PLM 2.0: Born to Die?

PLM 2.0 is a new term that was born about 5 years ago. The term was introduced by Dassault Sysetemes as part of their V6 platform. At the same time, Dassault didn’t put “an equal” sign between V6 and PLM 2.0. The consideration about PLM 2.0 was mostly related as a vision and the next fundamental step in the development of PLM solutions. According to the Dassault’s definition of PLM 2.0, you can find that it combined of 5 elements – 3D, Online, IP, Web 2.0 and Communities.

Do you think PLM 2.0 is taking off? Watch the following video from one of the Dassault conferences 2-3 years ago. I hope you will find it funny. As you can see the familiarity of ordinary people with PLM and specially PLM 2.0 is below average :).

Web 2.0 roots of PLM 2.0

Thinking about PLM 2.0, you cannot miss the analogy with Web 2.0. The fundamental elements of Web 2.0 are related to the ideas of information sharing and collaborative activities of people on the web. Here is the definition of Web 2.0 according to the Wikipedia article.

The term Web 2.0 is associated with web applications that facilitate participatory information sharing,interoperability, user-centered design,[1] and collaboration on the World Wide Web. A Web 2.0 site allows users to interact and collaborate with each other in a social media dialogue as creators (prosumers) of user-generated content in a virtual community, in contrast to websites where users (consumers) are limited to the passive viewing of content that was created for them. Examples of Web 2.0 include social networking sites, blogs, wikis, video sharing sites, hosted services, web applications, mashups and folksonomies.

Take a look on the following interesting comparison between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 I found online:

Enterprise 2.0 roots of PLM 2.0

Another association with PLM 2.0 is coming from somewhat called Enterprise 2.0 (E2.0). Enterprise 2.0 term was invented by Andrew McCaffee back in 2006. Here is another definition from Wikipedia:

Enterprise 2.0 is the use of “Web 2.0” technologies within an organization to enable or streamline business processes while enhancing collaboration – connecting people through the use of social-media tools. Enterprise 2.0 aims to help employees, customers and suppliers collaborate, share, and organize information. Andrew McAfeedescribes Enterprise 2.0 as “the use of emergent social software platforms within companies, or between companies and their partners or customers”.

Another comparison – now between Enterprise 1.0 and Enterprise 2.0 (picture credit of Enterprise 2.0 conference)

I was reading Jos Voskuil blog yesterday. Jos started a long series of post about PLM 2.0. Navigate to the following link to read the first one: Why PLM 2.0? Jos brings another comparison between PLM 1.0 and PLM 2.0. The analogy between previous definitions and comparisons are clear.

This picture made me think about V6 and PLM 2.0 realization. Actually, I didn’t find many components of PLM 2.0 in previous definitions made by Dassault. V6 is a big leapfrog for DS and delivers a completely different PLM experience. Even so, the question about PLM 2.0 remains open.

What is my conclusion? I think the key word in a failure of PLM 2.0 is openness and availability. On a contrary, think for a moment about Web 2.0 – Blogs, Wikipedia, Flikr, eBay, Twitter… These and many other applications and technologies turned Web 1.0 into what we know as Web 2.0. It allowed many people bring web to a completely new level. I can influence the content published on the web, and many people simultaneously can have an access to this content. What I’d expect from PLM 2.0? I’d say, first, the ability to all people in the organization to have an easy access to product lifecycle data and processes. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen, until now. So, we have a new version of PLM. It applies to DS V6 and to other PLM vendors as well. However, I cannot call it PLM 2.0. Just my thought…

Best, Oleg

[tag PLM 2.0, Enterprise 2.0, Web 2.0, Dassault V6]

4 Responses to PLM 2.0: Born to Die?

  1. Cbris says:

    You are right PLM 2.0 is not at all al la web 2.0. Bit like marketing disconnected from the product. Web 2.0 is all about open, access, unstructured content. I do not see any of these as part of any PLM application.

    That doesn’t mean PLM isn’t valuable – it is only to say PLM does not address the unstructured part of product development.

  2. Chris, Not sure what do you mean by “unstructured part of product development”. In my view, web 2.0 provide a sufficient level of openness to allow people to contribute content and became involved into Web building (blogs, wikis, photo sites, etc.). If I will make a parallel with PLM, tools vendors provided weren’t focused on how to take PLM downstream and upstream. Despite DS V6 supposed to become “PLM online for all”, tools like 3Dlive didn’t proliferate, and implementation of additional business tools was still very complicated. In addition, walled garden between DS and other vendors took a new spiral because of V6 bundle of CATIA-ENOVIA. Just my thoughts. Oleg

  3. Fabien Fedida says:

    Dear Oleg,

    It is always a pleasure to read you. I wanted to prolong a previous comment which was supporting the PLM 2.0 idea but it looks like it was removed.

    While you used a catchy title (maybe too catchy: some people would find it convenient to drop the interrogation mark at the end of ‘PLM 2.0: born to die?’), I do agree with several of your points including the requirement for openness on which Dassault Systemes places a lot of emphasis (see our latest release announcements).

    At a higher level, our customers have been asking us for PLM Online for All and we do see the industry going to this i.e. PLM 2.0
    [NOTE: We DEFINITIVELY INVITE competitors/ experts/ users/ companies to JOIN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT PLM 2.0 SHOULD BE] :

    – Our customers see the ‘For All’ dimension as critical and you pointed to this same idea of “all people in the organization need to have an easy access to product lifecycle data and processes” (I take it you meant extended organization). But your article is omitting the end-consumer involvement: ‘For All’ also and especially means that the end consumer is at the center of the innovation process (2.0 crowd sourcing, lifelike experience of future products in 3D, …).
    – I think we all agree the ‘Online’ dimension is very important and DS has made bold moves on that dimension from the start with V6 and recently in June with our on-the-cloud offerings launch.

    At a more detailed level, and while commending the thoroughness of your post, I’d like to add 2 more remarks :
    – First to clarify for your readers that the VPM (Virtual Product Model) technology leveraged by CATIA (and which happens to belong to the ENOVIA brand) is not a “PDM technology” and so it is not a “walled garden” play to use your words: it does not prevent openness. It is a unique technology for designers and engineers to provide state of the art relational design and concurrent engineering.
    – Second, you mentioned that “This picture (from Joos) made you think about V6 and PLM 2.0 realization. Actually, you didn’t find many components of PLM 2.0 in previous definitions made by Dassault”. There may be a logical flaw here. It’s not because we don’t say Joos terms as-is that it can be concluded that we don’t support those concepts or don’t think these concepts are important and part of our thinking in architecting our software. We simply decided to insist on Online and For All because we felt these 2 terms were at a higher level.

    So again, I appreciated your very insightful article. My vote is that, PLM 2.0 is definitively alive: it is a living (and therefore evolving and vibrant) concept

  4. Fabien, Thanks for your comments and insight! (You can see more comments on the same topic here –> I hope you excuse for “catching title”… However, you know, BLOG stands for “Better Listening On Google”. Talking more about your comments – you’ve made a good point of consumers. I know ‘consumer orientation’ is something DS lately started too focus very closely and I like this step. At the same time, I have to say that even if “for all” and “online” is a first priority, I’m not sure how V6 supports downstream product collaboration (manufacturing, supply chain) differently from what we did last 10-15 years. If you can put me on some examples, I’d love to discuss them. Thanks again for the discussion! Best, Oleg

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 290 other followers

%d bloggers like this: