Clarity on PLM

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?

What I learned this week … came from a great conversation with Sankar from Younomy. I have been in a number of conversations recently that make me realize that the world of social computing is looking into social product development and social innovation as much as the PLM and manufacturing communities are looking into the social computing world. Still with me? Sorry, that was a mouthful. You can read Sankar’s interview of Jim Brown (me) on social computing and product development on Younomy here and learn more by reading this collection of social computing in PLM posts on my site.

Who is Looking at Who?

What I realized is that we are all trying to learn from each other. Manufacturers are trying to learn from what other companies are doing, and other companies are interested in some of the early initiatives from manufacturers. To me, this is just another reminder of how new social computing is. I am fortunate to sit in both camps – the advancement of social computing in business and the maturation of PLM. That is why the intersection of social computing and PLM is so interesting to me.

Implications for Manufacturers
One of the key points that I made in the interview was that I see the greatest value not from one side or the other (social computing or PLM). I believe that the most significant improvements to product innovation, product development, and engineering performance will come from linking social interactions with product data. That’s why I pay so much attention to what PTC, Siemens, Dassault Systemes, Vuuch, Sopheon, and others are doing in this space. That is the where the real power is unleashed. Generic tools will be helpful, but by connecting the two we get:

• A product-focused discussion that directly helps develop better products
• A source of product knowledge (the discussion itself) that can be captured and reused into the future

It was great to have an opportunity to discuss this with Sankar to remind me how passionate I am about the potential of taking the concepts of things like Facebook and applying them to product development. I hope you found the discussion (and the interview) interesting.

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?

What I learned this week … came after reflecting on this video on social computing in PLM I ran across on PTC’s website. I spent a significant amount of my time and energy last year trying to understand the implications of the social networking explosion on product innovation, product development, and engineering. It was interesting to listen to the podcast with the benefit of time moving on a bit to reassess the situation and see what will likely happen in 2011. So what happens next?

Brief Background and Views

Take a look at the video, but my viewpoint in a nutshell is:

• Social networking and social media have ramped up significantly in our personal lives (Facebook, YouTube, etc.)
• Social computing is continuing to gain ground in work environments and applications (LinkedIn, Twitter, etc.)
• Product innovation is a team sport (inherently requiring collaboration and cross-functional participation)
• Facebook and similar tools aren’t appropriate for new product development (NPD), but the concepts are (see Facebook fail post)
• The content for the social interaction around product development and engineering is the product (making it a natural to integrate it with PLM)
• Early adopters are on the move and gaining benefits (see early results from the Spike research I worked on with Kalypso)

My Crystal Ball Says 2011 Will Bring…

First, I don’t have a crystal ball and I can’t see the future. All I can do is tell you that this is one of the most obvious directions companies will take. This is as close to a “no-brainer” as they come. I do believe that social computing is happening in product innovation and NPD and will continue to expand. The tie to product data is also intuitive to me, although it will take more time and work. So here are my thoughts:

• Collaboration – This will happen sooner rather than later, it is the proverbial “low hanging fruit.” Companies will leverage generalized applications like Microsoft SharePoint, as well as specialty applications like Vuuch. The PLM vendors are actively working here as well, including PTC with SocialLink and Dassault Systemes with SwYm, and Siemens PLM. Integration to product data and existing PLM process will take longer, but the direction has been set. With so many companies still trying to get the basics in place (let’s face it, there are a lot of product data management (PDM) projects still in the works to put the foundation in place) I don’t think that this will cross into the majority this year, but there will be a lot of projects going on.
• Discovery - Finding ideas, people, and information internally is coming. While collaboration is typically within the known product development or engineering team, discovery extends this to a broader group. I think we will see progress on this in 2011. This can start relatively easy with discussion groups and innovation portals. I see a lot of companies experimenting with this. I believe a lot of this will be internally focused, however, which doesn’t stretch business models or existing processes but enhances them.
• Product Knowledge Management -This is an interesting one, and I think it will take longer. The promise here is not only to collaborate and discover, but to capture that interaction for future reference. This requires integrating the interactions back into the product record and storing them. The value is there, but it has to be done in a coordinated, integrated fashion so will take longer (in my opinion).
• Community, VOC, New IP -Developing external communities and gathering ideas from the outside is something I have always said will take longer. I am rethinking that. It requires people to think differently and develop new business models. But I have seen innovative companies get behind this.  For example, Kimberly-Clark talks about an innovative program in this interview. My opinion has changed as I view this as a standalone initiative. Full integration to innovation processes and NPD (and particularly engineering) will likely take longer, but a good idea that doesn’t require a huge investment is not going to wait in an innovative company. I see vendors like Brightidea, Congistreamer, Imaginatik, Spigit, and a host of others making an impact here in addition to the traditional companies.

