From the category archives:

Technologies

high-tech-electronic

Products are getting complex these days. Look on every small electronic gadget in your hands. It is actually combined from multiple pieces – mechanical parts, plastics, electronic and software. Traditionally you are using separate tools to design these parts – MCAD, PCB design, software tools. Then it gets tricky a bit – you need to put together right information about the product, manage changes, coordinate with suppliers, etc. PLM tools are here to help. But, for some reasons, it is a difficult problem to handle.

Engineering.com article In High-Tech Electronics, Managing Three Lifecycles As One is a New Key to Product Development by Laila Hirr speaks exactly about that problem. Here is my favorite passage from the article explaining the problem:

HTE’s need for PLM is straightforward—a firmer grasp of the information generated before and during product development and subsequently “in the field.” Many information needs go unmet when products go into assembly operations of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and built into other manufacturers’ components in complex supply chains. Users and system integrators may also be slow to share information.

For many reasons, PLM has repeatedly fallen short in this industrial sector. At CIMdata, the reason we see most often is a lack of integration with the full information set that defines the product. Achieving this integration is a multidisciplinary challenge and in PLM’s twenty-plus year history with the high tech industry, the challenge has yet to be resolved. This largely accounts for the scarcity of compelling PLM successes in HTE and the ongoing skepticism about PLM.

Article speaks about absence of integration between tools and dependencies on homegrown spreadsheets to manage bill of materials and change. Which made me think about core problem in PLM tools – management of multi-disciplinary BOM. I addressed this problem in the keynote presentation at ProSTEP iViP Symposium few weeks ago – PLM and ERP: separated by a common Bill of Materials (BOM). PLM systems today are addressing BOM management. Most of them are taking an approach to manage multiple bill of materials view. However, these tools are not efficient enough to manage a BOM which contains mechanical, electronic and software pieces together.  The complexity of BOM is driven by multiple disciplines, change management and product lifecycle as I presented on the following slide

bom-complexity-1

What is my conclusion? Technical difficulties and disagreement between people often can lead to problems in establishment of cohesive BOM management solutions. PLM fails to provide a way to manage multi-disciplinary BOM and changes. High-tech and electronic industry is specific because of high diversity of design tools – mechanical, electronic, software. PLM tools are not integrated well with design tool, which leads to poor BOM management. There are several reasons why it happens – limits of BOM management tools, complexity of integrations between design tools provided by multiple suppliers, UI complexity. Just my thoughts..

Best, Oleg

Image courtesy of Toa55 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

 

Share

0 comments

integration-loop-bom

It is hard overestimate the importance of Bill of Materials for product development. In my keynote at ProSTEP iViP symposium in Stuttgart earlier this month I’ve been sharing my thoughts why developing of single BOM across multiple disciplines in critical for organization. I wanted to bring few examples that can demonstrate why having a single BOM strategy can bring benefits to product development and manufacturing organization.

Earlier today, at Siemens PLM connection event in Dallas, I captured the following slide demonstrating an integrated approach in design, manufacturing, planning and production. What is really interesting is how as-design, as-planned and as-build views in PLM are integrated with design, manufacturing, planning and production.

integrated-bom-plm-mes-mom

Few days ago, I the following article by 3D CAD World article caught my attention - Progress in closing the product lifecycle’s loops by Peter Bilello, president of CIMdata. The article speaks about the importance of collaboration across diverse enterprise groups.

For many years, the PLM industry has greatly benefited from a steady stream of improvements in collaboration among ever more diverse enterprise groups—in data interoperability, for example, and in the transparency of workflows and processes. The development, manufacture and support of globally competitive new products are, however, still hamstrung by the remaining open loops new and old.

Later in the article it came to the topic I was looking for – Bill of Materials. According to article, BOM is a biggest remaining challenge to make integration running smooth. Here is the passage, which explains that.

Between engineering, manufacturing and finance, a big remaining challenge is the bill of materials (BOM) in its many forms—the as-designed BOM, the as-engineered BOM, the as-manufactured BOM, and so on. Generated and managed with PLM and often executed by enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, BOMs themselves are loop closers. PLM-ERP connectivity and interoperability are steadily improving, but some open-loop issues are resolved only after time consuming face-to-face meetings.

What is my conclusion? Single BOM could be a great thing if vendors will figure out how to implement that. As you can learn from Biello’s article, PLM-ERP has open-loop issue and BOM is a tool to close that. However, companies are concerned about bringing single BOM strategy since it can raise lot of organizational challenges for them. At the same time, the demand for better integration and collaboration can put companies in front of decision to bring single BOM to close open loops between engineering, manufacturing and production anyway. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

 

Share

0 comments

Plm-technology-matters

It is hard to sell PLM. Sigh… Even today. Even with all modern open source, cloud, browser, web, mobile, big data, SaaS, PaaS, IaaS and other cool product and technological buzzwords. How to get PLM right? Startups and large companies are trying to bring new ideas and products to the market in hope to make it different. I certainly can confirm that modern PLM systems are better in many ways than what we had 10-15 years ago. They are nicer, faster, more flexible, better integrated and better equipment to deal with problems manufacturing companies have today.

