What I learned as a follow up to my report on Product Data Accessibility is that there is a lot more angst about finding product data than I ever realized. I was amazed at the discussion generated by my blog post about accessing all product data regardless of how it is stored. In particular, there as a lot of PDA discussion on LinkedIn. For those that can’t access it (I was told you have to join the group) I decided to share some of what I learned from it here.

What I Learned

One of the key findings of the report was that “accessing product data and centralizing it are not absolutely linked.” That really seems to resonate with people. One person I spoke with (Skype, not in the LinkedIn thread or my comments) reiterated that point, saying that “you need control, but regardless of where you are with that you have to be able to find data.” That brings up some interesting thoughts about PDM. My report on the business value of Product Data Management highlights controlling/securing data, finding/reusing data, and sharing data as primary benefits of PDM. There is clearly overlap in finding/reusing data between PDM and PDA. My view is that PDM and PDA are complementary solutions, and the discussion seems to indicate that there is no requirement to have one in place before the other, either can help regardless of whether the other is in place. One example brought up in the LinkedIn group is how useful search can be after an acquisition, and not having to wait for systems to be migrated. This need (and opportunity) was echoed by others.

Time for a Maturity Model?

I have seen maturity models for PDM and PLM (among others), but given a lot of the comments and the research for the report about the need for product data accessibility I thought I would take a stab at a few levels of accessibility:

1. The Wild, Wild West – No formal accessibility strategy. From the discussions I have had, this is very common. Searching on document names and looking for things where they are “supposed to be.”
2. Basic Search – Ability to search for information in known locations based on known parameters, perhaps with some full text search thrown in.
3. Advanced Search – A formal strategy based on an index, most likely including helpful capabilities like saved and shared searches. One comment mentioned Zakta.com that offers guides for searches, although I am not familiar with the solution (but I guess I should be). I am feeling a matrix might be applicable here, though, because there are different approaches that include text, attributes, metadata, or shape (like what ShapeSpace or Siemens PLM’s Geolus solution offers), and I am sure others.
4. Access and Aggregate – Accessing disparate data and pulling it together to get a more full view of the product. Perhaps this is two levels, depending on the intelligence behind the aggregation, or maybe there is another matrix forming here. For example, using semantics to intelligently discover relationships like Inforbix does is more powerful than simply aggregating on part numbers.
5. Search Based Applications – Accessing, aggregating, and acting on product data. This would include Search based applications (SBA) such as Dassault Systemes’ Exelead (focused more broadly products) and Inforbix xApps. Perhaps another capability that belongs here (or another level?) is the ability to develop composite applications that can both access and update underlying data? Or maybe that belongs somewhere else, not sure.

Implications for Manufacturers

I am not suggesting that the above is ready for prime time, it needs some work in order to really be robust. And no maturity model should really include a level called “the Wild, Wild West.” But I hope it serves as a way to get people thinking about the different ways companies can access, aggregate, and use their product data to drive more business value.

I don’t see this as a replacement for centralizing and controlling product data. One commenter even mentioned it would be nice to link data to workflows. That starts to sound like  PDM and PLM to me. In fact, I think we will see incorporation of these capabilities in PLM, as well as offer independently. The value is clear, and there are options to pursue, so it’s time to take a look.

So those are some thoughts on product data accessibility, I hope you found it interesting. Who knew? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it. Another good resource on the topic is the Inforbix product data space blog. For full disclosure, Inforbix is a client, but they didn’t ask for this mention and I bring it up because Oleg has really taken the time to explore this issue and communicate about it. Let me know what you think.

A quick peek into some research on … the importance of accessing all product-related information, whether it is stored in a formal system such as Product Data Management (PDM) or not. The report, Issue in Focus: Product Data Accessibility: Getting Value from All of your Product Data, explains the importance for manufacturers to readily retrieve product data and points out that there are emerging technologies that can help.

The Research Findings

I have reported on the importance of product data many times, including Tech-Clarity’s The Business Value of Product Data Management: Achieving Rapid and Extendible Benefits and Managing Engineering Data – The Role of Product Data Management in Improving Engineering Efficiency. In the PDM report, I talked about three fundamentals of PDM:

• Control and secure product-related data
• Improve the ability to quickly find and reuse information
• Share product knowledge with other departments

But the report discusses the reality that, as the report says, “Many companies don’t have centralized product data, and even those that do typically have a lot of product-related data spread out across the business that isn’t centralized.” Manufactures have to live with the following realities:

• Not all companies have been able to control their product data in this way (due to software or implementations costs or other factors like acquisitions that leave companies with multiple processes and solutions)
• Many companies are handling the control of their data manually
• Most companies have product data that will probably never be under control of a formal system, including documents and spreadsheets that reference parts and products
• Most manufacturers have important information in their ERP, SCM, CRM, and other systems that can be valuable

The report also makes an important conclusion that “accessing product data and centralizing it are not absolutely linked, and there are emerging technologies that help engineers access data without having to consolidate it in a central location.” These new technologies can help engineers stop wasting time looking for data. In addition, they can intelligently aggregate (‘mash up”) if you will, data from different sources to see the big picture and make better decisions.

Implications for Manufacturers

I am not coming out against PDM. PDM offers valuable functions that allow companies to control their product data. Capabilities like revision control, check-in/out, and approval cycles are important. For companies that need to manage complex relationships between files, including 3D CAD assemblies, there are important features in PDM. But if you find yourself facing one or more of the realities above (I would bet that includes 90% or more manufacturers) then you have to live in your current reality. And realize that your reality may change in the blink of an acquisition.

Manufacturers should check out the new class of technologies that is evolving aimed at allowing companies to quickly assemble their information in much the same way that a search engine like Google. These technologies are absolutely worth a look. Should we call the “PDA” for Product Data Accessibility? Or product data search? But both seem to fall short when you consider what they can do to not only find but assemble and act on the data. Time will tell. Will they replace the need for PDM? Will they augment an existing PDM implementation (or multiple implementations, as some companies have)? It really depends on your business, but I envision it serving all of these needs. But the simple truth is that companies need to access all of their product data and put it into context in order to make good decisions. A product data accessibility approach allows them to access their information quickly, regardless of the reality they live in.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on product data accessibility, 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 product data and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

Hear Jim Brown share his views on … efficiently and effectively meeting product environmental compliance demands using PLM software. This episode shares some interesting findings from Tech-Clarity’s Understanding Product Development Tradeoffs: Designing Products for Sustainability, Cost, and Compliance.

This is the latest edition of Tech-Clarity TV, let us know what you think.

The topics included in this episode include:

• Continued regulatory pressure from multiple sources
• Top 10 environmental regulations faced by global manufacturer
• Common negative business impacts from difficulty designing products for compliance, cost, and sustainability (including time to market and missed shipments)
• Increasing frequency (trend data) of these damaging business impacts
• Framework for environmental product compliance that shows the steps and capabilities required to design for compliance
• Discussion of how PLM meets the Tech-Clarity Compliance Framework

Let us know what you think. Do you agree? Disagree? Have a great example to share? Please see the related post, download the report, or review more free research and white papers about PDM, PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

This is an invitation to speak your mind on the use of social computing in product innovation, product development, and engineering. I have the honor of helping one of my favorite innovation and PLM consulting firms, Kalypso, with some new research. Please take our survey on using social media for product innovation now.

My Thoughts

I have been a clear proponent of the use of social computing to improve innovation, for some history see:

• Mythbusting “Facebook and Business Don’t Necessarily Mix”
• Social Software and PLM – Gap Filler or Intelligent Network?
• Why does Facebook Fail for Product Development? (and how to fix it)
• Connecting Social Interaction with Product Information (Interview)

My Predictions

One of my favorite things to do is “mythbust” analyst and research predictions. It’s great fun to go back and see what people predict and compare it to what actually happened. I particularly like to poke fun at myself when I was wrong (and maybe brag a little on the occasion that I am right). Of course I cheat and use research to fuel my predictions, so I stack the deck a little bit. So here is what I posted in 2011 – The Year Social Computing Explodes in NPD and PLM?:

• Collaboration – “will happen sooner rather than later“
• Discovery – “is coming“
• Product Knowledge – “will take a little longer“

Your Chance to Make it Real

Way more important than my thoughts and predictions are what companies (like yours) are actually doing. Am I spot on? Did I blow it? This is where you come in.

Please take the survey now!

(It shouldn’t take more than about 10 minutes or so. And if you like, we will send you a copy of the results.)

