How many times you stuck in PLM meeting by saying “What I actually mean is… “. PLM has one big problem of terminology. Earlier this week, I came across funny article on LinkedIn – Don’t make people feel stupid – drop jargon (Tomas Bay). I found also original Thomas Bay article here. These articles resonated with some of my earlier thoughts.
I had my “Thomas Bay moment” by starring at Jos Voskuil slide from PI PLMx London. The slide looks super fancy. But I looked at the slide multiple times and I wasn’t able to understand what does it mean.
I can see a new wave of buzzwords and terminology coming in PLM domain for the last few years – digital transformation, digital twin(s), digital thread, model-based everything, connected everything, close-loop, lifecycle ownership, end-to-end connectivity, end-to-end lifecycle, system of systems, lifecycle data, coordinated cross-value chain. There are many others…
I think PLM projects are overloaded with buzzwords as never before. New buzzword is pushing to the stratosphere with the level of complexity that makes it very hard to understand. Is it a time to take a deep breath and practice buzzword detox?
Here is my attempt to drop complex buzzwords and definitions:
1- Digital transformation –> Use data management, not only email, PDFs and Excels.
2- Digital twin –> Information about product
3- Digital thread –> history of changes and dependencies
4- Model-based XYZ –> information about product and its behaviors
5- Close-loop –> Automatic, based on information
6- End-to-end connectivity –> Integrated applications
7- End-to-end lifecycle –> Information about product and its changes
8- Systems of Systems –> Information structure
9- Lifecycle data –> Information and changes
10- Coordinated cross value chain –> used by different department and organizations
Transformation is not simple. But I can see tremendous value of PLM simplification. It will help to create a better understanding of what industry is doing and to create much better relationships with customers. There is huge risk in not doing so. By pushing PLM system towards new buzzwords, we risk to lost it completely.
What is my conclusion? Don’t make people feel stupid and drop the jargon. How many times you stuck in PLM meeting by saying “What I actually mean is… “. PLM has one big problem of terminology. Simplicity is hard and another round of buzzwords is much easier. But by pushing PLM industry into a spiral of new buzzwords we can miss an opportunity for changes and improvements. Just my thoughts…
Disclaimer: I’m co-founder and CEO of OpenBOM developing cloud based bill of materials and inventory management tool for manufacturing companies, hardware startups and supply chain. My opinion can be unintentionally biased