Implications for Manufacturers

Things are happening. The world is changing the way we communicate, and the leaders will find a way to be more innovative and drive higher levels of profitability. Innovation has started and will continue. When? That is the big question. My crystal ball only works backwards (researching what has already happened). But I think we will see a lot of progress this year. Check back with me in 2012 when my crystal ball (aka rearview mirror) is working.

So those are my thoughts for 2011, I hope you found it interesting. Let me know what you think, or more importantly what you are planning to do about it!

I had the chance to attend PTC’s “Project Lightning” announcement yesterday in Boston. PTC CEO Jim Heppelmann  announced “creo” as the “biggest innovation in the industry in years” and the future of PTC’s mechanical CAD (MCAD) offering. We showed up in a castle-like stone building with a prison cell in the room and guards all around. We sat in metal chairs at metal tables like a prison. In dramatic fashion, four men in orange jumpsuits labeled “Efficiency,” “Creativity,” “Value,” and one other which I think was “Innovation” were locked in the cell. The metaphor is clear – CAD has locked up the most important things you want from your engineers. Then – they are set free and the announcement begins. The meeting was dramatic and PTC got everybody’s attention right from the start. So what did the say and what does it mean?

What did they Say?

You can learn more and see the replay of the event for yourself at the creo blog site. I won’t spend too much time repeating what they said, instead I will give you a few facts and then share my impressions. Some key facts:

• The new suite of products is the future of PTC’s MCAD offering
• Pro/Engineer, CoCreate, and ProductView are now all “creo/elements” products
• Creo will be a suite of products built on an open, common database
• Creo will consist of smaller, lighter, simpler “apps” that are role and function-specific

What is Different?

One of the key differences PTC describes is a fundamental one. There will be one database at the core of creo that is acted on by a series of smaller, role-based applications. These “AnyRole” apps will be simpler to use and very focused on specific tasks. For those that want the power of parametrics and are willing to invest the design rigor in it, there will be an app for that. For those that want the flexibility of direct modeling, there will be an app for that. The “AnyMode” concept promises to deliver that on the same data model and make them interoperable. The demo showed a parametric model opened in the direct modeling app, modified, and then showed up in the parametric app with changes highlighted which were then applied to the parametric model. Pretty amazing stuff. Of course the devil will be in the details. I am not a CAD expert, but I understand this is a big challenge. But PTC appears confident they have it solved.

So if I keep saying “there is an app for that” someone will eventually ask “will there be an app store for that?” We asked that too. What we heard is that PTC is developing creo as an open system, and that it can be a platform on which 3rd parties can develop their own applications. Is that an app store? My guess is probably yes, but whether you buy them in one place is less important in my opinion than the willingness for PTC to open up the infrastructure for others to develop on. The infrastructure is there and it is available for others to leverage, including a creo application template.

Implications for Customers
There is more to the announcement, and over time we will all learn more. So what do customers do? The good news is that they have time to decide. As the picture below shows, the roadmap for creo shows the first release in Summer of next year followed by another in Fall.

The customers that I spoke with at the event seemed positive. But there is definitely a “wait and see” mentality. The phrases that seemed to preface most comments was “If PTC can execute on this…” or “If PTC can pull this off…” But that skepticism is healthy, PTC is promising a lot and they know they need to deliver. And in the meantime they aren’t planning to take away the tools that people are already using and getting value from. I was pleased with the way the execs answered questions about customer transition. PTC promises to protect the relationship and the investments of their customers. If you have a license to a capability today (like direct modeling with CoCreate) then you will get a license to the creo that app that delivers that functionality.

I think the benefits will vary by customer. Some will be able to take advantage of another aspect of the announcement, such as the “anyBOM” capabilities to drive configurations from Windchill PLM down to the design environment. Very cool, and very needed for companies with multiple product variations based on specifications, features, and options. But the part that seemed to excite the customer more frequently than anything else seemed to be the “anyData” portion. Each of the participants on the customer panel mentioned that in one form or another. The promise for open and interoperable solutions is compelling. But I am not sure that PTC promised as much as the customers thought they heard. But they did promise to bring in CAD models from other leading CAD suppliers and be able to adopt them in creo as if they were native creo models. The other aspect that excited the customers was getting the CAD data out to more people though purpose-built apps for roles outside of Engineering. The customers seemed to relate to the idea that their CAD data is locked up, and are looking to creo to help them solve that problem.

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? Clearly PTC has a lot of work in front of them, it will be exciting to watch this as it unfolds.

A quick peek into some research on … how effectively managing engineering data can improve engineering efficiency. Beyond just efficiency, the study looks at how solutions that manage engineering data – whether you call them PLM, PDM, cPDM, EDM, or any other acronym – can play a critical role in helping manufacturers realize their business strategies.

The Research Findings

Past Tech-Clarity research, including Tech-Clarity Insight: Innovating Through an Economic Downturn and Tech-Clarity Insight: Engineering’s Role in Surviving a Down Economy, make it clear that manufacturers are facing difficult times. Although there are positive signs about the recovery, there are lingering impacts on today’s manufacturing business including:

• Companies have to innovate to capture their share of a smaller market (some say they have to increase market share just to stay still due to lower overall sales volume)
• They need to bring products to market faster in today’s competitive, global environment (even before the downturn)
• They are running lean (and recent studies including one from Aberdeen Group indicate that they plan to add resources back in slowly)

What does that mean? As the recently published report Tech-Clarity Insight: Managing Engineering Data – The Role of Product Data Management in Improving Engineering Efficiency says, “manufacturers need to be able to design and develop products extremely efficiently to get the most out of their engineering efforts.” Perhaps that’s always true, and somewhat obvious. But what can they do about it? The report reviews the experience of three manufacturers, including AMETEK (rotary and linear motion control products and electronic instruments), SchuF-Fetterolf (industrial valve company specializing in the design and manufacture of process critical valves), and Visa Lighting (manufacturer of performance decorative lighting). The research finds that managing engineering data has a positive impact on:

• Gaining control of product data
• Collaborating across sites and sharing information
• Automating (and streamlining) product-related processes
• Leveraging PDM beyond engineering data

In turn, these improvements drive business level results including increased engineering efficiency and faster time to market. Looking back at the challenges companies face in a tough economy, these are important benefits!

Implications for Manufacturers

The research indicates that solutions to manage engineering data drive important business benefits. Product Data Management (PDM) is an important discipline and software enabler in manufacturing companies today. Regardless of whether the PDM is a part of a larger Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) solution or a simpler solution that focuses only on the PDM aspects, it is a must for manufacturers today. Manufacturers that haven’t invested in these solutions have a choice to make. They can choose a PLM solution from vendors like Dassault Systemes, PTC, or Siemens PLM. They could choose to get PLM from an ERP vendor such as Oracle or SAP. Others will choose a more focused PDM solution. Which is right? It depends on the business strategy and what the company wants to accomplish – now and in the future.

