I’m still digesting my Share PLM Summit experience. If you missed my previous articles, check them here – What I Learned at the Share PLM Summit: Five Observations That Challenge the Status Quo. The webinar to discuss Share PLM Summit experience is coming later in June (here is the invitation)- The Future of PLM – Episode 3: SharePLM Summit 25 – Recap and Way Forward.
In one of the comment about my Share PLM Summit presentation Five Principles of Building Human Centric PLM, I’ve got a comment asking about use-focused systems. It sounded like this – are user-oriented systems and human centric is the same? My initial reaction was to say – year, it is about people using the systems, but after some thoughts, I came to the conclusion that there is a bit more to unpack in this question/ In my blog today, I’m going to share my thoughts with you.
In enterprise software, we often hear the word “user.” We design for users, build user interfaces, and create user workflows.
But here’s something I’ve been thinking about lately, maybe that’s not enough.
When we say user, we usually mean someone performing a role in the system. An engineer. A buyer. A planner. A person doing a function.
But when we say human, we’re talking about the whole person, not just what they do, but how they do it. Their behavior, their habits, their questions, their frustrations.
That’s the real difference:
User = function
Human = behavior
From Tasks to Behavior
Traditional enterprise software — especially PLM — has always been focused on tasks.
You define roles, assign permissions, and map out workflows. The system says, “You’re a buyer, here’s your screen. You’re an engineer, here’s your data table and task list.”
That’s helpful to a point. It gets things done. But humans don’t live in tidy workflows. We jump between roles. We forget things. We ask questions. We need context. And most systems aren’t great at helping with that.
Conversations, Not Clicks
Here’s a simple example.
Imagine a buyer looking at a change order. In a typical system, they might need to click through four screens to get all the information: the part, the supplier, the price change, the approval history.
But what if they could just ask:
“Why did the cost of this part go up?”
Or
“Who approved this change?”
That’s what a human-centric system does. It doesn’t just give you reports and dashboards — it talks back in a way that makes sense. It answers questions the way a colleague would.
It’s not about making things fancy. It’s about making them natural.
The Data Behind It: A Manufacturing Graph
Of course, for a system to understand questions like that, it needs the right data foundation.
Most legacy PLM and ERP systems are built SQL databases 25 years old architectures. They’re good at storing data, but not at connecting the dots.
That’s why we need a graphs for PLM. This is a way to represent how things are related. Not just CAD files, parts and BOMs, but who changed them, when, why, and what else was affected.
This kind of data model connects people, not just objects. It reflects how humans actually think — in conversations and connections, not lists.
Designing for People, Not Just Roles
Here’s another way to look at it.
User-centric design asks:
“Show my my Bill of Materials with attached files?”
Human-centric design asks:
“What does this person need to understand?”
“Find all files that still needs to be reviewed”
One is about completing tasks. The other is about building confidence, reducing confusion, and helping someone move forward. In the end, it’s not just about features. It’s about fit — how well the system fits the person using it.
In one of my favorite books – Don’t Make Me Think by Steve Krug, I learned that an experience must be easy and simple to understand without forcing people to apply some additional logic to understand how it works.
Why It Matters in PLM Software?
PLM software are full of valuable data such as parts, CAD drawings, items, revisions, changes. But too often, the systems are hard to use and even harder to adopt.
That’s because they’re built for users, not humans.
If we want people to actually use PLM software and not just tolerate them, then we need to make the system behavior more helpful, more flexible, and more human.
That means:
- Conversational interfaces instead of complex menus
- Graph-based data that connects the dots
- AI agents that guide, answer, and learn
- Workflows that adapt to real-life behavior
What is My Conclusion?
At the end of the day, people don’t adopt software because it has more features. They adopt it because it helps them do their job, to solve problems, understand their world, and feel in control.
That’s what human-centric design is about.
It’s not superior. It’s just better aligned with how people work.
And maybe that’s what enterprise software, especially PLM software, needs more of.
Just my thoughts…
Best, Oleg
Disclaimer: I’m the co-founder and CEO of OpenBOM, a digital-thread platform providing cloud-native collaborative and integration services between engineering tools 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
