PLM Prompt: Social PLM and Security

June 30, 2009

Note…  Reading very interesting study about higher vulnearability of social networkers.

We are all very excited about advantages of PLM social product development and social innovation. I think, social software brings a lot of potential.  But what will be security impact for these people and enterprises?

My short prompt. How do you see it?

PLM Prompt: Combine Virtual and Physical with G1 Map Overlay

June 30, 2009

Short prompt and amazing video. Our life becomes more and more mix of physical and virtual contents. I think Product Lifecycle Management initiatives need to re-use this capabilities.

Just my thoughts. What do you think?

PLM, Please Don’t Take Giant Steps…

June 30, 2009

This post caught my attention last week. “PLM, please take 3 giant steps forward!” by Jim Brown. I’m very well connected to Jim and yet I’d like to pose a controversial question – should PLM do it? I would like to explain my points and look forward to a fruitful discussion.

I will be discussing the three dimensions raised by Jim –

1/ Product;

2/ People;

3/ Lifecycle:

Products are expanding. Of course we are thrilled by our product capabilities, but what is the actual adoption rate? How much of our functionality is used by customers? How we can implement and answer exact customers needs? Since about 50% of revenues in our industry are generated by services, I assume that we still have a long way to go to deliver a good fit of functionality to customer needs. So, here’s my request:  please, let’s do what customers want slowly– and in the current turbulent time, we will try to deliver as much more precisely. I’d like to learn from Google, put more betas out of the door and see how our customers can adopt our functionality.

People. When I first saw all the social-related development by Product Lifecycle Management vendors, I thought –this is really great! We will allow users to be better connected. Which means to be aligned with what customers want. Actually for PLM vendors, we need to allow our products and processes to be better connected with people that use them, and we need to be able to get their feedback step by step, and implement it. This is related to the overall manufacturing ecosystem that needs to be driven by vendors and their partners.

Lifecycle. This is a good one and really connected to PLM in my view. Everything is about to change. We are managing the lifecycle of products created by our customers. But what about our lifecycle?. Our customers these days are trying to be more lean and agile. So, how we can we manage change successfully? Our implementations are still so complex and expensive that customers need time to adopt to new versions and changes of existing implementations. So, I want us to be more agile and be able to go with multiple small steps.

So, what is my conclusion? We definitely need PLM to leapfrog in the future and improve what we are doing in the current turbulent economical situation. But let’s start this huge leapfrog with small steps. This will be more flexible and lean and simple for our customers.

What is your view on this? I’m looking forward to our discussion.

Future PDM’s Trajectories

June 29, 2009

I think that with all the hype about Product Lifecycle Management, we completely forgot about Product Data Management (PDM). Despite the fact that we don’t like to speak about PDM too much, I think that some very interesting might happen with Product Data Management in the future

1. Be integrated and become a natural part of CAD and Design Systems.

As many more technologies are going to be developed around CAD, developers of PDM systems can put their efforts into a specific CAD system. In practical terms, this means that we will develop “satellites” to CAD systems. Is this good or bad?… In my opinion, the significant work needs to be done to bridge between CAD and PDM. As soon as it this is possible, it will be very beneficial.

2. Provide Product Data Services in the Enterprise

Consolidate efforts and capabilities of PDM systems and use them as an extended PDM platform in the enterprise. This is actually very possible, in my view. PDM systems provide an advanced set of features such as BOM, Workflow, Sourcing and more…

3. Expand beyond PDM into PLM areas

Are expanded PDM and PLM the same thing? My answer is no. By joining the “PLMish” world, the company will expand their products horizontally. So, from the functional standpoint, solutions beyond PDM can become very promising if they can manage additional domains of data.

So, whatever option you choose, PDM is the key enabling technology for enterprises to make data about products more available. I’d specifically mention option #1. For most of the CAD systems today, there is a specific satellite PDM system. So, the next actions are to make these PDM services widely available in the enterprises.

PLM Prompt: What Means to Create “Good Enough” PLM?

June 26, 2009

Short prompt. I want to continue  theme related to PLM adoption. There are many talks about PLM deployment, ROI, Values etc. But does it make sense to create “good enough PLM”?  What does it mean?  What should be included?

This is my priority list:

1/ Flexibility

2/ Usability

3/ Integration

What do you think?

PLM Prompt: Connect Physical and Virtual Worlds on iPhone

June 26, 2009

Short note. Impressive video about how you can merge photo with 3D models on iPhone using 3DVIA tools.  3DVIA is connecting virtual and physical worlds on iPhone.

This is promising. My opinion… what do you think?

Why I haven’t bought PLM yet.

June 26, 2009

Well, Product Lifecycle Management sounds like a very profound concept. I can see organizational benefits, values, etc… etc… But I’m not buying yet! You are probably familiar with such behavior – it all sounds good, but people are keeping their positions and not moving. So, I tried to analyze and talk with a few of our customers.

Here is my list of “why I’m not buying yet”?

1. Complexity. This is key. I mentioned it yesterday in a separate blog post called “Complexity Kills…”. It’s too complex to be true. I’m afraid that when I start following all the processes, recommendations, models, and user interfaces…. I see too much. So, in this situation, my reaction is – you guys are too smart and too complex for me.

2. Need to change the way I work. PLM comes with a state of mind “We know how to change it — believe me!” My user’s position here is that I want be able first to see how PLM handles my environment. So, from this standpoint, I want the company to be able to implement PLM, see how it works in not optimized way and then optimize everything.

3. Additional hassle to handle. Unfortunately, this is another system on the table. I need to learn it, handle it separately, ultimately work on this system separately. So, I don’t like this idea :) …

4. Want LEGO approach. This is want I want. I want my PLM LEGOLAND. I want to add blocks as easily as possible – to play with them, allow to users to play with them, and only after we’ll see how it flies in the organization – by moving it to the user’s daily work. And… one more thing: Users need to be part of this process. They need to provide inputs interactively– not only to see it.

So, what is my bottom line? I want to go with the Toyota approach – “test before design”.  So, afterwards, we will make the system simple — the main approach will be to see how the system can work in the organization AS IS, use it, and improve it with small steps. All this will help people want to buy PLM to improve their daily work within their organizations.

What do you think?


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 287 other followers