PLM Data Warehouse: Dream Or Nightmare?

July 12, 2010

My new website and blog is BeyondPLM. The original post is here.

PLM is certainly dealing with lots of data about products: design, engineering, lifecycle data, manufacturing, processes. When/If you speak to PLM software providers and some big customers you can hear term “Data Warehouse”. DW term is not coming originally from PLM domain and related more to the general purpose databases and data management field.

This is a very commonly used definition of Data Warehouse from Wikipedia:

A data warehouse is a repository of an organization’s electronically stored data, designed to facilitate reporting and analysis [1]. This definition of the data warehouse focuses on data storage. However, the means to retrieve and analyze data, to extract, transform and load data, and to manage thedata dictionary are also considered essential components of a data warehousing system. Many references to data warehousing use this broader context. Thus, an expanded definition for data warehousing includes business intelligence tools, tools to extract, transform and load data into the repository, and tools to manage and retrieve metadata.

Data Warehouse Technologies

The technologies for data warehouse most commonly are coming from database and data vendors related domains. There are multiple methodologies and techniques to organize data and make available. The most known in this field are bottom up and top down design for data warehouse. Most of the data warehouse methodologies are focusing on fast data retrieval opposite to transactional databases. With all bright insight made around the data warehouse, their implementations are very expensive and, in my view,  data warehousing technologies are under significant pressure to drop cost and improve the agility of implementations. You can often find multiple data-related implementations that may correspond to data warehousing , such as Business Intelligence, Data Integrations, etc. The newest trends in Business Intelligence are stating that Data Warehousing is ruined and the future BI technologies will bring better solutions in this space. Recently, I had a chance to read a very interesting write up made by TEC – Are Data Warehouses as Dead as the Dodo?, which is exploring a promising future of new BI technologies to replace data warehousing need.

PLM and Data Warehouse

I think, PLM is often using “Data Warehouse” term to underline the power of PLM technologies to manage big amounts of product data. In my view, PLM platforms never took serious steps in the implementation of actual data warehousing. Nevertheless, large PLM implementations done for big aero- and auto- OEMs contain a significant amount of product data that need to be available across the multiple departments and synchronized with multiple applications. You can find an interesting story about Boeing and Airbus PLM data warehousing implementation can be found on TechniGraphics web site. At the time of writing this blog, I could download this paper from the following link. Some interesting numbers from this document- the Boeing Dreamliner data warehouse contains about 16TB of data. PLM needs to deal with large amounts of data. To handle it efficiently seems to be a very interesting problem.

What is my conclusion today? Large PLM implementations need to handle a significant amount of data. Today, DMU implementations are requiring to bring multiple elements of design data to handle analysis and validation of complex products. There are many other product-data related problems that often remained unsolved because of technological complexity. What is the technology available to solve this problem? Is it future HD PLM from Siemens? Or maybe Project Lightning from PTC? Time will show…

Best, Oleg


How To Disrupt PLM Price with Technologies?

June 21, 2010

My post “How To Manage ECO Without Paying $1’500 Per Seat” raised a very interesting discussion on Zero-Waite State blog about PLM price. Thanks Stephen Porter for doing that. I recommend you to get inside and have a read. This post made me think about the future of PLM price trajectories and an impact of technologies on the future of PLM price.

The Future Disruption

I hope you had chance to read the book by Chris Anderson – Free: The Future of a Radical Price. I’d call it the modern “Bible of Free”. One of the important points, in my view is the following – “information and technology cost is trending towards zero”. As part of this, my own believe is that we are going to experience an influence of this trend, including an influence of free-price-market in various fields. The potential weak elements in the chain of highly priced software products are those that have a serious customer dissatisfaction or a very high price/value characteristic. What happens with PLM? In my view, this is a definitely weak chain. The complexity, over-promising during a sale process and history of acquired products and companies created a place that needs to be disrupted. I can see potential PLM disruptors PLM disruptors – Open Source (Free Distribution) of Aras, few on-demand products and PTC SharePoint business. The last one is trying to ride SharePoint adoption and Microsoft strength in the enterprise market. Who will be more successful in the future PLM disruption? A very interesting question…

PLM Technology Weakness

Where I see a weakness in PLM technology we have today? The current technological approach was born 15-20 years ago. We are continuing to SQL our future. The development of most of PLM technological platforms are balancing to co-exist between existing customer commitments and future product development. Platform fundamentals are the same regardless on the type of user interface or modern marketing terms. This technology is vulnerable in front of new development that happened during past ten years in Web 2.0. To understand the scope of the last ten years and the potential influence is very important.

