Look at this news about Google Cloud: 1. MS Office: 0. Actually, most of the discussion here is about when MS Office will die, but for the PLM minded reader I’d say – look at the customer. Automotive Supplier Valeo is on the list of PLM businesses. So, let’s discuss – where does PLM cross its path with Google Apps on a Cloud?
http://www.techcrunchit.com/2009/05/13/google-cloud-1-ms-office-0/
15 Comments | 
PLM Prompt | Tagged: Google Apps, PLM | 
Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Dear Friends,
I’d like to introduce a new type of discussion on Daily PLM Think Tank- PLM Prompt. Sometimes, I really want to say something short, but I cannot cut it to the 140 chars limit on Twitter:). So I will try this and if you enjoy readying this format and see if it “prompts” a good discussion.
Oleg.
Leave a Comment » | PLM Prompt | Tagged: PLM, PLM Prompt, PLM Twitter | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
I read two posts this week took me that led me back to the cloud theme. One was NIST’s first try at common cloud definition. I liked its good classification of Characteristics, Delivery and Deployment models. Even if these definitions are still in a preliminary, immature phase, I think it’s good to see how this evolves.
Characteristics:
· On-demand self-services
· Ubiquitous network access
· Location independent resource pooling
· Rapid elasticity
· Pay per use
Delivery Models:
· SaaS – Software as a Service
· PaaS – Platform as a Service
· IaaS – Infrastructure as a Service
Deployment Models:
· Private Cloud
· Community Cloud
· Public Cloud
· Hybrid Cloud
The second post was Dezineforce, which talked about the availability of FEA and CFD packages on demand. It was nice is to see how this offering fits in particular models and uses cloud characteristics and capabilities. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wfpu5DL1rf8 .
So, with regards to the question – should PLM establish its own cloud? I think that currently, the answer is probably no. It looks like current infrastructure development will focus on long-term optimization of IT infrastructure. As a result, it will provide new type of platforms that PLM service companies will be able to use. It’s important during the next few years that PLM vendors will be able to recognize the potential need and acceptance of customers to subscribe and get benefits from specific PLM/PDM/CAD/CAE services.
I see two main inflation points: One is to deploy private clouds for very big customers. This is basically the same as having a global Web-based deployment. The second point is to provide CAE-related / calculation and other services that can fit pay-per-use models.
Leave a Comment » | Daily PLM Think Tank, Future Trends, Technology | Tagged: CAD, CAE, Cloud, Cloud Services, PLM | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
In one of my previous posts, I discussed the topic “Should PLM develop its own process tools? “. In this post, I discussed the various PLM approaches related to process technologies. Two main options I had in my mind at that time was to reuse existing process tools/platforms or to develop your\our own PLM tools. Each approach has benefits and disadvantages.
Today, I’d like to talk about something I term “unstructured process management”. In my view, people in general have the tendency to like processes. They see processes as self-organizing tools. Especially when it comes to business and organizational usage, there is a strong belief that process implementation can solve most of your problems. Is this really true? Yes, probably. But, in my view there is a“catch22” situation with process implementation nowadays. To prepare an implementation processes takes time. As our life becomes more and more dynamic, people and businesses need to react to what is going on outside and inside of an organization.
So, how we can identify a problem? I see many PLM processes that belong to the area of knowledge workers and represent tasks and tacit activities among people, along with, sometimes, an unpredictable slew of events. In addition, a workload can change its priority in an organization and shift people to work from one area to another. Such situations are normally killers for the traditional approach in process management. In many cases, this requires the involvement of administrators on different levels to resolve conflicts or move tasks/processes forward.
So, what can be potential solutions for this problem? There are two approaches that in my view can be beneficial for such case:
1. Focus on People Tasks
First of all, we need to have a system that allows people to manage their tasks, but have a process management base. People need to be less involved in the “process view” and more involved in “task” oriented work. This is also a simple experience to build an easy to understand view on what is going on. People need to have the ability to delegate tasks as a natural part of their process. The last one is very important.
2. Visualization
Don’t invent a special User Interface for a process. This is yet another UI people need to learn. It’s better to integrate these process/task-oriented tools in their natural environment. Or you can come with up with Mashup ideas on how to do this.
3. Process Rule Management
This means being able to define rules as a natural foundation for processes. Process flows need to be controlled by rules. In most of today’s process management infrastructure, this is not a problem. But we need to generalize it to the level of providing full rule-based controls on processes.
I’m sure you have ideas and issues to cover for such a vast topic. I’ll wait for your comments and thoughts.
