston. Every time I attend one of these events, I come back and ask myself “what can I share with people that will help them understand all that I learned in two days of presentations, demonstrations, interviews, and side conversations?” There is so much to share and so much detail it is hard to know where to start and there is not enough time to share it all. So I am going to share my key takeaways from the event in regards to the PLM Market, Cool Things Manufacturers are Doing with PLM, and My Take on how Siemens PLM is doing in furthering the PLM vision and roadmap. Fair enough? I hope so.

Note: Part 2 Cool Customer Tricks – Presenting Business Value from PLM at Siemens Conference is up now

The PLM Market

In short, the PLM market is alive and well. PLM, and Siemens PLM in particular, has made it through the economic downturn and is enjoying recovering spend. Interestingly, even with the current uneasiness in the market, PLM license revenues continue to grow. As Siemens reported at the conference, Siemens PLM has:

• Had 6 quarters of steady growth
• Enjoyed double-digit license growth
• Exceeded all of their profitability and cash flow targets

Other recent news from Siemens’ competitors also point towards a strong recovery for PLM software. Siemens PLM also gave some strong competitive updates including significant wins in automotive and claim to be having great success against the competition (although I am sure we will hear dissenting opinions from said competitors shortly).

Another important takeaway from the conference (and an indicator of PLM market health in my mind) is continued industry specialization. As I have been saying for years, including my soapbox on PLM is an Industry Affair, or Is It? going back to 2003 and revisited in 2010 with Mythbusting PLM is an Industry Affair – different industries need different things from PLM. But, and this is important, they also have common needs that transcend industry. I have seen PLM follow ERP in verticalizing offerings as it matures. At this point, Siemens PLM has re-aligned their organization to put greater industry-specific emphasis on their business. I think this is an important change, and was impressed at the well thought-out strategy that provides industry-focused solutions while still maintaining commonality across the industry offerings. This is an important balancing act so industry solutions can still leverage all of the core enhancements being added to the products. Well done.

At this point, I realize that this is going to be a long post even though I am summarizing. I think it’s time to take a break. Look for more on Cool Things Manufacturers are Doing with PLM and My Take on Siemens PLM’s Progress shortly.

Implications for Manufacturers

A healthy PLM market and Siemens PLM business is a good sign for manufacturers. This will ensure that Siemens will continue to invest in their PLM products to maintain growth. Interestingly, Siemens PLM President Chuck Grindstaff pointed out during the conference that Siemens does not believe in cutting R&D in a downturn anyway to ensure innovation, which is welcome news for customers I am sure.

So that’s what I hear from Siemens PLM, I hope you found it useful. What do you think?

I had the chance to talk with … the leadership at PTC and their customers at the recent PlanetPTC conference. PTC took full advantage of the opportunity to update their customers on their progress and future PLM plans at the customer meeting in Las Vegas. As analysts we also had some behind the scenes discussions and a Q&A with a panel of PTC execs.

Most of the press and analysts I know were clamoring for an update and some insight into the much anticipated launch of the Creo design apps. They got that, but also a full helping of news on PTC’s PLM offerings – or what PTC calls their “Product Development System.” For the first time, I felt that PTC was giving equal weight to product development and PLM as they do to design and authoring. Pretty important shift, and one that shows PTC is in touch with the market and their customers.

Let’s Talk Creo – but not Just Creo

OK, Creo got deserved attention. After all, the Creo suite is a major change to PTC’s offerings, and one that PTC made a big bet on. The “Lightning” launch which resulted in Creo was a big move for PTC and this was the coming out party. To me, time will tell whether the launch is a big win or just proof that they are delivering. I am not a CAD expert and will defer to other analysts (and perhaps more importantly customers) on whether Creo meets the hype. But at a minimum the product is released and it looks like they are off to a good start.

But the discussion on the main stage did not start with Creo. PTC had three major focus areas:

• Creo
• Windchill  10 Updates
• The Acquisition of MKS

These updates received a significant amount of attention, and show that PTC gets data management and business process – and not just for engineers. I mentioned my observation that PTC is delivering solutions across the enterprise in a way that reminds me of my “four dimensions of PLM expansion” in a hallway chat with CEO Jim Heppelmann. He confirmed that PTC will focus on delivering value where they can find unsolved problems in the enterprise, but only when they can bring something unique and highly value-added to the solution. Jim is not playing catch-up or feature wars with his competition, he is willing to develop a strategy that provides business value where his customers have problems. That sounds trivial, but I believe it is a fundamental statement on PTC’s changed view of customers. Customers are being listened to and embraced. In fact, Jim’s entire keynote started talking about conversations with customers in different roles in the manufacturing enterprise.

Enter … Enthusiasm

Another key takeaway from the conference is enthusiasm at the conference. I have not seen PTC employees – let alone their customers – with this level of excitement since…. OK, never. People are proud to be PTC right now, and that shows in the progress they are making. I will try to follow up with more detail on the Windchill, MKS, and the newly announced Service Information Systems updates shortly – after all – I am an “enterprise and product development guy” and not a CAD guy. But the thing I wanted to get across is that PTC is innovating across the lifecycle, focusing on customers, and excited about it. Sounds like a winning combination to me. Last year’s user conference was interesting, this meeting was actually exciting. I welcome opposing opinions, as usual, but you have to admit PTC has been busy!