PLM is expanding to cover a lot more than data management, as I discuss in What I Learned: PLM Please Take 3 Giant Steps Forward. For some companies that fits their strategy well. For others (including some interviewed for this paper) that seems like too much for them. Instead of investing in PLM and using a subset, they chose to work with a simpler solution. Solutions from companies like Arena Solutions or Synergis Software can offer a lighter weight solution for these companies to meet their PDM needs. To be fair, some of the large PLM vendors also offer a simpler solution (although that is too much to get into here). They may not have all of the capabilities that the larger PLM systems do, but if the business isn’t ready for PLM they can offer a long-term PDM solution or a stepping stone to get data in order on the path towards a more broad PLM strategy. Regardless of what path they choose, the study is further evidence that manufacturers are getting real value from PDM.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on the importance of managing engineering data well, I hope you found it interesting. Does the research reflect your experiences? Do you see it differently? Let us know what it looks like from your perspective.

Please feel free to review more free research and white papers about PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

I had the chance to talk with … Kalypso‘s managing partner Bill Poston and new Kalypso partner Andreas Lindenthal about the recent merger of their companies. PLM implementation experts are in high demand, with most many “big name” consulting firms carrying small teams. In this case, two smaller specialists in product innovation and PLM are coming together to make an even stronger team.

What do they Do?

Kalypso is an innovation consulting firm. They help companies set the right strategies, develop the right business processes, and implement the right software to improve their product innovation performance. Kalypso specialized in a number of aspects of innovation including:

• Business & Innovation Strategy
• Front End of Innovation
• Portfolio & Pipeline Management (PPM)
• Development & NPI (new product introduction)
• Value Management
• PLM Technology
• Leadership & Learning
• Intellectual Property Management

Metafore is an very experienced PLM implementation consulting firm. Both firms have rich backgrounds in management consulting, systems integration, and PLM.

Benefits of the Merger

What is the value of the combined team? As I mentioned earlier, PLM consultants are in high demand. More importantly, it is often difficult to find good business consulting in this area. The largest consulting firms typically provide a large breadth of services (strategy, process definition, implementation, development) but lack depth in PLM resources. The smaller firms often have very deep PLM systems skills (although frequently in a single vendor’s system) but lack a breadth of consulting services. Kalypso offered both depth and breadth, even before the acquisition. So although Kalypso is a “smaller” consulting firm, they already had one of the largest independent PLM teams in the industry. The addition of Metafore extends that advantage.

But the new, combined entity is not just a bigger version of Kalypso. Instead, Metafore adds deeper skills in Siemens PLM solutions (namely Teamcenter) as well as more experience with smaller vendors including Aras, Arena Solutions, and Omnify Software. This complements Kalypso’s traditional strength in Oracle (Agile), Dassault Systemes (Enovia / MatrixOne) and PTC (Windchill). The merger also gives Kalypso more programming power, including access to offshore developers.

Who do they Work With?

Kalypso works with manufacturers of all industries, and has done some interesting innovation work in the service industries as well. The first time I met Kalypso in fact, was due to their unique expertise in PLM for CPG (consumer packaged goods) and the food industry. The addition of Metafore’s team provides Kalypso with more breadth in industries such as automotive, A&D, and industrial manufacturing.

Implications for Manufacturers

For existing Kalypso or Metafore clients, the merger will mean access to extended resources and a more capable partner. For those looking for product innovation or PLM expertise, the combined offering provides a compelling alternative to the big consultants that may not have the deep skills you need, or the small firs that may not have the breadth of services (or the top-tier talent) that Kalypso offers.

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

Note: In the interest of full disclosure, I am a paid member of Kalypso’s Board of Advisors. I don’t feel that I would have written the article in any different way if that weren’t the case, but I felt that disclosing this information was the proper thing to do.

I had the chance to talk with … PTC and their customers at last week’s PTCuser user conference. PTC has been busy, making a number of significant announcements. I will clearly not do justice to such a big event in one short blog, but I hope to hit the highlights for you and share my thoughts on the implications.

Note: Just to be clear, this is the last PTCuser because the conference is changing and will be renamed PlanetPTC.