11 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM User Experience, Technology | Tagged: Business Rules Management, PLM, Process Management, Process Visualization | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
The latest trends in software development definitely lean towards simplification. People tend to avoid complex stuff. I think most of us agree that we rather than expecting customers to read User Guides, we want to provide an intuitive user experience, and use 3D and CAD software focuses on simplification. As the use of this software becomes more natural in the customers’ operation, products that don’t require training will definitely leapfrog over products that require education and a high learning curve. So, with all these things on our mind, how we can make the next major shift in Product Lifecycle Management to becoming… yes, Invisible!
I’d like to figure a few core implementation principles that can help us make this invisibility a reality.
1. Cloud on our mind
We need to stop thinking about a “place to store our work”. Cloud (or corporate cloud) is a technical answer to “where to store”. This place needs to be big enough and widely available in order NOT to burden people about how to save their design, Bill of Material, Item etc.
2. Tagging and Classification
My design, product data, Bill of Materials and everything else I create during my job functions need to be tagged and classified. I don’t need to be part of this job. I already mentioned Tagging in my previous posts. I think, folksonomy-based classification combined with some automatic guidance will help us avoid “boring data entering” and other “data selection” procedures. In general, my work needs to be natural and focused only on <my tasks>.
3. Collaborative (Social) Networks in the Organization
We need to translate the benefits of social networks in the organization to the level of self-identification. These networks need to be created based on the organizational information and conceptual definition of processes. Mapping of people/roles/processes need to be done automatically. As soon as this happens, the issue of “workflow” management in the organization will disappear. The system will route tasks/messages without asking users additional and complex questions.
4. Natural Language Processing (NLP)
Last, but not least. Even after many years of computing, people still prefer communicating in their natural language. PLM needs to invest more in communication using natural languages, at least the written language (i.e. you can build commands to enhance/enrich/develop user experience on top of NLP tools).
2 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM and organization, Technology | Tagged: Classifications, Cloud PLM, Future PLM, NLP for PLM, PLM Tagging, Social Networks, Technology | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Collaboration is a magic word that we use a lot in Product Lifecycle Management. I’d say we also use the word “collaboration” even if we’re just talking about Product Development, Engineering, Simulation, Manufacturing etc.
Collaboration is a recursive process where two or more people or organizations work together on common goals — for example, an intellectual endeavor[1] [2] that is creative in nature[3]—by sharing knowledge, learning and building consensus. Collaboration does not require leadership and can sometimes bring better results through decentralization and egalitarianism
Collaborative software is software designed to help people involved in a common task achieve their goals. Collaborative software is the basis for computer supported cooperative work. “It is not a question of how well each process works; the question is how well they all work together.” – Lloyd Dobyns and Clare Crawford-Mason, Think about quality. Such software systems as email, calendaring, text chat, wiki, and bookmarking belong to this category. It has been suggested that Metcalfe’s law — the more people who use something, the more valuable it becomes — applies to such software
So, with such a broad definition, I’d like to discuss more deeply what collaboration means for Product Development and Product Lifecycle Management; as well as share a few ideas with you about how PLM collaboration needs to be developed in the near future.
1. Collaboration Networks. This is what we know today as “Social Networks”. Social Networks is a rapidly growing segment of the consumer sector. Such products as Twitter, Facebook and others use people’s natural tendency to build relationships. Such relationship building processes allows people to realize their need to communicate, share ideas and information. How do you translate this into a business and enterprise organization? Today everything is siloed and people have low to no ability to communicate with relevant people in an organization. I believe that we need to find an easy way to build these relationships and build such “collaboration networks” in an easy and flexible manner. People need to share their work, experience, information. They have to have the ability to find relevant people and organize communication.
2. Multiple Rich User Experience and Mobile Devices. I think that the User Experience will play a major role in PLM collaboration software. In my view, topic such as Web, non-Web, on demand etc. will disappear and people will only be focused on what user experience is and how to get access to services. I expect that people will experience many ways of achieving their collaborative goals- going with the Web, installing additional applications to get their preferred user experience, touch interfaces, game-like controllers, going mobile etc. So, my propose direction here is to find explicit user experience for specific groups of people dependent on their role, tasks and personal preference. In addition, I think that Mobile device strategy will play a special role in the future of PLM collaboration. New mobile devices let people change their working habits and be more flexible in the way they organize their common tasks.
3. Operational Usage. I think that this one is very important to connect our traditional PLM approach focused on design and engineering with the overall corporate and supply chain operation. I think that when you discuss what’s more important– Innovation or Operation, for the consensus these days is that “we need both”. The way that I see making this possible is to have the ability to organize cross-functional collaboration networks between people belonging to different siloes in the organization. This operation transparency will allow PLM to step into the operational field and expose more product knowledge and information to support operational decisions.
