PLM and Process Tools: Opportunity or Complication?

January 18, 2012

I’d like to talk about BPM again. I was writing about BPM in the past. Navigate to this link to take a look on few pasts topics related to Business Process Management. Almost four years ago, I asked a question – Should PLM develop its own process tools? I think, the question is still not answered. Here is a quote from my historical article about what is the place PLM can take in the BPM game:

So where does PLM play into this game? I see two possible options: (1) PLM providers will focus on the development of process management tools; (2) PLM providers will allow the integration of PLM information and IP (Intellectual Property) into existing process tools provided by platforms. I believe that option (1) will be very helpful in integrating PLM systems into the enterprise software already available within the vast zoo of software within the organization, option (2) can simplify deployment and and keep the implementation of PLM simple.

I was reading Beth Stackpole Design News article PLM startup targets efficiency. It is a short article. Have a read and make your opinion. Don’t miss also comments to the article too. Based on what Kenesto is saying, manufacturing companies are still looking for good process management solutions. I found the following passage interesting:

…PLM’s tight ties to CAD still limit its use beyond engineering — a fact Kenesto is hoping to avoid with its process-automation-for-anyone approach…. traditional PLM is basically a process automation tool that is too complex to use effectively, prompting many users to circumvent it, using spreadsheets or email to share critical product data….Kenesto isn’t a replacement for PLM systems, but rather a different approach for solving the process automation piece of facilitating engineering workflows. Kenesto, which is cloud-based software, employs conventions that most users understand, like sending and receiving attachments, so it feels in many ways like a familiar email system…

The idea seems to me simple and interesting. Kenesto will be on the cloud, disconnected from CAD, providing graphical DIY tools to engineers to route documents and messages.

BPM and PLM: Integration Complexity

One of the biggest problems of BPM in the past was a problem of integration. Tools like SharePoint, WebSphere, and many others provided quite powerful solution to support processes in your organization. However, when companies tried to implement it, organization faced significant complexity to integrate existing “content oriented” systems (i.e. ERP, CRM, PLM) with process management tools (BPM). Most of BPM tools ended up acquired by large platform tools, and you can find them as part of larger platforms.

What is my conclusion? It seems to me “cloud” is a game changer in Kenesto play. By introducing solution in the cloud, Kenesto will try to simplify the process of integration with existing CAD, PLM and other enterprise tools. DIY approach can simplify IT life in organizing engineering processes. At the same time, it can introduce a challenge for IT trying to rule application and business processes and not interested to give it up to end users. The simplicity claimed by Kenesto can be another game changer. Kenesto is searching for beta customers. You can read more here. You can watch Kenesto in action to prove it right. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Disclosure: I’m serving as an external advisor to Kenesto

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

Should PLM Disconnect Data from Process?

August 27, 2010

I had a chance to read an article byebizQ related to Cordys BPM. For those who is not aware - Cordys is a relatively new outfit in the enterprise software market. The wizard name behind this company is Jan Baan. If you are a long-time citizen in the enterprise software domain, you need his first ERP company - BAAN. These days Jan Baan is very active and Cordys is one of his new babies. In his interview, Jan is discussing his long project related to decoupling of processes. The following quote seems to me interesting:

… ending the data-process dependency is easier said than done. Suppliers attempted it using extremely fat clients at one extreme and sophisticated distributed data with replication at the other.

Process Decoupling

For a very long period of time the concept of “a process needs data” were dominant. Multiple BPM vendors claimed that the only way to make BPM successful is to bring meta-data (and other data) into BPM product suites. I can agree, this strategy seems to be successful if you plan is to create integrated enterprise software suites. However, thinking more about Internet technologies and lean architectures it makes much more sense to make a disconnection of data and process.

PLM: Process vs. Data

In my view, PLM Software vendors are definitely moving towards better vertical integration. Users are asking PLM companies for a better integration between products, and PLM (and not only PLM) companies are starting to couple products and solutions together to ensure customers will spend fewer resources tailoring these solutions.

What is my conclusion? I think, enterprise software vendors can miss the dangerous point of data and process connection and interplay. When most of the enterprise companies use data to lock-in customers in their product suites, the addition of processes seems to them as a natural continuation of this strategy. The real danger of these strategies is a large complicated software products and extremely high cost of changes. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

5 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM and End-To-End Business Process Myth

March 31, 2010

I was reading Arcweb SAP Insider 2010 related to the manufacturing, sustainability and product lifecycle management domains. The tag line “End-to-End Business Process Management” came to my attention, so I decided to go inside and try to understand what SAP is up to in their new PLM deliveries.

The overall document is heavy loaded with general statements about SAP and their investment into PLM program, important customer needs and problems that can be solved by SAP PLM. In the area of new product development, I found three pieces of new release achievements: 1- SAP new user interface; 2- New Project and Portfolio Management; 3- Integrated Development Environment. The last one was related to the information about end-to-end business processes I was looking for.

SAP PLM’s offerings for the Integrated Development environment.  Following the theme of end-to-end business processes, SAP PLM has focused on the need for a comprehensive product development and innovation approach.  This would involve multiple components of their PLM solution portfolio including robust CAD integration, project and portfolio management, single repository for product and process data, and a collaborative development platform that manages role-based IP protection. One of the more interesting offerings in this area is an Integrated Product Development platform for discrete industries and a companion IPD for the process industries.  IPD for the process industries included specific solutions for area like recipe management, material and task sourcing, compliance, and document management.  This follows the trend among PLM providers today to focus on specific industries with tailored solutions sets.

I think, I succeeded to get an idea of End-to-End business processes SAP is talking about. If I will translate to simple words it will contain a single repository for product and process data as well as set of tools and application to work on this data such as Project and Portfolio Management and some others. I still have few important, but not answered questions with regards to End-To-End business processes:

1. How to capture existing business processes?
2. What is the process of “solution tailoring”?
3. How IPD will be integrated with non-SAP modules and tools?

End-to-end business process management is a nice marketing slogan. In the end, there is nothing more than pieces of product and process data that need to stick together. SAP Wizards assumes that they know how to put them together to get an organizational job done by providing a specific tailored solution. Maybe they are right. However, the process to do so will contain lots of small steps related to existing business processes analyzes, integration and customization. I turned me back to one of my previous posts: PLM Best Practices Torpedo. End-To-End Business Processes are set of best practices on top of the single product and process data repository.

What is my conclusion after all? End-to-End processes sound very profound and attractive. However, it seems to me SAP was focused last three years on how to gather all definitions and implementation practices to introduce the comprehensive product portfolio making best practices for customers. The implementation of such can be bumpy and requires lots of energy, skills and the most important – time. The last becomes the most critical for manufacturers today. I’d like to quote another pace from the same write-up: “… that the number one goal for manufacturing companies was to reduce “time-to-profit” for new or changed products...”. With long PLM End-To-End business processes implementation cycles this goal will not be achievable and can easily become Dead-End.

Just my thoughts…
Best, Oleg

Share

2 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, Productivity | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM and Multi-domain business processes.

September 3, 2009

Picture 7I’d like to continue the topic I started yesterday in my post “PLM vs. ERP: Demand for Business Process”. Even from the small amount of comments I’ve got from yesterday, my impression is that there is no agreed position about how PLM and ERP related to business processes and what are their roles in the establishment of organization business processes. I think, there is a significant consensus with regards to ERP and Business Processes. At the same time, I think a role of PLM in a business process is not as agreed.

My topic today is about “Multi-domain” processes. I don’t think this term is widely used and agree, but I think, it reflects quite well a company situation. As a background, from my view, there are several organizational and business trends.