What I Learned

PTC is still serious about mechanical CAD. They believe that there is still innovation happening in that space, and that it will be an interesting market in the future. Good news for mechanical engineers and those that are fans of PTC CAD solutions including Pro/Engineer and CoCreate. They announced Project Lightening which is a multi-year strategy to reinvent mechanical CAD, but promised deliverables in the near term. Not much information here yet, but from conversations with PTC product managers this is a big focus area. Expect some significant focus on making MCAD much easier to use.

PTC is pushing the PLM boundaries. PTC furthered InSight product analytics by announcing product cost analytics and expanded Arbortext into service documentation and instructions. By going into areas like product analytics (particularly in areas like cost), PTC continues to push the envelope. PTC has a broad vision for PLM, and has already stretched the scope of PLM to include product documentation and engineering calculations in the past, and they don’t appear to be done yet.

PTC is making good on their Social Product Development initiative. The new SocialLink product is a great example of this. They added a new product, but also demonstrated how these new social computing capabilities will work across the entire PTC product portfolio. That is the right way to do it (in my opinion). The capabilities are generalized and part of the infrastructure (in large part thanks to Microsoft), but the application of the capabilities is happening in the solutions themselves. This allows product managers from each product line to decide how their users can benefit. Expect more here over time.

PTC has refocused on a Small to Midsize Business (SMB) PDM system – ProductPoint is no longer trying to be both a simpler PDM offering for the SMB and PTC’s answer to Social Product Development. With the introduction of SocialLink and other social computing capabilities, ProductPoint is now free to be a SharePoint-based PDM system. Good news for the SMB who doesn’t need (or can’t attain) a full PLM system.

PTC enters PPM market – PTC is launching a product portfolio management solution based on Microsoft technology. The early indications are that PTC’s solution is more focused on project roll ups and programs than decision support in product portfolios and R&D investment. Stay tuned for more on this in the future as I learn more.

PlanetPTC replaces PTCuser – PTC users have asked PTC to take a broader role and responsibility in the user event. PlanetPTC also includes a community site and virtual events like webcasts, showing that PTC really believes in the power of social media.

So that’s what I hear from PTC, I am sure I missed something. I hope you found it useful. What do you think? What else should I have asked them? What else would you like them to do?

What I learned this week … is that product cost is not getting the attention it deserves in PLM. I was presenting on the future of PLM in a PLM-focused event last week in Helsinki. My topic was the future of PLM, and I based my discussion on the four dimensions of PLM expansion (recently updated past post). I got a great question from one of the participants. He wanted to know “why I hadn’t included cost in the future of PLM?“ My response? Good question!

Product Cost in PLM

Product Cost Management (PCM) in PLM is something that I used to bring up on a regular basis. Design for cost is an important initiatives. Particularly as companies are trying to remain lean in uncertain economic times, controlling cost is critical. Even in good times, designing products with optimal cost structures is hugely important to driving high profit margins. So why has this dropped off of my radar? Is the problem being addressed? Is the problem solved? No.

The problem still lingers, but I haven’t seen as many companies willing to try to address it. Perhaps this complicates the roles of ERP and PLM, and companies don’t want to deal with a hard decision on which system supports which part of the process. ERP and PLM both have the potential to help, and should be a part of the solution. But neither ERP nor PLM are ready to take on the PCM challenge fully.

• ERP
  • Has historic costs
  • Understands multi-currency, locations, volumes, other sourcing factors
  • Generally handles cost for the execution of procurement and manufacturing
• PLM
  • Has new parts
  • Understands product content early when costs are locked into designs
  • Generally handles product development decisions in the innovation lifecycle

So each system has some thing to offer. So why instead of addressing this properly with the right combination of ERP and PLM, do companies continue to use masses of disconnected spreadsheets to solve the problem? At least I can hope that they are managing the spreadsheets in PLM so it is readily available and can be reused. But that is only a partial solution. We need a better answer.