What is my conclusion? When Stephen is asking – The Price Is Right?, I’m thinking about sales lessons I learned in the past. The right price is one customer will be ready to pay. Since PLM sales these days are not similar to sales of iPhones and iPads, I think we have a problem. We won’t be able to solve it since the problem is not in the price, in my view. The problem is broader and related to all main components of PLM delivery to customer – price, technological complexity and high price customer need to pay by installing, customizing, modifying software and training people. To make PLM cheaper, to provide a more flexible PLM pricing model, or even give PLM away can definitely provide some pain-relief, but will not give a radical change to the industry.

Just my thoughts.
Best, Oleg

Share


PLM Content and Facebook Open Graph

April 28, 2010

Facebook F8 conference this week was a place for some very interesting announcements that, in my view, may have an impact on PLM too. I can recommend you to read a good summary of news introduced by Facebook here. In my view, it presents a very interesting dimension in the future development of Facebook. The question I’m asking – should PLM care? Is there something new presented by Facebook, that can catch a focus of current and future PLM development?

Web Content Creation

Facebook is making next steps in the development of content on the web. FB introducing a new way to build social sites where a site itself converted into meaningful content item able to accumulate links to other elements of web content. It presents another dimension in the way web content can be structured.

Social Graph

The notion of connection between social sites is presented in the Open Graph Protocol. Facebook OGP API will provide a way to browse through dependencies and connection between content elements based on social dimension. This is a very interesting approach in the development of rich metadata about web content.

PLM Content

I see a comparison between the way Facebook is building social web content and PLM content. For the last few years PLM presented a very hardwired way to create structured content. It creates a lot of complexity in user interaction and tools integration. The fundamentals of this content are in the ability to structure product information in various dimensions – design, bill of material, projects, etc. The similarity between Facebook social content and PLM structured content is obvious to me. However, Facebook presented an interesting approach to build it. There are several developments on PLM horizon that can fit such concepts – DS/BlueKiwi, PTC Windchill/SharePoint, Vuuch. It will be interesting to see the future development of these products.

What is my conclusion? Facebook is going to change a way to create the web content. Current PDM/PLM software seems very cumbersome from the standpoint on how to interplay with user on content creations. PLM can learn few lessons about how to create a content in the organization and across the value chain. Some concepts and ideas can be replicated in my view. What is your opinion?

Best, Oleg

Share


Can I Report to My PLM from Audi A8 via Google?

December 21, 2009

A very short prompt this early European morning. Google is coming to the next Audi A8. Take a look on the nice photos on Google’s blog.

This is what written in the blog:

To help you figure out where you want to go and how to get there, we’ve also brought Google Maps and Local Search into the A8, and linking it to your desk. You can send business listings directly from Google Maps to your car: search for an address at your desk, send it to the car, and by the time you go to the parking lot your car will know where to go. While in the car, you can use Google Local Search in the same rich quality as at your desk. Imagine you get hungry on the way or want to find a cinema – simply perform a live Google search on your car navigation system and immediately get up-to-date, rich and relevant results.

Now my question is quite simple. Google might collect information about users of A8. So, if you will be driving your next A8, in potential, all systems can report about their performance via the Google’s board navigation system. As you can see on the picture, systems are online… Ha! Don’t you think it will be just cool?

Holiday Greetings!
Best, Oleg


Future PLM Connection between Physical and Virtual Worlds – Google Power Meter

October 8, 2009

Do you remember, PLM Think Tank is about future crazy ideas? So, here you go - one that I liked very much. However, let me tell you few words before. During these days, a lot of innovative presentations were done on DS Customers Conference in Orlando. Demonstration connection of virtual and physical worlds was part of Bernard Charles presentation on DSCC. You can find an interesting summary about it from Jim Brown in his blog. I had chance to write about 3DVIA mobile early on plmtwine too- Connect PLM with World Content.

