How to streamline PLM?

by Oleg on December 10, 2011 · View Comments

One of the biggest problem I can see in all PDM / PLM tools is a high level of the complexity. I’ve been thinking about it many times. After observing this industry for quite some time, I started to come to conclusion that solutions are becoming more complicated without becoming more functional. I’ve been reading the article The case for stripped-down enterprise 2.0 tools on by Moly Bernhart Walker. He was quoting Tim Young of Socialcast. Here is my favorite passage:

“Simple tools are incredibly powerful,” said Young Nov. 15, during a keynote at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Santa Clara, Calif. It’s very difficult to solve a complex problem with a complex tool, he added. What we’ve been doing with customers is actually moving away, stripping away functionality and making it very, very simple by just focusing on one or two activity screens. And we’ve actually begun to see the value in this,” said Young.

I decided to pull few old pictures of EDM and PDM tools and take a look on them from the angle of PLM 2012.

How to strip-down PLM?

I think, we’ve been obsessed by the power of computer, higher screen resolution and interest to push additional functionality in the PLM software. It is a time to stop and think. Here is the slide from last presentation I’ve made during Autodesk University 2011.

PLM software is bloody complicated. To find a right strip-down option will be an appropriate way to think about the next PLM solution.

What is my conclusion? PLM was born many years to solve the problem of product development in complex defense and aerospace companies. Since that time, software vendors passed a long way developing new functionality. However, I don’t think it made solutions better. It is very hard to remove functionality for existing software. At the same time, I don’t see any alternative to that in the future. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

  • Share/Bookmark

Tagged as: Autodesk University 2011, Enterprise 2.0, PLM, Simplify

  • Nathan A.

    As a PLM Consultant, I find the biggest challenge of simplifying PLM is the wide range of customer requirements. The requirement for a Medical company and an Aerospace company is almost 2 different PLM systems. What we've tried to do is incorporate everything the customer is looking for with the ability to disable certain functionality. What you're left with is an extremely functional core system yet the ability to tailor it to your industry. The ironic part is most of our customers love the bells and whistles.

  • beyondplm

    Nathan,

    thanks for commenting! You pointed on a very important fact - high level of diversity of product development processes in different companies and industries. That's why, I'm always saying - "one size doesn't fit all". The future of manufacturing and product development solutions belongs to "flexibility" and "granularity".

    Here are some of my thoughts about that--

    PLM Model, Granularity, Bottom-up and change:
    http://plmtwine.com/2010/05/03...

    Inforbix and PLM Granularity:
    http://www.inforbix.com/new-bl...

    Best, Oleg

  • Rachel Berry

    Eric - it's known as "Pareto"

  • Eric

    I have heard it said that 80 percent of the functionality comes for 20 percent of the effort, yet the last 20 percent of the functionality takes 80 percent of the effort. Obviously these are just numbers, but does illustrate an interesting concept. There is clearly room for simpler tools that provide some core functionality. Create this solid core, but allow extensibility as needed on a per usage basis, and you might be on to something.

  • beyondplm

    Eric, you are right - 80/20 still works! Back in 1990s, SolidWorks came with 80% of PTC functions for 20% of prices, isn't it?

  • Hi Oleg,

    The same applies to business systems across the board.  Software vendors race to add more and more functionality; the idea is that more is better.  What you get with additional "bells and whistles" is a higher noise level.

    I visited a customer last week; their IT staff has told us for years that 'their existing business system does everything'.  The end user view was quite different.  While they agreed that the existing system could "do everything", most users had turned their back on this ERP system, prefering to use home-grown tools that were simpler.

  • beyondplm

    Rick, agree with you opinion. IT and business people in a company are not always are going at the same direction. Software vendors are on the opposite site. Complicated formula :). Thanks for your comments! Oleg

  • Hi Oleg.
    I just read this quote in Garr Reynolds sequel to Presentation Zen, called Presentation Zen Design. 

    "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler" -  Albert Einstein

    PLM tools and services solve a complex problem, and thus the solution tends to be complex, however, a big push on simplification of screens and the simplification of configuring PLM tools would be a very welcome initiative. The PLM user base and management in charge of improving bottom lines with technology investments like PLM would greatly appreciate a simplification effort by PLM vendors.

  • beyondplm

    Steve, Thanks for commenting! I like the quote, btw. The fact problem is complex doesn't mean the solution needs to be complex. One of the main reasons' customers tolerated complex solutions is related to the fact that migration is complicated and very costly. Oleg

  • Wow - Great images! What is the first screen shot of? 

  • beyondplm

    Brian, first screen is early iMAN. I had a chance to touch in on UNIX back in 1990s.. (man, I'm old :)).

  • Jongable

    This is very true. An MBA would call this the result of "incremental innovation" instead of "transformational innovation". It is easy to see why this occurs though. Software companies get extreme pressure from their installed bases to provide more functionality. By definition, this functionality is usually complex because "mature" and "advanced" users require it. So, the users that have never touched PLM get overwhelmed with an experience that exceeds their needs.

    The good news is for established vendors is that it is easier to take away than to add. However, is the functionality that remains being delivered the way the person with lesser needs expects (price, platform, UI, etc.). This is where a vendor with a truly transformational approach can succeed.

  • beyondplm

    You are right. Actually, software companies in enterprise space are extremely pressured by the need to issue new versions and gain addition reasons for customers to upgrade. It fundamentally related to business models and revenues. However, I'd expect some changes as enterprises gradually switch towards "services" available on the cloud. Just my opinion, of course. Thanks for commenting! Oleg

blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: