Clarity on PLM

What I learned this week … is based on a post in Vuuch Voice. The post, People Centric PLM – A New PLM Age Is Born, really made me think. I don’t know where Chris Williams got the picture, but I don’t think it looks like him at all. Well, maybe a little. After recovering from the shock of the picture, I really started thinking about whether social computing in PLM requires a reinvention of PLM, or whether we are talking about augmenting the capabilities that PLM already provides?

People Centric PLM

In Chris’ post, he discusses the approaches that PTC and Dassault Systemes are taking to support the more people-centric, creative process of design. One of the comments also includes Siemens PLM in the mix. The post points out efforts by the major PLM companies (ProductPoint and Blue Kiwi) that are intended to provide social computing capabilities in PLM. But the real question is whether these solutions replace PLM, or extend it.

There has been a lot of discussion recently, including in Oleg’s blog, on the need for easier to use PLM. Chris has blogged about this as well. But are we realistically thinking that simplifying PLM and adding social computing capabilities are one in the same? I wonder if there is some concern that the PLM community will throw the baby out with the bath water?

My Thoughts?

What do I think? I am glad you asked. I think we need to look at two important, distinct needs for the future of PLM:

• PLM needs to be simpler to use
• PLM need to incorporate social computing

Will both happen at the same time? Not likely. Should they? Probably not. The underlying technology in PLM (managing files, document control and generation, revisioning, search capabilities, etc.) are incredibly valuable and important. They could be easier to use, no doubt, but they are fundamentally important. But making PLM easier to use should not require a rewrite. The underlying logic and infrastructure are a huge asset. What is needed is the ability to access it using more tailored, simple, task-based interfaces. This is what things like SOA arthitecture and composite applications are designed for.

For social computing (see more of my thoughts in Is Social Product Development Viable without PLM, We are not Going to Build an Airplane on Facebook, and related posts) there are some really unique opportunities for companies to improve product development performance. Some are very tied to the underlying information and processes in PLM (such as improving design collaboration and knowledge management with messaging, wikis, blogs, presence detection, etc.) and need to be tightly integrated – if not a part of – PLM. There are also some are new processes like crowdsourcing for ideas and innovation challenges that – at least in the near term – are likely to be developed independently from PLM. At some point, these solutions may become a part of the PLM footprint as well, but they don’t have the same need for underlying data and integration to process as adding social computing to core PLM activities. So Chris is absolutely right when he says vendors are taking different people-centric directions. And they probably should. But they could also take both if they choose.

Implications for Manufacturers

Look for simpler PLM solutions, and look for social computing capabilities to help improve product innovation, product development, and engineering. But don’t expect them at the same time. Consider offerings from your PLM vendor that add social computing into the fabric of their solution, but don’t shy away from experimenting with integrated plugins and standalone solutions in the right scenario. And yes, continue to push for simpler PLM. But let’s not ignore the high value of what we have already developed over the last decade or more.

So that’s what I think about adding people to PLM, I hope you found it interesting. Who knew this would be such an interesting topic? I didn’t, if you did let us know about it.

Updated Post:

PLM evolution gets a fourth formal dimension – process. I am updating this post about a year after I wrote it. I just re-read it, and thought it was worth making at least one minor adjustment. Since that time, I realized that the “three dimensions” of expansion did not give enough emphasis on the importance of business processes. I have changed the way I present this to the “Four Dimensions of PLM Expansion.”

I thought it was worth updating this past post with (at a minimum) the graphic as I present it now. Looking back, it clearly should have been this way in the first place!

What I learned this week … came from reflecting on three major PLM product announcements this week. In one week, Dassault is announcing the new release of their “PLM 2.0″ suite, Oracle is announcing the next release of Agile PLM, and Siemens PLM is announcing the new releases of Teamcenter and Tecnomatix. Jeff Hojlo and I will be covering each of the releases in our blog, but I thought it made sense to start with some context-setting across all three. I am impressed with the amount of investment that PLM vendors have made in their products in what has been a difficult year for enterprise software in general, kudos to all three (and the others that have continued to invest in this solution set that continues to grow in importance).

Note: A special thanks to all of my friends in the vendor community for picking my vacation week at the beach to come out with some of the most exciting PLM news in some time! They couldn’t have just checked with me first (sarcasm intended).

Context from Past Discussions and Perspective

I have talked in the past about PLM expanding in three directions:

• People – Product development and product innovation are expanding across the enterprise to more people inside and outside of the business
• Product – A “product” consists of much more than R&D or engineering specifications, and needs to include a richer view that includes commercial considerations so we are looking at the “whole product.” In addition, the technical view needs to grow to include mechanics, electronics, and embedded software
• Lifecycle – Product-related processes are being integrated across previously disparate functions

As I talk about these three, I have to give an honorable mention to:

• Process – PLM processes are being expanded and integrated across all three of these directions, and it this extension and integration of processes and information that really puts the value into PLM. Without process, the other three are not possible.