Here is the point. They are better…. Which brings me back to the the sales dispute about difference between vitamins and painkillers in PLM. Analysts and industry pundits are trying to find the reason why is so hard to sell PLM. A very respectful PLM analyst and my good blogging buddy Chad Jackson  of Lifecycle Insights came with an interesting research related to that. Navigate to his article to read more - Engineering’s struggle to justify technology. His main point – engineers aren’t good at justifying technology investments. As a result of that, engineers just cannot sell these great technologies to CxO executives. Here is the passage from Chad’s blog:

Engineers aren’t good at justifying technology investments. I wish it wasn’t true. But in my mind, the findings prove it. The technologies aren’t lacking. Otherwise, technology capabilities would rise to the top of these lists. They don’t. If there was a problem with the underlying value proposition of these technologies, then that would bear out. However, as seen in a post I published last week, the value of some of these technologies is high. To me, the failing lies in the inability to justify these tools.

chad-jackson-plm-challenges

In the conclusion, Chad stated clear that price is also not an issue with regards to the problem related to engineering software sales. It all connected to the ability of engineers to justify the value of the technologies.

Pricing, in my opinion, is not the culprit for these issues. It lies in the difficulty that engineering has in justifying the technologies they need. Engineer’s decisions directly affect company profitability ever single day. Understand that connection and engineers should be able to easily justify their technology needs.

Well… I feel bad for engineers. At least for some of them that struggles to implement complex PLM systems. Certainly, if technological value is clear and price is not an issue, then to sell PLM should be an easy deal to make. But it is not… Which takes me back in my mind into product and technology. I’m sure you remember an earlier attempt of Microsoft to develop tablet computer. If not, the picture above can remind you Microsoft tablets circa 2002. The technology was right and all buttons were in place. However, something was missed. And Steve Jobs iPad circa 2010 confirmed that it was about technology and products. And Bill Gates confirmed Apple did something different. Here is a passage from BI article:

Last July, during an interview with Charlie Rose, Bill Gates explained that Jobs “did some things better than I did. His timing in terms of when it came out, the engineering work, just the package that was put together. The tablets we had done before, weren’t as thin, they weren’t as attractive.”

What is my conclusion? Engineers are easy target to blame. It sounds like product and technologies are right, price is perfect, value proposition is articulated in a most clear way, but… customers are not buying. Yes, it could be about market and prices. Maybe market is not ready for PLM or many be prices are too high or too low. I was in the situation once when customer didn’t recognize the value of PLM product because price was too low. But I doubt, this is a case with PLM systems today. Getting back to the product, we need need to think how to make it more attractive? It is certainly the moment to look again on product and technology. Just in case. Maybe there is still a small chance PLM vendors missed something. Just my thoughts….

Best, Oleg

Share

4 comments

Bad PDM experience? After all, it is CAD systems’ fault…

May 4, 2015

PDM. Product Data Management was one of the topics engineers are really hating. It was always about slow implementations, complex user experience, slow check-in and check-out, unsupported CAD versions and many other things. The relationships between PDM and CAD vendors aren’t simple either. I shared some of my thoughts about that in my blog – […]

Share
Read the full article →

IoT, Industry 4.0 and PLM technological challenges

May 1, 2015

Connectivity and information technologies are changing our lives. Think about your everyday experience – news, driving, communication, banking. It is so different from we had 10 years ago. One of the main drivers behind the change is our ability to connect to different sources of information. Now think about connectivity in a broader sense can […]

Share
Read the full article →

Cloud PLM provider check list

April 30, 2015

Cloud is everywhere these days. Despite high popularity of cloud solution, I still can see some confusion on the side of a customer trying to make a decision about moving towards specific cloud services. The discussion I had at COFES 2015 earlier this month made me think about key questions you want to ask your […]

Share
Read the full article →

Why is it hard to implement PLM workflows?

April 29, 2015

One of the most painful topics in PLM is related to implementations. Let me be more specific. PLM implementation is combined from several steps – installing a system, setting up data model, importing legacy data and  implementing business workflows. I want to speak about that specific last one – business workflows. This is where things […]

Share
Read the full article →

Rethink PLM for the next industrial revolution

April 28, 2015

The last decade changed  many things in our everyday life. It is hard to imagine, but just think about few examples. We printed driving directions from MapQuest just about 10 years ago. Your 17 years old kids grown up without tablets and YouTube. Our everyday life was based on paper communication and phone conversations. We […]

Share
Read the full article →

COFES 2015: Product Lifecycle, Supply Chain and Data Networks

April 17, 2015

I had a chance to share my thoughts about complexity of product lifecycle in supply chain at COFES 2015 Design and Sustainability symposium. Manufacturing companies and software vendors are facing new enterprise reality these days – distributed environment, connected work and cloud software. On the other side we have skyrocketing complexity of products. Each product is a […]

Share
Read the full article →

Where to host my cloud CAD and PLM?

April 8, 2015

Cloud adoption is growing. There is almost a synergy about cloud and PLM. All PLM vendors are signaling about leveraging various pieces of cloud technologies in their business. Now, the time is coming for CAD. Last few months were sparked by multiple debates around future of cloud CAD technologies. Onshape was a resonating factor of […]

Share
Read the full article →