1. Business becomes more connected. In the today business situation, number of connections, communication and dependencies inside of organization are growing exponentially. Business becomes much leaner, agile and this is required to work more efficiently and, therefore, need of connections becomes obvious.

2. Organization activity needs to be optimized independent on boundaries of business systems. Companies accumulated huge amount of separate systems and operate them for the particular needs in the specific situations, scenarios and needs. These applications and systems were built in different time and almost always are not connected.

3. Process-oriented systems can provide a solution by connect people from various domains. Growing trend in understanding how business process systems and technologies can help to streamline business and support overall corporate operation is growing. We had chance to see signs of growing BPM even during a current turbulent time.

So, I think to establish cross domain business processes can be very beneficial for an organization. However, I see multiple problems that prevent business from do so.

1. Application boundaries. Most of the enterprise applications we have today were developed with a specific business domain in mind. Historically, application focused and improved their functionality and experience in the specific domain. Issues related to communication of application with external systems were considered as complex and in most cases companies were investing in consulting and professional services to establish cross-boundary work and integration.

2. Business silos. This is an organizational problem. Business units, departments in many cases are separate and operate independently or in very loose control mode. To establish horizontal business relationships in an organization is another challenge.

3.  Multiple systems. This is one of the most serious problems, in my view. Historically, company implemented lots of systems they are using for business needs. To connect this system zoo in something that can work together is very difficult. There are some positive movements related to SOA technologies we can see during last few years, but situation remained very complex.

So, what is a special role of PLM? I see in cross-domain business processes. Product Lifecycle Management, by nature is a discipline that creates a large amount of connection between different aspects of product development in an organization. Today, to establish and maintain these connections and interops is one of the most complicated business and technological problem in PLM. If PLM will be able to invest and/or cooperate with process management technologies and products, it will create a process-level foundation for enterprise system connections around product development. From the technological standpoint, I think, PLM needs to invest in processes technologies and openness to make cross-domain processes happen.

How do you see business process support related to product development organized in your company? Do you think, such PLM approach can improve your current situation with process development and will make your organization leaner?

Best, Oleg.

17 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, PLM and organization | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM Prompt: PLM and the rise of Business Process Management

August 29, 2009

bpm-rise-and-plmI was reading Gartner research showing that BPM (Business Process Management) is rising despite the turbulent time and bad financial situation.

“Gartner Survey Shows More Than Half ofRespondents Plan to Increase Spending on BPM by More Than 5 Percent inNext 12 Months. Most business process management (BPM) practitioners expect their organizations to increase their spending on BPM by at least 5 percent over the next 12 months, according to recent surveys by Gartner, Inc. Despite economic turbulence, more than half of those surveyed plan to increase their spending on BPM efforts by more than 5 percent, and over a third of respondents plan to increase BPM spending by more than 10 percent”.

I found it as a significant danger for Product Lifecycle Management. PLM is trying to grow outside of engineering domains and focus on global enterprise process and collaboration. This is exact place where PLM can meet BPM vendors… So 10% BPM growth can be projected on potential $$$ loses of enterprise PLM vendors.

Just my thoughts, Good weekend! Oleg.

8 Comments | Business Process Management, PLM Prompt, Technology | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

How PLM can use power of BPM rising stars?

August 20, 2009

The following article “The State of BPM: Poised to Take Off” drove my attention few days ago and took me to think about BPM and PLM intersection. Recession can spur business growth. In the Business Process Management (BPM) space, current recession presented major marketing opportunity to come to customers and IT that looking to cut cost. BPM can be easy double their numbers in the next coming years. BPM community shows signs of growth and development. Examples: pure BPM player Global 360, significantly upgrade their offering in July-2009, IBM significantly upgraded their WebSphere product line. In addition, Software AG, major German BPM player announced acquisition of BPM IT consulting firm IDS Scheer for almost $700M. Some BPM background. There are three main groups of Business Process Management vendors: 1/Integration centric; 2/Human Centric; 3/Document Centric. The BPM market, initially dominated by few pure BPM players, have changed. At the same time, pure BPM business is much smaller in comparison to an overall PLM market. However, if we will compare Process Oriented PLM offering (excluding parts of PLM such as CAD, CAE etc.) we can see very compatible numbers.

