A blog by Oleg Shilovitsky
Information & Comments about Engineering and Manufacturing Software

PLM Software and Business Process Scalability

PLM Software and Business Process Scalability
Oleg
Oleg
12 August, 2010 | 3 min for reading

Scaling up is a tough problem. I want to talk today and PLM Software scalability in unusual aspects – business processes. In the past, CAD and PLM vendors spent lots of effort to help software scale up in their ability to manage huge CAD assemblies and very sophisticated product configuration. When PLM system first loaded airplane 3D model, made a DMU and resolved different airplane or car configurations, we said wow… However, it was many years ago. Since then, PLM wizards are stacking with a problem they didn’t expect to see – how to scale up PLM in the organization?

Emails, Collaboration and Business Processes

In order to scale up in the organization, you need to have people using the system. After many years of different types of collaborative software experience, my fundamental conclusion is simple. Most of the engineering and manufacturing organizations are run by emails. This is where PLM failed massively – it doesn’t scale up to get people using PLM systems. PLM collaboration is very successful when you think about two designers are working on the same feature. However, it is different when you think about a design engineer and a manufacturing engineer are collaborating. Yesterday, I had a chance to read Develop3D article – Design and Manufacturing in Perfect Harmony. You may think, this is an excellent example where PLM system can help design and manufacturing people to work together. So, why it doesn’t happen?

Design to Manufacturing

PLM vendors spent lots of effort and resources working on collaborative processes. Design to Manufacturing is one of them, and this is probably is one of the most important if you think about how PLM implementation can scale up in the organization. However, I can identify top 3 reasons why collaboration is so not efficient between engineering and manufacturing:

1. Environment separation
Designer and Manufacturing Engineer sees a world differently. In most of the situations designers are living in their CAD/PDM world. At the same time, manufacturing engineers are on top of MRP/ERP environment and working on their MBOM-driven processes. PLM failed to scale up and establish a scalable process between these two environments.

2. Common Goals and Synchronization
How to achieve a harmony in a common work? You need to set up a common goal. When designer and manufacturing are working in different environments, they have a hard time to define a common goal and follow this goal in their daily operation. Most of their time they spent to synchronize their environments. The final stop in the synchronization is a weekly meeting. You can see how people spending their time literally synchronizing information between them.

3. Push Processes
How to get work done in the modern manufacturing organization? Unfortunately, email is probably the most widely used mechanism. And this is really bad, because it creates a ping-pong of information going back and forth between people in the organization. This is an environment where Excel is a king of the email road.

PLM and Process Scalability

In my view, this is the place where most of the current PLM implementations failed. Scaling up beyond the engineering department is a tough problem. The best organizations I had chance to see solved this problem by a massive customization work and enormous effort in making people work together in the same environment.

What is my conclusion? When I talk to people, I’m constantly asking the following question – what is the biggest problem you faced in all PLM implementations? Here is my today’s conclusion – PLM is a great concept and a very important organization strategy. However, it doesn’t scale up in the organization. In order to make it work out, you need to spend too many resources. When it comes to results you can see a very low value for money and resources you spent. Think about space shuttles. We need to spend a lot of rocket fuel to get a space shuttle in the space. The same with PLM… Something is wrong behind the scene. Is it technology? Implementation? People?

What is your take?
Best, Oleg

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
27 September, 2017

Photo credit: Tesla Robot Dance by Steve Jurvetson It is hard to argue about value proposition behind “PLM projects”. PLM story...

3 March, 2014

The importance of Bill of Material in product development and manufacturing hardly can be undervalued. BOM is a cornerstone of...

25 May, 2010

A short note on WorldCAD Access by Ralf Grabowski got my attention few days ago. In a very competitive world...

7 July, 2010

I’ve been thinking more about what are the gaps in taking PLM to the next level of collaboration. Social trend...

28 March, 2019

ProSTEP article caught my attention by the very interesting title – How do you efficiently implement the digital integration of PLM, ALM, MES,...

2 October, 2019

One of the most interesting trends today to watch is how all companies are transforming into technology companies. Manufacturing companies...

2 April, 2015

The thing you can often hear about PLM implementations – it is about change. PLM will change the way you...

23 October, 2012

People are collecting things. Beer bottles, matchboxes, car models, etc. As you probably know, I’m collecting PLM definitions. One of...

20 April, 2017

Cloud PLM adoption is on the top of minds for software vendors and PLM researchers. Catch up on the topic...

Blogroll

To the top