So that’s what I hear from PTC, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them? What else should PTC be focusing on?

I had the chance to talk with … Dassault Systemes recently about acquiring process PLM vendor Enginuity PLM, see the announcement here. As soon as I saw my friend Dr. John Sottery‘s name on the webcast along with Enovia CEO Mich Tellier, I had a pretty good guess about what they were going to tell me. DS made an investment in taking their PLM solution for recipe-based industries like CPG, food & beverage, personal care and pharmaceutical to the next level. This move combines strength on strength, because Enovia and Enginuity PLM serve very different roles in the R&D and product development process.

What did they do Before the Acquisition?

CPG, recipes, and formulas are not new to Dassault Systemes. DS acquired MatrixOne in 2006, and the MatrixOne platform is now the architecture behind Enovia V6. MatrixOne enjoyed some significant success in the CPG industry, and include specification management capabilities that are running in a number of CPG companies, most notably P&G. As an interesting note, P&G is also an Enginuity customer so they have already been running both solutions. DS was already competitive in the CPG industry, and frankly didn’t have much to offer in the way of formulation or recipe design. This acquisition changes that.

Now what do they Offer?

When a big company like Dassault Systems buys a smaller company like Enginuity, there is typically instant synergy. That is true in this case because:

• Enginuity provides deep domain expertise to DS.
• DS provides scale and market access that Enginuity could not achieve.

That is a typical scenario that happens when a suite provider like DS buys a specialist like Enginuity. But the synergy here is even more pronounced because:

• Enovia brings specification management, collaboration, and other PLM capabilities.
• Enginuity brings R&D tools to the chemists, and was built to fit into a broader PLM environment.

As a bonus, other DS brands have a lot to offer to the CPG industry as well. This includes 3DVIA with their shopper solutions and CATIA and SolidWorks for packaging design. I believe this provides a pretty unique and compelling offer.

So Where Does Enginuity Fit in DS?

One of the interesting implications of the acquisition is considering what type of solution Enginuity really is. DS is adding Enginuity to the Enovia brand, which makes sense. I know Enginuity has been labeled a PLM system. But I have known Enginuity for years, and I will be the first to tell you that I believe Enginuity is much stronger as a design tool than a PLM system. In fact, I would go so far as to say it is more like “CATIA for chemists.” But that is good news, because Enovia already has the PLM capabilities and Enginuity fills the design gap. Not to mention that Enginuity adds compliance capabilities to help formulators develop products that not only match product performance specifications but also meet regulatory needs as well. Read more about how compliance puts a “hidden tax” on innovation in the process industries here, in fact I interviewed a number of Enginuity customers for this research.

Why is it important to look at Enginuity as a design tool? Partially because it makes it clear that it is a complementary solution, but more importantly because it opens up the possibility that they will build even more advanced tools for formulators . Enginuity already handles more complex design functions than any other formulation system I have seen. On the phone, Dr. Sottery mentioned simulation and predictive modeling as well. Those kinds of sophisticated design tools are more like a specialty design solution in CATIA than what PLM can already offer (collaboration, change management, IP protection, etc.). With the resources of DS, Enginuity has the opportunity to explore those potential capabilities more deeply.

The key that makes this acquisition a good move is that the Enginuity solution is built based on strong formulation knowledge, and helps chemists develop the recipe in the first place. That is the part that has been missing from the major PLM systems. PLM can manage the specs well enough, but provided little value to the innovators at the bench level. Enginuity changes that. So I agree with DS for including the offering in Enovia, but for clarification I think that it is much more of a design tool that now fits in well with the existing specification management / PLM capabilities already in Enovia (again, from MatrixOne). To me, this adds to the synergy that DS and Enginuity gain from being a part of the same business.

Implications for Manufacturers

Some of you may know I spent quite a bit of time working with software for the formula-based industries, so this is an area that is near and dear to my heart. I have long been a proponent that recipe-based manufacturing (processing, dare I say) requires different solutions than discrete PLM offers. This move by DS opens up the opportunity for those that produce from a recipe or formula to arm their chemists and formulators with tools they need to innovate along with the PLM solution to support the enterprise in bringing the product to market. This is what we had the vision for ten years ago when I was with Sequencia (sold a decade ago), and I am happy to see that the solution is available from a major PLM brand.

So that’s what I hear from Dassault Systemes and Enginuity, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them?

I had the chance to talk with … Dassault Systemes about their acquisition of MES provider Intercim. The acquisition of Intercim is a strategic move, and represents Dassault’s confirmation of the importance of linking engineering intent and manufacturing process planning to manufacturing operations (and vice versa).

What do they Do?