Do you think BPM may have positive impact on Product Lifecycle Management business? Yes, I can see this opportunity. Here my top 3 “why” PLM can use power of BPM providers to improve PLM position in organization in current turbulent time.

1. Re-use well-developed BPM technologies

BPM vendors today grew up to demonstrate tools and technological infrastructure on a very matured level that everybody can use. BPM platforms became part of general IT infrastructure, especially by big IT vendors (IBM and Oracle) entered this market.

2. Optimization of IT infrastructure

How many process technologies do you need in your organization? If today’s economies, people cannot keep two systems to manage business processes, therefore PLM and BPM have an opportunity to present IT cost saving by unification of process infrastructure.

3. Jump to the cloud based space.

There is a good chance for BPM to become part of private cloud infrastructure for organizations. Tight re-use of BPM technologies in BPM can help to PLM companies to make their cloud shift.

So, what is my conclusion? The BPM boom, in my view, is only matter of time. Everyone wants to streamline and optimize processes. So, BPM is not luxury anymore. PLM could be potential interested in re-use of BPM technologies to increase adoption and span product oriented processes across organization. I see very sensitive situation in today’s PLM process oriented offerings by trying to re-develop or ignore BPM suites and technologies. The potential shift can come from customer’s side by trying to implement and integrate BPM and PLM products together.

Just my thoughts.
Best, Oleg

2 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, Technology | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

How to increase “Business Process Technology” Adoption Rate for PLM

July 8, 2009

business processOne of the things I see very important is user adoption. We can develop brilliant technologies, but if nobody  uses it, the value of these technologies will be very low. I see Process Technologies as  very important for the Product Lifecycle development… One of the problems I see today is that there is inconsistence between the definition of the Process  and its usage.

I think definition side of “process technologies” works very well. We can define who is doing what and when, how information is flowing and many other details. But as soon as we start this process, many things change. People move, new tasks and changes appear,  and at  the end it’s not easy  to understand  what is going on, how to execute, monitor and manage the changes in this process. Therefore, at  the end, many of processes slap and become  very formal or less usable. So, what can we do in order to prevent it?

I’d propose  three steps that can improve Business Process Technology adoption:

  1. Flattering Processes Definition. A process needs to become more modular, simple and changeable.
  2. Simplification of the User Interface. We need to remove complexity. Simple… Actually,  users need a list of tasks to perform on daily basis and a list of follow up tasks. We need to massively use mobile and other alternative communications and collaboration tools to allow users to follow up the processes.
  3. Flexibility and Change. Changes will come very fast. Life and organizational processes are really dynamic. Process implementation  must allow managing those  changes. It  should be easy-to-make step. We need to be able to re-assign people, change/cancel tasks and to change the process itself. 

So, what do you think?

12 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, User Experience | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM vs. BPM or What do you think about IBM PDIF?

July 2, 2009

ibm-pdifIn one of my previous posts, I raised the question if PLM needs to develop its own process tools. Looking at the few announcements made by IBM and Siemens PLM, I asked myself the following question again:  Where is PLM going regarding the implementation of Business Process Management (BPM) and SOA related frameworks? For the moment, I have more questions than answer, but my basic assumptions follow:

  1. From the PLM standpoint, business processes (or collaborative business processes) are a significant portion of what enterprise PLM does.
  2. There are about 100 companies in the world that are doing something more or less associated with Business Process Management (analysts normally talk about 10-20 top players).
  3. Pure BPM players are rarely involved into PLM implementations; PLM companies normally provide workflow and process functionality by themselves.