Challenges

ERP and PLM both bring value as seen above, but both fall short. Here are some of the issues:

• New purchased parts - ERP is not involved in the early parts of design, and doesn’t help with estimating costs of new parts. PLM (for the most part) doesn’t have a rich enough model for sourcing. I have seen “cost” as a single field too many times, without any concept that the cost will change based on volumes, locations, currencies, etc.
• Newly engineered parts – For brand new parts, there is not historic data to work from. Costs need to be developed based on product characteristics like materials and manufacturing complexity. Comparisons can help, but ERP typically doesn’t know enough to determine which parts are similar in their construction

Who will step up?

Are vendors ready for this? Agile has had a cost model for some time. Siemens partnered with ATK. Dassault Systemes invested in this area. PTC just announced that their InSight product analytics product will address cost. So there is hope. There are also specialty vendors like Akoya and aPriori that help engineers estimate cost based on product attributes. Why haven’t SAP PLM and Oracle (with Agile and ERP) done something about it?

More importantly, are manufacturers ready? Adidas CIO mentioned Design for Cost at a PLM user conference (PTCuser) yesterday. But I don’t hear it often enough. I haven’t seen the momentum that something as important to profitability as cost deserves.

Implications for Manufacturers

If manufacturers aren’t willing to integrate cost into their design processes (and PLM), they will be stuck with spreadsheets. And actually, the question was broader. The question also addressed other financials in addition to cost. For example, is PLM addressing product pricing? Product forecasting? While I think that it makes sense for PLM to address this, I have seen little activity in this area to this point. What a shame. What a great opportunity for someone to step up.

So that is my rant for today, I hope you found it interesting. Why did this fall off of my radar? Did it fall off of yours? Have you done something to address this? If you did let us know about it!

What I learned this week … was that we could use a good, common PLM definition and scope, but we will not get one. The discussion (a lot of discussion in multiple forums, actually) came from my post SAP, Too Much or Too Little Credit for PLM Efforts and another called Who Will Disrupt Entrenched PLM Vendors? Chris Williams pointed out on a LinkedIn thread that he felt maybe the confusion was due to a lack of understanding of what PLM really is, and asked for a common definition. My response? Not so much.

A Not-so-Common Defintion

Chris asked the million dollar question. But PLM is not one thing. While ERP has matured to a more common footprint across the vendors, the scope of PLM from each of the vendors differs. I define PLM as “processes and software used to improve product innovation, product development, and engineering performance.” That is (by definition, not by fault) very broad. There is no one “PLM” definition. The vision of the vendors shows consoliation over time, but today they are very different. Siemens includes MRO (maintenance, repair and overhaul) for A&D. Dassault Systemes has spent much more effort in “lifelike simulation.” PTC includes development of product documentation. Then, there are the applications that don’t come as a part of the suite, which makes each implementation different. Aras includes APQP and quality. They are all different.

Implications for Manufacturers

The lack of a common definition is also why putting in PLM without a strategy is a quagmire waiting to happen. But a common defintion won’t help. While there are standard processes in PLM, they are not as common as in ERP. There are examples of common processes, such as Stage-Gate processes for new product development (NPD) or CMII for change management. But product innovation and product development are not as standardized processes as accounting, as an example. It is not the lack of common PLM system definition at the root of this, it is the lack of common PLM processes. And as much as companies like Invention Machine are putting process orientation into innovation, it will still not be as standardized as ERP functions like human resource management.

So, manufacturers really need to think about what problems they want to solve before implementing PLM. You can’t just install the software and expect any benefits (beyond maybe simple data management). This is what I call the PLM Program, a strategy and vision for PLM that you accomplish in small, incremental steps.

So those are my thoughts on a common PLM defintion, don’t hold your breath waiting for it. I hope you found it interesting. Do you have a better one? I didn’t, if you do let us know about it.

That, by the way, is one of the reasons it is very hard for ERP to simply build another module and call it PLM. That is why SAP has a long program to develop PLM (which will be yet another variation on the PLM theme, different from the others).