So that’s what I believe is happening in the world of social computing and product innovation, I hope you found it interesting. More importantly, tell us what you think by taking the survey! One last time, the link is: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CQ37WKP

Hear Jim Brown share his views on … achieving business value by effectively managing engineering and product data.The report highlights findings from Tech-Clarity’s The Business Value of Product Data Management: Achieving Rapid and Extendible Benefits.

This is the first (and possibly only) edition of Tech-Clarity TV, let us know what you think. Should there be more? Or does Jim have a face more suited to audio-only podcasts. 

The topics include three consistent themes that participating manufacturers repeated:

• Importance of controlling product data
• Need to quickly find and reuse designs and data
• Value of sharing product knowledge across the enterprise

In addition, the video podcast (vodcast if you will) explains how companies can rapidly implement PDM (Product Data Management) to address these three needs.

Let us know what you think. Do you agree? Disagree? Have a great example to share? Please see the related post, download the report, or review more free research and white papers about PDM, PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Hear Jim Brown share his views on … mobile PLM applications in engineering, product management, and program management.
The main topics covered include:

• The advantages of mobile PLM to Engineering
• How mobile PLM helps in product and program management
• Key considerations every CIO should know when taking PLM mobile

Let us know what you think. Do you agree? Disagree? Have a great example to share?

Please see the related posts PLM Hits the Road – and the Plant – and the Service Depot… and Mobile PLM – What the CIO Should Know or download the underlying reports, PLM Goes Mobile, Product and Program Management Goes Mobile, and Enabling Mobile PLM for free to learn more. Please also feel free to review more free research and white papers about PLM and other enterprise software for manufacturers from Tech-Clarity.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

A quick peek into some research on … the role Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) play alongside ERP and PLM to help manufacturers improve their business and increase product profitability. I have researched, posted, and discussed the complementary and integrated roles of ERP and PLM numerous times. But the question would come up, “how does MES fits into the picture?” In my graphic I had placeholders for more execution-oriented systems such as MES, Maintenance Repair & Overhaul (MRO), and others. But I made a conscious decision not to complicate the already complicated subject of integrating the manufacturing systems ecosystem. Now that the industry has made progress in understanding how to integrate ERP and PLM, the time has come to address the role of MES. The details can be found in Tech-Clarity Insight: Integrating PLM and MES – Realizing the Digital Factory.

The Research Findings – Preface (or possibly rambling, you be the judge)

For you engineers reading this, do you remember freshman year when they taught you how to calculate stress and strain on rigid bodies? Then as you progressed in your learning, you found out that it was a gross oversimplification and didn’t really apply to real world materials? Or for you brainier people when someone admits that the rules of physics and mathematics are just models that seem to work (for the most part) but aren’t really hard and true rules? Or for business-oriented readers, the first time you heard an accountant ask “what would you like the numbers to be?” instead of giving you a simple answer. I might be digressing a little, so I’ll make my point – sometimes you need to understand the basics without all of the other real-world complexity that makes it hard. But it’s important to get to that real-world understanding, because that is where the real understanding lies. End digression.

The Research Findings – Simplified Roles of ERP and PLM

In my earliest discussions I typically simplified the roles of ERP and PLM as:

• PLM = Innovation
• ERP = Execution

I then progressed that a bit as:

• PLM – PLM focuses on product innovation, and is designed to help manufacturers design, develop, and launch profitable products.
• ERP - ERP’s role is executing the business of manufacturing, supporting the business of planning and managing the execution cycle.

I still like these definitions today, particularly the PLM one. The key difference in the ERP definition is the word “business.” While there are some companies that execute with ERP on the shop floor, for the most part it is used in planning for production and recording the results. Actual production is typically managed outside of ERP. Sometimes it is not automated at all, other times with some form of MES. So the picture was not yet complete.

The Roles of ERP and PLM – Now with MES!

So where does that leave us? With a need to integrate the manufacturing systems ecosystem into the reality of manufacturing operations. This is where MES enters into the picture. I had the opportunity to interview three companies that were willing to share their experience. One is a leading aerospace manufacturer who has significant experience with the integration but unfortunately wasn’t comfortable being identified, one is a Siemens electronics plant, and third is ATK Space Systems. Please read the report for their perspectives, they are worth hearing.