Comparing PLM and BPM process capabilities, I have concluded that:

  1. PLM provides a very good product-oriented workflow, but is relatively weak in enterprise functions and administration, and other middleware components.
  2. The BPM offering is always more agile and more generic compared to PLM business processes.
  3. BPM normally provides connectivity adapters… and for PLM products too.

The very interesting piece of IBM PDIF framework is related to IBM Web Sphere Process Server and additional process-oriented middleware components. I wonder what combination of PLM software from Siemens PLM will support the process components of PDIF and how they will work together. Similar frameworks are available with other big enterprise stakeholders such as Microsoft, SAP, and Oracle. How can their respectful products provide similar functionality?

Speaking broadly about PLM and BPM, I found the following questions interesting.

  1. Will PLM follow the traditional path and continue to develop BPM components to make their PLM Process technologies stronger?
  2. Will PLM vendors be interested in the acquisition of one of the available BPM pure players to get more “process stuff” on board?
  3. Will PLM adjust more to the BPM capabilities of large enterprise and platform vendors?

I look forward to your comments and opinions.

6 Comments | Business Process Management, Daily PLM Think Tank, Technology | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

Who wants to manage Product Data?

June 23, 2009

One of the ambitious goals PLM puts in front of strategists, implementors and developers is to manage a product lifecycle from early on (requirements, initial product designs) and until the end of product lifecycle towards manufacturing, supply chain and disposal processes. At first glance, it sounds like a great idea, as it looks like PLM is on a fundamentally unique track of providing this solution to a customer…. but, here is the problem. I think that PLM is not really unique when it comes to the company’s landscape, and there are many different systems in organization claim to manage product data.

So, I decided to cluster a few tools from different areas to outline who are these “PLM” competitors to data in an organization. So far, I found five fundamental product domains.

  1. Content Management. This is company document storage. Most of the companies in this area are working primarily on documents, the ability to put them on the shelf, manage their access and lifecycles.  Since most of product lifecycle information in the end becomes a “document”  I’d put this companies on ‘Red Alert J…
  2. ERP /MRP. This is a traditional neighbor and competitor. PLM and ERP/MRP have been “competing” against each other for many years. I discussed this issue many times on blog. I don’t predict a “system expansion”. Many ERP vendors have a solution with a specific PLM flavor. We can see them and what they offer on the market.  These systems can evolve and claim to manage even more product data in the future.
  3. Business Process Management. This is a newly emerged trend. In my view, the BPM market is relatively small in manufacturing, and therefore BPM tools will feel they need to work out their potential in  PLM cases as well.
  4. MDM – Master Data Management has a relatively good adoption rate by big enterprise customers. In my view, as MDM cannot scale down, I’d provide limited importance to being able to compete with PLM. Indeed, we need to pay specific attention when we plan for enterprise PLM.
  5. Collaboration Tools and Applications. Hot topic. People are looking how to collaborate better. Various collaboration tools are looking at how to improve data management solutions too. With the introduction of Google Wave and the expanded future offering of MS SharePoint 2010, collaboration tools definitely can expand their offering to a more specific PLM space. There is a potential danger from the low end.

So, how will PLM be able to compete with these systems successfully?  This is a big question – which is why I’m asking for your advice and feedback here, as well as find out what else you have in mind.

11 Comments | Daily PLM Think Tank, Future Trends, PLM and organization | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

PLM Prompt: BPM & PLM Cloud Meeting?

June 3, 2009

Short note: I see many BPM vendors are running to provide Business Process Management solution on cloud / SaaS. 

What does it mean for PLM? Business process management is an important component of overal product lifecycle management. Can cloud BPM change the way companies will implement Product Lifecycle Management?

Cordys-Cloud

 

Intalio-cloud

 

Appian-Cloud

 

Pega-Cloud

 

BlueWorks-cloud

 

Leave a Comment » | Business Process Management, Cloud Application, PLM Prompt | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by olegshilovitsky

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 73 other followers