Earlier this week, I read a post by Andreas Lindenthal. He speaks about problems PLM can solve and he goes a bit into “PLM definition”. Here is a passage I captured:
To truly solve [these] problems a company needs a comprehensive long-term PLM strategy that addresses all elements of PLM, including practices, processes, tools, data and people and then to properly implement the entire PLM strategy.
The main point? The belief that the PLM industry needs to do a better job educating customers about what PLM can do. I see this perspective often, especially from seasoned PLM sales professionals or consultants who know the technology inside and out and believe that if customers only understood it better, they would embrace it.
But the reality is more nuanced.
Over the last 20+ years of working with manufacturing companies of different sizes, I’ve noticed something both frustrating and enlightening: many of the problems PLM professionals can classify as “PLM problems” are being solved every day… just not under the name “PLM.”
The Carl Bass Rant, Revisited
Back in 2007, Carl Bass (then CEO of Autodesk) delivered what many remember as the “anti-PLM speech.” His take? Manufacturing companies don’t have “PLM problems.” They have design problems, manufacturing problems, quality problems, procurement problems. But “PLM” as a term was largely an invention of software vendors trying to bundle these needs under one big umbrella—and then sell a system to solve them.
Was he right?
Partially. The video is almost 20 years old. I think Carl is spot on about solving customer problems. I will speak about what he called “creation of categories” separately. I think “PLM” category proved the right to exist and does work for a specific group of customers. But it has a baggage and the history.
What I’ve seen over the years is that companies are solving lifecycle-related challenges, but they often don’t call it PLM. In fact, for many companies—especially small and mid-sized businesses—the term “PLM” is something they actively avoid. Too expensive. Too complex. Too heavy. And let’s be honest: the legacy of many first-generation PLM tools didn’t help.
Same Problems, Different Packaging
What’s even more interesting is how this plays out across industries. Take AEC and BIM, for example. Many of the same problems—collaboration, revisions, version control, digital twin, coordination across disciplines—exist there too. But nobody’s calling it PLM. Instead, it’s “project management,” “construction tech,” “BIM coordination.”
Technologically, we’re often looking at overlapping functionality. Yet, because the category and language are different, the approach to the problem—and the market perception of the solution—changes dramatically.
Which brings me to marketing.
Categories Matter (But Language Matters More)
In the startup world, there’s a lot of writing about go-to-market strategy and product category creation. The big idea: you can either enter an existing category (and compete there) or you can create a new one. Each path comes with its own set of challenges.
The category of “PLM” exists. And it comes with legacy players, buyer expectations, budgets, consultants, and—yes—baggage. For some, that’s an advantage. If you’re building a PLM product and your buyers already speak PLM, then great. Own it. Compete. Educate. Differentiate.
But if your buyers don’t speak PLM, you might be in trouble.
Because no matter how elegant your product is, if your customers associate “PLM” with pain, the conversation ends before it begins.
My Take: Start With the Customer, Not the Category
If you’re an entrepreneur or product builder in this space, here’s what I’ve learned:
- Start with your customer. Who are they? What do they actually say when describing their problems? What tools do they use today?
- Listen to their language. Are they talking about BOMs? File management? RFQs? Data chaos? If they’re not saying “PLM,” maybe you shouldn’t either.
- Decide your positioning intentionally. You can align with an existing category, or you can try to define a new one. Just be clear on what game you’re playing.
- Marketing is not magic. It’s a lot of work and it is expensive. If you want to educate the market (as Andreas suggests), make sure you have the time, patience, and resources to do it well.
Once you understand your customers, you can decide how to frame your go-to-market strategy and whether using the term “PLM” is the right choice for you. Also, keep in mind that as your business grows, your GTM motion may evolve. You can start with “Bill of Materials” and “Procurement,” as we did at OpenBOM, and over time shift and grow into something broader (or narrow), including PLM.
What is my conclusion?
PLM is not just about software. It’s about services, consulting, integration, and trust. People can buy “PLM.” But more importantly, they buy solutions to their problems. If that solution happens to be “PLM,” great. But if you’re forcing a label onto a customer who doesn’t want it—you might lose the deal before you even start.
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