The roles as defined by this report, which are reflected in the updated graphic, are:

• PLM - PLM drives and captures product and process innovation
• MES – MES manages and tracks execution to turn those products into reality
• ERP -  ERP manages the commercial business of manufacturing

Still pretty simplistic, I know. But sometimes having simple, clear roles helps companies move their strategy forward. In addition to redefining the roles, the report discusses the following topics in more detail:

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

Implications for Manufacturers

I realize this is a long post, there is a lot to say and I have barely scratched the surface of the information in the report. So I will keep this short. Consider the role that MES plays alongside ERP and PLM and take the opportunity to integrate the product and production lifecycle. Whether you call that the “digital factory” or that term means something different to you, examine the value of increasing speed, improving quality, and decreasing errors by developing a synchronized manufacturing backbone that ties innovation, business execution, and manufacturing execution.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on role that MES plays with ERP and PLM in a manufacturing software strategy, 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.

A quick peek into some research on … designing products for environmental compliance from our 2009 report. And maybe more importantly, here is the link to participate in the 2011 study on designing for compliance, cost, and sustainability. This year, I am expanding the research to recognize the trade-offs sometimes required between cost and compliance. Please share the link with your friends in engineering and manufacturing.

Note: For my blogging friends and those in the press, let me know if you are interested in helping gather responses, I will return the favor with some contributed content.

Research Findings – 2011

OK, it is a trick heading. There are no findings yet, take the survey and help me gather a broad perspective on the issue. If you are a consultant or a vendor, please feel free to pass along the link to an engineer or manufacturer. I will share some of the data back on this blog in return.

Research Findings – 2009

One of the most interesting findings from the last report was the broadening view of sustainability. The focus on environmental compliance information was getting the most attention in data collection from suppliers (no surprise) but the growth in focus on a broader view of sustainability was much higher (including carbon footprint, energy usage, waste/recycling). We are looking into that question again in the current survey, it will be interesting to see what has changed in the last year or so. See more of the report findings in my post on making environmental product compliance sustainable.

Cost and Sustainability

I have written about compliance before, and the need to reduce the compliance tax on product innovation. While the prior survey focused primarily on environmental product compliance, the research shows a growing interest in sustainability. But the business reality is that compliance and sustainability can’t always command a higher price, so companies have to continue to focus on controlling product cost to be commercially sustainable. You may have heard my views on designing for product cost and product cost management (PCM) before, it is something I am passionate about. So now is the opportunity to look at these issues in a holistic way.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on compliance and a request for help in learning more, I hope you found it interesting. 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.

A quick peek into some research (and some “mythbusting”) on a post by Christopher Null on Yahoo News titled “Facebook and business don’t necessarily mix.” Great, catchy headline. But does it really reflect the underlying research from MIT? I don’t think so. I will also share some comments posted on the PDMA blog from a study by Kalypso that don’t sync up with the commentary. And, I will provide an opportunity for you to speak your mind by participating in a current research study on social media and product innovation.

Commentary and Reactions

I don’t know the author of the post, but when I read it something didn’t sit right with me. For the most part, maybe it was that the title of the post didn’t match the underlying premise. To be fair, I know that some editorial gets “help” with their titles to grab attention (which this one certainly did, at least to me). But here are my thoughts (and feel free to “bust” them yourself, I realize I don’t own all the right answers).

Facebook and Business Don’t Necessarily Mix (Busted) – OK, I know I am picking on the title. But let’s own up to two realities:

1. You don’t have a choice. People on social networks are going to talk about your products. Whether you initiate the conversations or someone else does (customers or competitors), it is going to happen. As the post in PDMA ”Do you use social media in innovation?” points out, Social media on your terms is a much better idea than letting others take control of it for you. You MUST get ahead of this.

2. This isn’t what the MIT research says. The post Mr. Null references, “Pitch may fail on Facebook – Study: Social media don’t always create good buzz“, is much more aptly titled. What is says is that buzz can be positive or negative, and that it can actually hurt sales. According to the Boston Herald blog, the research (which I haven’t read, and is not published yet as far as I know) quotes the author as saying that “found that online buzz only helps when new products are at least half as good as consumers expected.” Now that is interesting! The author, P.J. Lamberson, an MIT Sloan School of Management visiting assistant professor, is said to use math to study large networks.

