Last week, I attended the CIMdata event. Check my article and thoughts where I covered the event. As usual, for many Product Lifecycle Management forums and PLM software conferences, it was a gathering of familiar names, familiar companies, and unfortunately—familiar patterns. Product data management, product lifecycle, engineering and business processes. I can pull my slide deck from 10-15 years ago, slightly refresh it and it will be good to go. The same problems with document management, supply chain management, product quality, a slightly perspective on service lifecycle management because of a growing needs for connected and software products, but overall- all the same. The same vendors dominate the leadership quadrants, continue to buy anything that moves, and perpetuate the narrative that PLM is an engineering-only discipline. A telling statistic from the event: only 13% of survey responders said they cannot live without their PLM system. That’s not a sign of a vibrant, indispensable platform—it’s a sign that we’re stuck.
Over the last decade, the PLM industry and business systems has been riding the SaaS/Cloud wave, aiming to “democratize” PLM. Every PLM vendor today boasts a cloud strategy. Yet, the market doesn’t look dramatically different. Vendors speak about product development process (with a flavor of digital transformation), supply chain collaboration (with the emphasize to “connected” nature of companies) The systems are still complex, expensive, and confined to engineering departments in large enterprises. The conclusion – product lifecycle management (PLM) market is stuck. So, how do we change the status quo?
Let’s take a step back—about 100 years—to learn a powerful marketing lesson from history.
A Lesson from Lucky Strike: How Social Psychology Expanded a Market
Back 100 years, James Buchanan Duke (aka Buck Duke), founder of the American Tobacco Company, had already revolutionized the tobacco industry with machine-rolled cigarettes and aggressive market consolidation. But it was Edward Bernays – the father of public relations, a PR visionary and not a tobacco executive, who would expand the cigarette market to an entirely new audience—women. If you’re interested to learn more, check Bernays’ book Propaganda – I found it very interesting.
In 1929, Bernays orchestrated what’s now considered one of the most iconic PR campaigns in history: “Torches of Freedom.” During the Easter Parade in New York City, he hired women to march while confidently smoking Lucky Strike cigarettes—an act that was taboo at the time.
The media picked it up. The stigma began to fade. Cigarettes became a symbol of empowerment for women, and the tobacco market exploded.
What’s the takeaway? Strategic business expansion requires:
- A clear business goal (expand the market),
- A new audience (women),
- A message aligned with cultural change (freedom and empowerment),
- And a tactical GTM strategy that uses psychology and social norms to influence behavior.
That’s how markets are reshaped. And that’s the playbook PLM needs right now.
The Devil Is in the (Industry) Details
PLM lives in a rigidly defined world: engineering, design, manufacturing, operations, supply chain, maintenance. The terminology, processes, and system requirements are well-known—and that’s the reality for all engineering teams, manufacturing companies and vendors that provide solutions for them. Here is a picture I captured from ACE 2025 conference with the amazing story of digital transformation in CERN institute.
The underlining story is that the existing software used by this company is dead and not supported anymore. So, the company picked the best available for them, which is the great news for Aras Corp and their team, but I can easy find success stories from other PLM vendors too telling how they replaced outdated PDM/PLM packages and moved companies to use new products.
The industry is caught in a self-reinforcing loop where the same companies compete over the same customers, using the same language and the same overpromised “we-do-it-all” portfolios. From time to time, these companies discontinue the products they earlier acquired from other vendors and it creates some “replacement energy” (for example, now there is some replacement energy around Oracle retirement of Agile PLM software, but there are some other examples).
Meanwhile, if you talk to actual customers—especially those outside Fortune 100—you’ll hear a different story:
- “The big vendors’ products suck.”
- “They’re overpriced, hard to configure, and impossible to adopt.”
- “Support is limited unless you’re paying millions.”
Despite the big logos and glossy presentations, real-world adoption lags. Broad capability doesn’t equal practical usability. If everyone says they do everything, no one really knows what to trust—or how to start. The “no one was every was fired because of buying IBM product” stigma exists and large OEMs are building their strategies on top of technologies introduced by vendors 20 years ago.
The Technology Is Maturing—Is PLM?
In the background, technology has quietly matured. We now have cloud-native platforms, graph databases, real-time collaboration, semantic search, low-code/no-code solutions, and AI-powered agents. These tools allow us to reimagine how data is connected, visualized, and acted upon.
In the past, building a PLM system required a huge upfront investment and long timelines. Today, you can build intelligent, scalable, and composable systems with significantly lower effort.
The barriers are no longer technological. They are structural, experience, psychological, and sometimes even cultural.
So How Do We Expand the PLM Market?
This is the $1B question. The next SolidWorks (re-invented 3D MCAD with supporting Windows low cost and user experience), AutoCAD (re-inventing 2D drawings with PC), Revit (construction with 3D), or Aras Innovator (Enterprise Open Source) won’t emerge by chasing the same customers with slightly better technology. Here are some ideas where the next breakthrough can come from:
- Target a New Vertical or Niche:
Think beyond aerospace and automotive. What about CPG, biotech, agricultural robotics, EV startups, or modular home manufacturing? - Empower the Underserved:
PLM is still largely inaccessible to SMBs, suppliers, and contractors. These companies are underserved yet vital parts of the product lifecycle. - Redefine the Entry Point:
Focus on specific pain points like change management, supplier collaboration, or procurement planning. Solve a real problem, not the entire PLM universe on Day 1. - Use Social Psychology and GTM Innovation:
Like Bernays did with Lucky Strike, we need to use narrative, community, and perception to change how people see PLM. Make it approachable. Make it empowering. Make it modern.
This is not just about features—it’s about how people feel when they interact with your product, your brand, and your message.
What is my conclusion?
If You Do the Same, Expect the Same.
The PLM industry has been telling the same story for many years. While the market has grown modestly, it’s largely stagnant in terms of customer excitement, accessibility, and real innovation. Most software in the PLM space still feels like “tools doing the same jobs”—just in the cloud now.
But a shift is coming. Cloud is mature. GenAI and AI agents are gaining real traction. Real-time data modeling, composable architecture, and platform thinking are here. The opportunity to shake up the PLM status quo is very real.
The next wave of PLM won’t be won by the biggest portfolio. It will be won by those who tell a new story, target a new audience, and leverage new psychology. Just like Lucky Strike did 100 years ago.
Just my thoughts…
Best, Oleg
PS. What to discuss your PLM strategy with me? Contact me – I’m happy to discuss.
Disclaimer: I’m the co-founder and CEO of OpenBOM, a digital-thread platform providing cloud-native collaborative services including PDM, PLM, and ERP capabilities. With extensive experience in federated CAD-PDM and PLM architecture, I’m advocates for agile, open product models and cloud technologies in manufacturing. My opinion can be unintentionally biased
