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

Why My PLM Won’t Work For You?

Why My PLM Won’t Work For You?
Oleg
Oleg
6 February, 2014 | 3 min for reading

plm-customization-complexity

To implement PLM is a process and change. Speak to anyone in engineering and manufacturing community and they will bring you lots of stories about complexity of PLM implementations and associated cost. Also, you can hear lots of stories about complexity of moving from one PLM implementation to another or switching from one PLM system to another. Companies are spending tons of money to align PLM systems to a specific set of requirements to fit company date management and process needs.

Couple of years ago, I posted “Is PLM customization a data management Titanic?“. For many of manufacturing companies, it is a reality these days. Implementations done 10 years ago can be hardly maintained. To update current implementation to a new PLM system version or another PLM systems is mission impossible. Companies are hiring advisers and consulting companies involved in the implementations and development of PLM systems to run migration and adjust PLM system to a new set of requirements.

Vendors have been trying to resolve the complexity of PLM systems by applying out-of-the-box configurations. However, the success  of these ready-to-go systems was somewhat mixed. Pre-configured templates worked well during marketing shows, presentations and evaluations. However, in order to bring system to production mode, (still) required customization to be done. Very often, the customization was coming to replace pre-configured template totally. The problem is not very unique in PLM space. I posted – How to de-customize PLM article few weeks ago. I discussed the importance to decrease customization level as well as presented some similar customization complexities coming from SharePoint implementations.

Today I wanted to provide some recommendations you can follow in order to stay away from costly PLM customizations. These recommendations will also help you to avoid some typical PLM implementation pitfalls. Here are 4 steps to follow:

1- Ask yourself what problem you want to solve with PLM for the next 2 years. The term PLM used by many people in a variety of forms and meanings. Going with specific scope (e.g. change management, quality, bill of materials, etc.)  will help you to chart functionality you expect PLM system to support.

2- Outline main data elements and structures PLM system needs to support in order to solve list of problems from previous step. Do it with no connection to specific PLM system and vendor. Make an agreement in your extended team about that. It can take you some time to get to the agreement, but in many situations this is one of the best investments you can do in order to eliminate extra customization steps.

3- Pickup few PLM systems and try to map your requirements to what these systems can provide you without customizations. Don’t be afraid to change your terminology alongside of this process. However, insure that whatever name PLM system is using, it will do what you expect from functional standpoint. It will be a good idea to hire consultant during this stage. It is worth to spend some dollars to avoid future budget waste.

4- Last, but very important. You need to test that selected system is flexible enough to apply changes on top of pre-configured parameters/templates. It is not unusual to provide out-of-the-box system configuration that cannot be practically changed. Practically means in this context the ability to add/modify system and data model and (at the same time) keep most of existing functionality in place. Stay away from system configurations with scripts and customized behaviors hard-coded to a particular data models and workflows.

What is my conclusion? The combination of flexibility and preconfigured environment is the key to stay away from costly PLM customizations. However, these two characteristics are very often mutually exclusive. Vendors can show up ready-to-be-used PLM configuration that will be literally destroyed as soon as you will have to change something. To run a test of how flexible is out-of-the-box PLM model is a key thing not to be punched in the face by future PLM system re-configuration and customization cost. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
24 March, 2020

Nobody Gets Fired For Buying IBM. I’ve heard this phrase many years ago when I was learning nuts and bolts...

16 April, 2013

Face it, even cloud is trending and growing fast, on enterprise premise systems are representing a major part of engineering...

21 April, 2021

During the last few days, I’ve been getting many questions about Autodesk and Upchain. Thanks to all my online and...

27 February, 2009

I was inspired to see Josh’s post on Solidsmack – Your Future 3D CAD Interface May be Soft, Cozy Memory...

12 October, 2015

We love to speak about latest gadget features and disruptive technologies. Earlier this month, CNet posted  about “telepresence robot” is...

9 November, 2009

In the past, I had chance to write about Google Wave (GW). Lots of interest coming around everything related to...

3 December, 2008

Structured vs. Unstructured – should PLM be reinforced by additional technologies?   The question I’d like to raise is how...

11 August, 2010

I’ve been reading Ray Kurland interviewing Rich Allen of Dassault Systems SolidWorks Corp. about the future of SolidWorks’ cloud solutions....

26 July, 2010

When I’m thinking about any PLM project, I can clearly see the step when data available in the organization need...

Blogroll

To the top