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

PLM Simplification: What to give up?

PLM Simplification: What to give up?
Oleg
Oleg
26 February, 2013 | 2 min for reading

Simplification is a trending topic these days. Finally, everybody wants to simplify everything. Vendors are crying to simplify portfolios, developers are crying to simplify user experience, etc. I’ve been reading an interesting writeup about simplification – Simplicity: Fewer steps and Fewer options? by John Evans. I found the following passage the most important to me:

I asked engineers what they thought about simplification of their favorite software. The response was unanimous. “I like the idea, but what would I have to give up? I mean if I had to give up some of the tools that I use everyday, that would probably be a deal killer.”

In the past, I posted about PLM simplification – PLM Simplification: first drop PLM word. My idea back one year was that PLM needs to drop PLM word since it brings a lot of complexity to people. The question of what to give up is the most important when it comes to product development and PLM. Since, we are not talking about mobile phone, digital camera and even not automobile, the question of giving up features is probably less relevant. In my view, it is all about perception and how things can be visible to end users and developers. It made me think about two aspects – visibility of features and perception of complexity.

We like features. Remember old Windows toolbar era with zillion buttons and options. Still, many UIs of older enterprise systems have the same disease. How many of them are you using on daily basis? Not much. Think about MS World? How many of features in this application are you using? The second issue is connected. PLM software is heavily rooted to engineering world. Therefore to show complexity was important. Engineers like engineering toys and these toys need to be complex and powerful. However, when it comes to users in a whole company, the same “visible features and options” become a showstoppers to mass adoptions.

What is my conclusion? Answering on the question “what to give up?”, I think PLM needs to give up on visible complexity. Don’t take me wrong and don’t get back to “OOTB PLM” circa 2000s. We need flexible and powerful software. However, we need to figure out how to make it simple and usable for 80% of users that needs it on everyday basis. This is where the science of nice user experience will come into the play. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

Recent Posts

Also on BeyondPLM

4 6
5 June, 2017

I’m attending The Digital Factory event organized by Formlabs and Desktop Metal. Morning exhibition floor and coffee. The main stage...

14 February, 2018

It took me few days to catch up on my writing about Solidworks World 2018. But I’m not done yet....

30 September, 2015

I started a series of articles explaining how hardware startups can establish a product lifecycle management strategy and why it...

2 June, 2015

Data was always a core part of what manufacturing does. Manufacturing companies have lots of data. According to Joanna Schloss...

7 November, 2017

My yesterday blog How to compete with Solidworks? brought a number of comments and questions I thought would be interesting to...

13 January, 2018

One of my ‘burning questions” for PLM in 2018 is about value of data. Check my article (here). What PLM...

31 May, 2021

I used an extended pause during the U.S. Memorial Day weekend to catch up on some PLM reading. The article...

26 May, 2011

In the old days, the focus of manufacturing companies was mostly about how to produce stuff. Most of the products...

19 October, 2017

I’m still at Gothenburg, Sweden attending PDT Europe and CIMdata PLM Roadmap conference. If you missed my blog from yesterday,...

Blogroll

To the top