Dassault Systemes is one of the premier providers of PLM (Product Lifecycle Management) solutions. Dassault has a very broad suite ranging from CAD (Catia and Solidworks) and simulation (Simulia) all the way through technical communications (3DVia) and enterprise systems (Enovia PLM). In the past year or so they have also added search (Exalead) and social computing (SwYm). Dassault Systemes has been redefining the boundaries of PLM and pursuing a strategy to bring “lifelike experience” to digital representations of the world. For more of my thoughts on DS, please see Reflections on Dassault Systemes Business, Strategy, and Progress at DSCC. Perhaps one of the most important assets pertaining to this announcement is DS’ digital manufacturing solution (Delmia) for manufacturing process planning.

Intercim is an MES (Manufacturing Execution Systems) software company with emphasis on complex and highly regulated manufacturing companies. Intercim helps companies execute the plans from engineering in the plant. They also focus on tracking what they call “emergent processes” when execution deviates from the plan.  The goal is to manage non-conformance and exceptions in in the same platform as normal operations. They also handle plant operations such as scheduling, task management, and shop floor reporting. One of the differentiators that Intercim claims is “operations intelligence” which enables their customers to analyze manufacturing results to identify areas of concern or opportunities for improvement. For example,  a manufacturer may identify an operation that is running significantly differently than the digital process definition it is based on.

What do they Offer?

DS plans to offer a deeply integrated PLM-MES system. They describe an environment of “digital continuity” that delivers digitizing work instructions to the plant floor, but goes beyond to close the loop to provide feedback to Engineering on defects and other issues. Intercim will become a part of the Delmia brand within DS, giving DS an integrated digital manufacturing – MES solution.

The integration of PLM and MES has the potential to provide significant business value, as described in The Roles of ERP and PLM in Manufacturing – now with MES!  The post links to a report on PLM and MES called Tech-Clarity Insight: Integrating PLM and MES – Realizing the Digital Factory, which addresses:

• Integrating the product and production lifecycle
• Automating the integrated product and production lifecycle
• Closing the Loop between designs and products

Who do they Work with?

To be clear, this is not a new relationship. Dassault and Intercim have been working together for some time as partners. They have a number of joint customers already, and will continue to penetrate the highly regulated, complex manufacturing industries such as aerospace.

So that’s what I hear from DS and Intercim, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them?

I had the chance to talk with … PTC about the important role that PLM plays in ensuring product quality. PTC shared their views on quality and reliability and followed up by giving me some detailed insight into their Relex reliability management solution and how it fits into the PLM ecosystem. It turns out PTC is doing quite a bit to bring a comprehensive Quality Management System (QMS) to their PLM community.

Putting the Q in PLM

The discussion was a follow up to some of my past posts (rants?) on expanding PLM to include quality management. Addressing quality early in the product lifecycle offers significant advantages by designing quality into the product up front. I have written in the past about the importance of Quality Lifecycle Management (QLM) and Quality Risk Management (QRM), and proposed that Quality Risk Management might be the missing link in PLM. My belief is that quality is inherently a product lifecycle issue and that integrating quality management into PLM helps companies design for quality and then close the loop between Engineering and product quality in the field.

What do they Do?

So where does PTC, one of the leading PLM vendors, come into play when we start talking about quality management? Well, PTC has been busy. They acquired Relex in 2009 and NetRegulus in 2007. With this combination PTC covers a large spectrum of the quality management systems spectrum. PTC helps companies develop quality requirements, and then trace them through design FMEAs to process FMEAs and all the way to control plans (including test procedures). This ensures that those criteria that are critical to quality are both designed into the product and designed into the quality assurance processes. At this point, the quality plans are ready to be passed on to execution systems (as shown in this diagram on integrating PLM, ERP, and MES).

Beyond planning, PTC also offers tools to help improve quality and reliability by capturing failures, documenting test data, developing non-conformance reports, and analyzing trends. PTC supports quality management processes such as FRACAS, 8D, and CAPA that are designed to help companies learn from failures and observations to improve quality. With these processes, PTC is executing on a vision to close the loop on product quality.

What don’t they do? I think it is important that PTC recognizes their role in the product lifecycle. Another main portion of QMS supports the execution side of manufacturing. This involves shop floor data collection and statistical process control (SPC) among other capabilities. PTC is sticking to the planning side of quality and design for quality, along with capabilities to provide feedback on quality performance to engineers. A good move on their part, because the execution side is crowded and more integrated to manufacturing execution systems (MES) than PLM.

What do they Offer?

Relex is PTC’s suite of solutions targeted at improving quality, reliability, safety, and risk management. NetRegulus is now a part of Windchill QMS which covers complaints, CAPA, non-conformance, and supports quality audits. Windchill QMS helps companies show due diligence and comply with industry standards for quality. Together, PTC has developed a suite of quality solutions that covers a broad spectrum of quality management needs that complement and integrate with their other products. PTC has clearly made a statement that quality management is a big part of PLM. Expect more from PTC, including increased integration of QMS into Windchill and PLM workflows. Integration will be a key value driver for PTC’s offering in a market where QMS systems themselves are frequently built of a collection of standalone tools. PTC has the opportunity to offer not just an integrated application that allows integration, communication, and data flow between QMS applications but also links into Windchill BOMs, ECRs, ECOs, and other product data. Pretty compelling.

So that’s what I hear from PTC, I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them?