However, back original topic. The idea sparked in my mind when I was reading about Google PowerMeter. Take a deeper review here.The bottom line - Google’s services via special devices will be able to monitor power consumption in your house…. cool?I think so too.

However, this is not all. Now let’s dream. Since these special devices (you see announcement about the first device here), will be more and more connected to all electrical devices in your house (fridge, hairdryer, owen and… in the future, if you will be using an electrical car plugged in your house). This is an excellent place where initial device usage information will be gathered from consumers. Now imaging, if such information will be magically available to designers and manufacturers of all consumer goods, automobiles etc. You can open a lot of new opportunities how to design better products in the future.

Isn’t it a good innovation for future PLM products? I think we will see more and more connections between the PLM and consumer world in the future.

What
do you think about this?

Best, Oleg


Benefits of RIA for Product Lifecycle Management

September 23, 2009

riaI’d like to discuss RIA today. RIA – Rich Internet Applications are web applications that have most of the characteristics of desktop applications, typically delivered by way of standards based web browser plug-ins or independently via sandboxes or virtual machines. Examples of RIA frameworks include Curl, GWT , Adobe Flash/Adobe Flex/AIR, Java/JavaFX, uniPaaS, Mozilla’s XUL and Microsoft Silverlight.

Thinking about today’s modern technologies such as SOA, SaaS and development of PLM systems I see more and more advantages in complete encapsulation of user experience component from PLM business components. In such context, RIA can provide a good technological foundation to establish great user experience. And, in my view, user experience is one of the key factors for today’s PLM system user adoption.

So, what can be such benefits? I’d like to figure out top three and describe them in details.

1. Better data visualization.

A lot of information in PLM systems can be better understood in a graphical way (in comparison to normal boring web application). Spatial information, geo locations, 3D models, process visualization- this is the only short list of data that can be presented graphically to the user. RIA can be an excellent choice to improve UI in such cases.

2. Integration of data across multiple systems

The nature of PLM is to deal in multiple domains of data - requirements, design, engineering, support, customers. PLM systems today can provide a federated layer to manage information in other systems. However, it creates visualization challenges. Usage of RIA can simplify a way PLM will present information coming from different domains.

3. Mobile Access to Information

The nature of PLM is to deal in multiple domains of data - requirements, design, engineering, support, customers. PLM systems today can provide a federated layer to manage information in other systems. However, it creates visualization challenges. Usage of RIA can simplify a way PLM will present information coming from different domains.Today’s life is very dynamic and customer demand is to be able to access product-related information everywhere. Since RIA can seamlessly make data available on mobile devices, PLM can leverage it and expand PLM system usage and deployment in the organization for many additional tasks.

In addition, PLM deployment is heavily relying on services and customization. This is, in my view, additional reason why RIA is not in mainstream for PLM. RIA development is complicated and not always can be acceptable to service providers. PLM system can gain a significant advantage from the ability to support RIA and provide toolboxes for PLM system customization based on these tools.

Have you made any initial investment in RIA system learning? Do you plan to do it? Do you see any benefits?

Best, Oleg


6 reasons Why Google Wave will Change PLM Collaboration

June 12, 2009

 It’s impossible to speak about collaboration these days, in my opinion,  without touching Google Wave. I analyzed multiple presentations, demos, videos, analyzes and would like to present my take on the 6 top reasons as to why Wave will change today’s PLM collaboration world.

 1.    Real Time

Everything happens at the same time. You are typing, uploading, searching. You can be absolutely synchronized with your colleagues and other people involved into this collaboration process. Real-time is important because in today’s life, many forms of asynchronous collaboration and/or communication create more problems rather than benefits – and this need to change. If you look at products like 3DLive,  you will see the initial appearance of online collaboration. But with the invention of GW, you will get additional performance and adaptation boost.

 2.    Online Content

Staying connected online and in real-time, actually, opens additional doors for people who are interested in online content – IP, documents, Bill of Materials. Since Wave facilitates storage of documents on the cloud, this is will be an important overall shift toward such technologies.

 3.    Embedded

Everything you are doing in GW can be embedded into the content with which Wave operates. So, from this standpoint, future PLM implementations will be able more easily to include 3D models and drawings and documents in your Collaborative Waves. Even though I still want to see how this will happen, in my opinion, it will still give an additional push for the development of technologies which will be able to merge the collaboration of one set of data with other sources of PLM data.  

 4.    Playback History

This is the killer function, in my view. The ability to play back everything you do will be the ultimate goal for all people in PLM dealing with the comparison of history (i.e. what WAS done) vs. the future (what is being proposed by the current user).

 5.    Federation

Wave will be unique and be able to run and be synchronized on multiple instances of Wave Servers. The only association that comes to my mind in this context is past SMTP implementation. I think that GW will provide a new communication model with distributed services. So, I will be able to host my GW server, let people work with this server, and collaborate with other servers.

 6.    Automation and Extensions

This is the golden age of everything. The ability to extend GW will bring many additional people and implementations so that end-users will gain even greater benefits.

 Please, note, there is no order of importance. The current order is absolutely not scientific and reflects my memory of Google Wave stuff, and not the memory of Google itself (whom I cannot compete withJ).

 So, even if GW is still not available for a wider audience, I think we can already learn a bit about how collaboration will occur in the future.


Invisible Data Management for PLM

May 12, 2009

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).


Four directions for successful PLM collaboration

May 11, 2009

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.


My favorite PLM and PLM-related technologies for 2008

January 5, 2009

At the end of the year and at the beginning of the new year, there are a log of posts that are generated summarizing the past and predicting the future. Since I’ve already covered the future in my first post of 2009,  PLM Dream Technologies for 2009”, now I’d like to talk about the past.

 The following is my top 5 list for the “PLM technological jungles” in 2008.

 1.    PLM 2.0 concept

Technologically, PLM 2.0, in my view, takes product lifecycle management to the next level of capabilities by adding “openness”. My main concern about Enterprise PLM today is about the disconnection of people and processes within an organization.  PLM 2.0 breathes new, fresh air into this space. Now all data is available online for all, with transparent tools. Although there are still a  lot of issues related to interoperability that need to be resolved, the technical achievements presented today in PLM 2.0 allow users to work online on the same components and assemblies.  These  (technological achievements) are very interesting and impressive.

 2.    Direct Modeling

This technology is trying to make 3D more user friendly and, as a result, widely available for people. This technological trend was presented by multiple existing, new and leading providers in the CAD/PLM space. Overall, this technology, popularizes 3D to the masses and definitely takes CAD/PLM downstream. With the development of this technology, more users in CAD/PLM eco-systems will be able to use 3D in their daily lives – manufacturing, marketing, customer support etc.

 3.    Web 2.0

Rather than being a  particular technology, Web 2.0 provides a specific set of technological capabilities that has changed the Web into a ‘Web of participation’. One of the top technological needs in PLM, in my view, is the ability to connect people. The Web 2.0 technological trend majorly impacted and influenced PLM 2.0 definitions. The success of Web 2.0 technologies and awareness (such as blogs, Wikis etc.) has impacted and will continue to impact the PLM community significantly.

 4.    Mashups

The peak of excitement around Mashups came from Google maps. This is the first and foremost example of successful and practical Mashups. There are additional vendors in the Mashup world such as Yahoo Pipes, Microsoft Popfly and others. In my view, Mashups is heavily under-invested in PLM. Moreover, there are some very serious technological and community oriented influencers that are preventing some Mashups from succeeding . I’m excited about it, but this still needs to happen.

 5.    RIA

Rich Internet Application is a very important technology. In my opinion, RIA marks the end of discussion regarding what’s the best Web or Desktop solution. RIA moves the Web from an application name to technology, allowing access over Web only. What’s more, it also provides an overall agreement about users’ needs regarding user experience and user acceptance – this is one of the top priorities of PLM

 This sums up is my “top -five”. I’d be interested in knowing if you agree with my ranking, or what other technologies to add to this list.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 73 other followers