4. Information and Connectivity. Last but very not least. In the current world, according to some of the research I’ve read lately, we double information in organization every 18 months. I think that PLM collaboration needs to face the situation that multiple information pieces are distributed by multiple channels in an organization. Being able to keep track and connect and integrate related information is top priority for many of enterprise projects. In PLM context is becoming a top priority and PLM collaboration needs to provide a way to share this information ubiquitously.
4 Comments | Collaboration, Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM and organization | Tagged: Collaboration, Information Management, PLM, PLM Collaboration, Social Networks, Technology | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Life around us is changing dramatically. The current global economic situation and technology have the potential to change the business and industry landscapes for many existing companies. When I look at the companies’ performance indicators and on how users are looking for highly optimized solutions, I think that this will result in what I term as ‘game changers’. Crisis and downturn is always a time when you cannot do ‘business as usual’ and you need to come up with a diversified solution and technological set. So, with this intro, I’d like to sum up my potential ‘game changers” for PLM in 2010.
PLM Evolution
Product Lifecycle Management is in a complex position. The two biggest elements of this position are value proposition and enterprise software cost. What actually happened is that the market became mature for PLM. Companies have recognized the value and benefits on one side, but perceive PLM solutions as being expensive, on the other side. This creates a barrier on the PLM road to success. In the current economy, cost becomes the driver for change. The companies that will be able to lower the costs of their solutions while keeping the value of PLM value will be leapfrogging in 2010.
Microsoft Enterprise Convergence
The long-term dominance of Microsoft in the Desktop application was the foundation of enterprise productivity. MS Office and beyond-Office applications hold the majority of the enterprise market share. With the development of SaaS based alternatives, Microsoft will be actively looking at how to increase their enterprise presence by multiple product and technologies for the enterprise. For Microsoft, the next disruptive offering afterwards will be the enterprise information worker. MS Office, MS SharePoint and other products look like a very good platform for this, and MS will be actively moving in this direction. The ability to converge PLM collaborative capability with the Converged Microsoft offering can have a good potential for companies in this space.
Google Push
Google Push into the enterprise is becoming more visible. GSA and Google Apps comprise a potential collaborative platform for the enterprise in the future. In addition, Google offerings in 3D technologies such as SketchUp and O3D have the potential for future mainstream deployment in applications related to 3D design and Product Lifecycle Management.
Open Source
Open Source software has not reached a leading edge in the PLM industry. But, in the current economy, some vendors can consider the open source option for gaining access to new potential customers. When initial license cost is going down and there is visible increase in service and recurrent revenues trend, open source has a good potential for growth.
I’m sure that there are other trends and opportunities for making changes in the PLM industry. I’m convinced that in the near future, manufacturers will be looking for new and innovative ways to solve their problems. I think that the trends mentioned above have a good chance of being part of these new stories.
8 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM and organization, Productivity, Technology | Tagged: disruptive innovation, New Technology, PLM, PLM Strategy | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Clouds have become a very important trend lately. Earlier this week, I was reading a McKinsey discussion about document presentation – <Clearing the air on cloud Computing>. Also, I had the chance to write a few posts on this subject a couple of months ago. I’d like to get back to this topic again and discuss its potential implication on the PLM/PDM/CAD business. I’d like to group it into hardware, software, application, and innovation.
Impact in the area of hardware infrastructure will allow you to provide better solutions from the environmental standpoint. Additional impact will be on data management and data retention programs. The biggest benefit and impact is that cloud data centers will allow you to manage an infrastructure that you weren’t able to manage previously. It will make a global PLM solution possible and decrease cost. It will allow many small manufacturers to have solutions they weren’t able to build before.
From the perspective of software platforms, today’s PLM vendors and future PLM solutions providers will be able to use the capabilities of existing and new cloud services. This is a new type of software that focuses on virtualization and common application services like databases and services. A great benefit of these platforms is the ability to scale up when needed. This is can be greatly used by simulation and computation products, as well as serve peak performance needs.
Here is a landscape of most popular today’s platforms:
Hardware and Software Platforms will open a new space for the development of service applications. These applications will be specifically designed with the “cloud in mind”. They will focus on online presence, transparent data availability and multiple device access. Additional benefits will be a dramatic cost reduction for PLM applications as a result of cloud hardware/software bundled platforms.
