PLM And New Types Of User Experience

May 5, 2010

User experience is important. It comes with all cool gadgets, Web 2.0 websites and iPhone apps. I think, people started to understand it even in enterprise organizations. I can hear lots of people voices asking when enterprise tools will become cooler than today. The obvious answer of PLM and other related vendors for many years was 3D. Everything looks better in 3D – visualization, animation, etc. I want to focus on few examples of trends that can potentially introduce new types of user experience.

Augmented Reality
The latest trend in 3D space is augmenting reality. It helps us to mix virtual and real 3D spaces into a single one. The nice thing about it is that it helps you to realize the potential of your product before it even comes to prototyping and manufacturing. I had chance to see many examples of augmented reality. One of the best ones is iQ Toyota. The impressive piece of this video is how you can create a virtual disassemble of the car.

3D Working Environment
This example is actually coming from the BumpTop acquisition Google made this week. BumpTop is a nice idea simulating real 3D environment on your desktop. And it is specially interesting, since the existing desktops remain unchanged the last 10-15 years, and it sounds like a potential change in this place. I can imaging it coming to the product design environment too.

Voice Collaborative Communication
In my view, this is the most unusual one. I’ve been watching Siri - assistant application since it was introduced last year on iPhone. This is a nice example of collaborative application that interact with user in a very unusual and intuitive manner. I posted about this apps few mounts ago in my article – What Are You Questions PLM Virtual Assistant? So, this company was acquired by Apple earlier this week, which means for me Apple is investing in more intuitive ways of collaboration and communication. I think, this is also something that can fit very well today’s product development environment.

So, what is my conclusion? I can definitely see something new is coming in user experience and communication. The trends in  communication and collaboration made by non-PLM software manufacturers can outrun design and engineering software vendors. PLM vendors are dealing with a huge amount of legacy code and legacy implementations. However, this is a time to think about what can bring next potential leap in collaborative manufacturing, engineering and design software.

Just my thoughts…
Best, Oleg

Share

4 Comments | 3D, Apple, Daily PLM Think Tank, Future Trends, Google | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

5 Things To Know Before PLM-ERP Integration Project

May 4, 2010

Yesterday, I had chance to read the new paper by Jim Brown: Issue in Focus: The Integrated ERP-PLM Strategy. There are lots of things I agree with Jim. They are mostly in the area of strategic need for PLM-ERP as well as growing level of awareness about such need on the side of companies. However, the issue of integration cost is somewhat, I think, is a very critical. Unfortunately, because of complexity, manufacturers are facing the issue of PLM-ERP cost very late in the implementation process.

In my view PLM-ERP integration never comes as out-of-the-box product. The diversity of product development and manufacturing practices, product versions and many other factors are making PLM-ERP integration very complex and expensive project. I want to breakdown possible decision points related to PLM-ERP integration.

What data do you want to integrate?
It sounds obvious, but before you want to integrate systems, you need to understand what data you are going to integrate. It seems to me as an important topic is to break down data in both systems into very granular pieces and see how this data will be combined, transferred and integrated. Don’t move forward until you don’t understand what data assets do you have.

Where is data located and how it controlled?
The enterprise data management is a complex task. PLM and ERP systems are two the most complicated in the modern manufacturing. Data can be distributed in different locations, organization can use multiple ERP and, sometime, PLM systems. The ownership of enterprise systems and, in the end, control over the data assets can be very complicated. You need to see a full picture of data control by different people in the organization.

What processes influenced by integration?
There are lots of advantages in implementing PLM-ERP integration. However, such integration will introduce a change in the organization development and manufacturing process. As every change, it may bring some problems or simple additional cost in adjustment of work in the organization. You have to understand the influence from the different standpoint – people, software and processes. The cost of adjustment needs to be include into overall estimation related to your PLM-ERP integration project.

What API and development skills do you need?
It sounds like a completely technical. Nevertheless, it is very important. Your organizational systems can provide a different set of techniques and tools to develop integration. In most of the cases, enterprise systems are heavily customized. You need to understand and validate what tools and API you can use and how you PLM-ERP integration will be adjusted to all existing custom developments you have in place.

How to maintain your integration?
This one is last, but extremely important. Your PLM-ERP integration is not a single shot project you are doing once. Your organization becomes heavily dependent on this integration. PLM-ERP integrations are very often belonging to the class of “mission critical systems” in the organization. Therefore, you need to validate how you will be able to maintain this integration from all possible standpoints – people, technologies, system upgrades. The last one is also important. You obviously will manage upgrades of your ERP and PLM systems. You need to take into account that since you have PLM-ERP integration in place, this upgrade process will always be dependable on how you maintain your integration.

What is my conclusion today? PLM-ERP integration is a very expensive project. It can bring lots of benefits, but also drain a significant amount of resources. You need to understand how to make a right estimation of work and validate this project before it starts. I’m interested to discuss your experience and listen to your feedback.

Best, Oleg

Share

15 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM+ERP | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM Model: Granularity, Bottom-Up and Change

May 3, 2010

Few weeks ago, I had chance to post about PLM Data Model. I think, PLM space has a real lack of discussions about data modeling. It seems to me, PLM vendors and developers are too focused on process management, user experience and other catchy trends. At the same time, everybody forgot that data model is bread and butter of every PDM/PLM implementation. I want to open some debates about what I see missing in current PLM data models.

Granularity
I’m very happy, this word started to catch up attention of people. It came in multiple discussions I had last time with some of the colleagues in the CAD/PDM/PLM software domain. Chis mentioned in it his Vuuch (www.blog.vuuch.com) blog. Al Dean also had chance to talk about it on his Develop3D (www.develop3d.com). One of the problems in PLM is a diversity of implementation and needs. PLM tools implemented lots of functional goodies over the past decade. However, the customization becomes a mess. It looks to me, current data model organization is outdated in most of PLM systems these days.  The last revolution PDM/PLM made was about 15 years ago when the notion of “a flexible data model” was introduced. Today, the next step should be done.

Bottom-up
How to build an efficient data model for PLM implementation? How to build a model that answers to the specific customer needs. Current vendor’s proposal is to make a selection from the list of all possible “modules”. It comes in a form of “best practices”. In my view, it is really “bad” practices. Selecting of big data model chunks put too many model constraints and create compatibility problems. The idea of bottom-up data modeling relies on the capability to define very granular pieces of data and grow bottom up in building a model that reflects customer needs.

Cost of Change
What is the most killing factor in today’s PDM/PLM software. In my view, it is cost of change. PLM models become not flexible and keep lots of dependencies on PLM system implementations. The future, in my view, is building very granular functional services alongside with the bottom up data model schema. It will allow to decrease cost of change, reduce dependencies between components and in the end, reduce a cost of change.

What is my conclusion? I think, technology matters. Without thinking about technologies, PLM won’t be able to make a next leapfrog. It becomes urgent. PLM model is a natural starting point to improve PLM implementation.

Just my thoughts…
Best, Oleg

Share

10 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, Technology | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 63 other followers