“Conventional Wisdom” (Plausible) – Mr. Null starts his article with “conventional wisdom now holds that if you want to have a successful product launch, you need to exploit Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace to get the word out about your product.” Is this really conventional wisdom? Are most companies using social media today? My experience says no, but I could be wrong. I will admit, my focus is more on social computing for product innovation, product development, and engineering (PLM) and not product launch. But my experience says that companies are experimenting with the use of social media, but it is far from standard operating procedure. The only evidence I have is from some preliminary results from the study being run by Kalypso (Disclosure: I am helping them run the study) that indicates that the use of social networking and social computing in product launches is still not fully developed. In fact, only about 1/2 of companies are using social media for product launch. Further, companies that are using social media are only using it on a small percentage of their initiatives. In other words, we are very early in the use of social media, and it is far from conventional wisdom. On the other hand, the preliminary results show that about 90% of companies that are using social media for innovation are planning to increase usage next year, with none indicating they were reducing it.  Why is this Plausible and not Busted? The research is not done – please participate in the survey and I will share results back with you via the blog.

Bottom Line (Busted) – After being generous with the last mark, I was fully planning to Confirm the post’s bottom line. Then I read it again to copy it here, and I disagree. “The bottom line is simple: Viral marketing, in which a conversation about a product is actively encouraged, can turn good or bad in ways that traditional marketing and advertising typically cannot. Unless a business pays careful attention to the tone of that conversation, the company could find itself shelling out millions on a viral ad campaign, only to have the unwanted effect of decreasing sales instead of increasing them.” I copied the whole comment over, because I agree with the first part. Yes, viral marketing can turn bad. But then it says business need to pay attention to the tone of the conversation. The underlying study (from what I can see) doesn’t say that. It says that your products have to meet expectations. In other words, it’s saying you can’t just manage the tone because it is out of your control.

Implications for Manufacturers
So what should manufacturers do? Learn from the study. What I hear is don’t over-hype your products, and don’t try to push a bad product through social media. It seems to me the harder you push how great a product is, the more likely you are to get dissenting view from customers. The study doesn’t say your product has to be good, it just has to meet expectations at least half-way.

Continue to experiment and learn. Social media is changing the way we interact with products. Be a part of the change and experiment. The last bit or preliminary data I will share from the Kalypso study is that those that are doing it are seeing business benefits (revenue, time to market, reduced cost). This is real, get on it.

So that was a quick peek into some recent research on social networking and business, 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 free research and white papers about product innovation and product development from Tech-Clarity.

What I learned this week … was a retrospective look at an article analyzing how industry-specific PLM application are. The review was in response to a comment on my post In Search of a Common PLM Definition. I had a little bit of fun with the review, and I thought I would share it here. In fairness to Oleg, I decided to use my “mythbusting” technique that I used on him earlier in the year in Mythbusing ERP-PLM Integration.

Responses and Reactions

Need to Document and Prioritize PLM Requirements (Confirmed) - I start by saying companies should document and prioritize requirements. I believe that holds as true today as ever. And I think that you might agree, so let’s confirm that as a statement that holds up today.

Inegrating PLM to Manufacturing (Plausible) - I use “technology transfer” as an example of a very industry-specific part of PLM. For those that aren’t as familiar with the term, it is effectively translating the product as defined in engineering / R&D (and PLM) into a product that can be produced, up to and including instructions for automated plant equipment. This is an area that really hasn’t come to be in most PLM solutions. The example holds trues as industry specific, but despite efforts in Digital Manufacturing (DM) and Manufacturing Process Management (MPM) - most manufacturers are still not yet integrating PLM to plant solutions like Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) or Manufacturing Operations Management (MOM). The opportunity is still compelling, but I thought we would be further ahead. Hats off to my old friends at Sequencia for being ahead of the curve.

Product Portfolio Management in PLM (Confirmed) - I use Product Portfolio Management as an example for a general solution. I think this one still stands true, and is a hot topic in product innovation and product development today.

My Bio (BUSTED, big time) - Most importantly, what was I thinking with that bio picture? I think I thought it made me look like a serious analyst. Instead, I just look like I have a stomach ache (and seriously need a haircut). Yikes. Busted. Definately.

So that is a brief look at some old research with the benefits of hindsight, I hope you found it interesting. Who knew? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it. I look forward to additional commentary (although not on the picture, the glasses, or the haircut please).

NOTE: I use the “mythbusting” concept out of pure admiration and respect for such a brilliant concept, that helps kids (and adults) learn about how cool engineering can be while entertaining them.