Last, but not least, is Innovation in PLM. Today’s on-premise environment sets a relatively high bar for newcomers in developing new and innovative applications in this space. I think that the combined effect of hardware, software and application development will impact the future PLM application landscape. This be largely beneficial for manufacturing companies around the globe during the current economic situation.
7 Comments | Cloud Application, Daily PLM Think Tank, Technology | Tagged: Cloud Computing, HaaS, Hosted services, PaaS, PLM on demand, SaaS | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Last month, I wrote a few posts about Bill of Materials. My interest was to investigate how to improve Bill of Material and BOM management in the organization. In the post <Search for the right BOM – I’m feeling lucky? >, I discussed how many different BOMs we can discover in the organization and later <When BOM seeks the right enterprise nanny… >, I discussed the various trends in BOM management. I came to the conclusion that the organization is interested in managing a single Bill of Materials, but every person in the organization may have a different point of view on the same BOM, representing different aspects of product development.
Chris from Vuuch and Josh made some interesting comments <When BOM seeks the right enterprise nanny>. Their point was about the connection between people and parts in the Bill of Materials. Linking to people in the Bill of Materials can create a social dimension in the BOM. This gave me the idea of how to model Bill of Materials connect it to the organizational social environment.
How can we do that? Let’s think about a model where we can link between <person> and multiple <parts> in the Bill of Materials. These links can be created by users and kept in the database. As soon as the user creates these links, he or she will be able to render or display the Bill of Materials anyway the particular user wants to see it. Since these links will not destroy links between parts, they will be able to use it simultaneously. Imagine a single Bill of Material structure associated with multiple users. Users would be able to open the Bill of Materials and get a customized view, reflecting his or her particular Bill of Materials configuration.
I can think about this feature as a more advanced way of BOM Part <Tags>. Compared to literal Tags, the connection to users/roles allows us to customize way people work on the Bill of Materials and significantly improve the performance of people while they work on BOM.
4 Comments | BOM Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM and Social Environment | Tagged: Bill Of Material, BOM, Social Network, Social Software | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
Over the past few months, I have seen an increased volume of discussions related to the connection between CAD/PDM/PLM space and Social Networking. These discussions took place in different blogs and communities. I blogged about this several times in the following posts:
Serious Joke – Why CAD needs to Tweet?
Process Thinking with the Development of Social Collaborative Business Processes for PLM
How PLM can reuse SharePoint Social Network Capabilities?
The Social Bill of Material Tools Dream
In addition, I found some very interesting posts on this topic by vuuch.com – A Twitter World, Fad or Here to Stay? and on some other blogs.
Below you can see how the Social Networking trend has been growing steadily over the past few years:
Now, what about Engineers and Designers? After reading all blogs and discussions, I can definitely say that , there are two major opinions: (1) Social Networking is a new reality and Engineers need to live immersive into this new space; and (2) Social Networking is not related much to the Engineering professional space. It needs to be mediated by marketing and other people “watching outside” that need to help properly spice the “social soup”
Which opinion is correct? I have very mixed feelings about these two opinions as I see them both as being very far from the truth. On one side, I completely agree – Engineers, like any other people involved in the creative process, need to have an environment where they will NOT be burdened by various non-systematic impacts. It’s very hard to navigate between opinions, expressions and meanings of today’s social collaboration. On the other side, I don’t believe that isolation can work well these days. Our world is flat and we need to manage a broad coverage of people’s needs, opinions, and feedback To involve engineers in this social system will provide them with a very natural way to interact with their users. Sometimes, this experience have a unique impact on what an engineer can do.
My recipe for a secret engineering social soup follows:
1. Allow engineers to be involved in social networks. Provide them with the capabilities to interact with their worlds – both on the inside and on the outside. Get feedback and introduce engineers’ opinions.
2. Support engineers with additional tools and capabilities that will allow them to separate the engineering environment, as needed. Systems can switch off, wait, don’t disturb – there are so many ways that have been invented by social and communication systems.
3. Make (1) and (2) work effectively by providing engineers with enough analytical, business intelligence and representation tools that will give them a balanced and representative view about what is going on outside, in the social networks.
4. Make social networks work in their professional organizations too. So, the engineering environment will reveal communities within their own organizations and reuse social network capabilities inside and outside of the organization in the same way.
Combination of these three capabilities will allow the engineering community to get new dimensions in leveraging Social Networking capabilities for development of new and innovative products.
What is your view on this?
4 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, Market and Technology, PLM and organization, Technology | Tagged: CAD, PLM, social design, Social Networks | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky
You are currently browsing the Daily PLM Think Tank Blog blog archives for May, 2009.
Daily PLM Think Tank