Giant Leaps in Functional Scope

First, I want to start with the functional enhancements that the vendors have focused on. In the releases, I see significant investment in all three areas above. But it’s easy to talk about where your predictions come true. Instead of focusing on what I got right (not my style), let’s focus on what I missed. I missed:

• SOA – From a technical perspective, the adoption of service-oriented architecture (SOA) promises to make PLM more web-friendly, but also to allow it to be more easily pulled apart so individual elements can be incorporated into composite “mash up” processes and applications.
• Analytics -I am not going to be big enough to admit that I didn’t see this one coming. I have lived through ERP and Supply Chain and seen the transition from gathering information to leveraging it to make decisions. This is happening in PLM in a number of different areas, including designing for compliance, cost, etc. It is exceeding my expectations in terms of adoption by the vendors.
• Web 2.0 – The impact of Web 2.0 technologies and concepts are having a very big impact on PLM. The further expansion of collaboration and social computing in product development is starting to be seen. PTC also focused on this during their recent PROuser event and their earlier release of ProductPoint.

Implications for Manufacturers?
So what does this mean for manufacturers today? If you are a customer of one of the three vendors, you have some very nice functionality (and technology) to look forward to. It is time to start looking at the potential to improve your business and plan your migration. Vendors have spaced out releases in recent years, so hopefully you are due. It is time to start learning about the capabilities available, deciding how to take business advantage of them, and planning for their adoption.

If you are not a customer of one of these three vendors, take a look at your vendor to see how they are doing against the criteria above. I have seen some nice progress from PTC and SAP this year as well.

If you are not using PLM, it is time to consider why not. I believe there are very few manufacturers that will remain competitive without these capabilities. Further, this is just more proof that PLM is continuing on the path to become one of the most important – if not the most important – enterprise applications for manufacturers. The continued evolution of the solutions is just further evidence of the additional value that customers are demanding from their vendor partners.

So that is what I learned this week, I hope you found it interesting. Let me know what you think. Look for more on each relevant release shortly. After all, the sun is bad for your skin and PLM is good for everybody!

What I learned this week… came from conversations with manufacturers and SaaS vendors over the past year. I believe the market is ripe for a SaaS approach to PLM. When it comes to product development, every organization strives for efficiency, flexibility, better collaboration (internally and externally), and easier upgrades. Yet, business models that could enable such benefits, such as Software-as-a-service (SaaS) have not been widely adopted to support product lifecycle management. The ongoing economic malaise, however, is driving manufacturers to rethink how they deploy PLM, and other enterprise software systems.

One consistent point of feedback I have heard is that green-field opportunities (where there is no incumbent PLM solution) are the low hanging fruit for SaaS – no surprise there. This is why for the most part, deployments are mostly at small to medium size businesses, or in a division within a large company, where easy deployment, management and upgrade are of paramount importance. Typically, it’s difficult for the division champion of a SaaS approach to sell the concept to executives of putting a company’s product crown jewels online. And the concern isn’t just security; in many cases it’s performance: does the system have the ability to scale and handle large CAD models, and enable real time collaboration across the globe?

Social Product Development can Drive SaaS
One reason why I think 2009 (and following years) will be the year of the SaaS PLM model are the pervasive trends of social networking and open innovation. Companies in markets as diverse as complex discrete and fast moving consumer goods recognize the power of collaborating quickly with each other, suppliers, and customers during the new product development and launch process. And social networking and open innovation – “social product development,” if you combine the two – is the perfect venue in which to do this; the ideal foundation for this open approach is SaaS.

Implications for Manufacturers?
I don’t believe that SaaS will replace “traditional” PLM; a hybrid approach will persist. There will still be the need for local CAD data management so small engineering and design workgroups can quickly iterate on an idea or design, and secure certain information behind the firewall, not in the cloud. Hybrid models, at least at large companies, will persist for the near future – for example local data, CAD design, and manufacturing process management within the four walls, and the “business layer” of PLM such as customer needs management, product portfolio management (PPM), direct materials sourcing, and collaborative design (assuming a strong authorization system is in place) in a web based, service oriented system. Regarding PPM, however, I think many manufacturers will likely want to maintain much of the information about their product portfolio locally, and make only appropriate segments of the information available via their web interface.

A hybrid approach can be beneficial because SaaS PLM vendors have strengths that can complement an existing PLM implementation. For example Arena Solutions excels at BOM management and offers portfolio and supplier management capabilities, brightidea.com and Arc90 (with their Kindling app) focus on CNM, Accept Software provides CNM and PPM in a SaaS model. In the apparel & footwear world, Zweave and World Fashion Exchange provide line planning, calendar management, and supplier collaboration in a modular, SaaS format.  A flexible, open approach such as this could help accelerate enterprise-wide adoption of PLM, particularly in fast moving markets that are newer to PLM, such as apparel and CPG.

So that is what I learned (or have been thinking about) this week. Let me know what you think: is it finally time for SaaS to make its mark in PLM?