18 October 2012

Who invented PLM?


In keeping with the past dimension of this blog’s mission, perhaps it is important to ask the question: who invented Product Lifecycle Management (PLM)?

On the face of it, this may seem a frivolous question, but if it is legitimate, the answer does have implications for the usage in the industry. Consider a quotation on this question by Carl Bass of Autodesk (search YouTube for “Carl Bass anti-PLM rap”) in which he states that the only companies with a PLM problem are Dassault Systèmes, PTC and UGS (now Siemens PLM).

So, this leads one to pay more attention to the question and formulate two potential answers:
  1. PLM was invented by the vendors as a strategy to scare manufacturing customers into buying expensive software (push model)
  2. PLM was an industry competitive imperative and software vendors are fulfilling a genuine need (pull model)
If your preference is for the push model, then organizations should be looking seriously at their so-called “PLM strategy” and questioning what they really need. Does the ability to tie together all product data from conception to manufacture actually improve business? Or is it better to deploy targeted software at strategic points in the design process where it can be clearly demonstrated that this brings efficiencies?

There are a couple of proof points that tend to answer the questions above in favor of the push model. Firstly, many large, successful companies who are considered industry leaders often have a patchwork of software solutions that don’t actually tie product data together. If it was a business imperative, this situation would not exist. Secondly, it is well known that some PLM implementations do not succeed, but do not necessarily result in taking the company out of business. Finally, PLM software vendors will often have a core product that generates most of their profits and the rest of their “strategic” offerings are not widely adopted.

Alternatively, if your preference is for the pull model, then organizations best be focused on a PLM strategy or else they will be out of business. There is evidence that supports this view. Firstly, organizations have increased productivity dramatically, and there is an explosion of consumer choices for physical products. Secondly, consider the automobile of today compared to 20 years ago and compare the level of sophistication. Finally, one can look at the revenue growth of PLM software vendors and extrapolate this into a real need by industry.

Perhaps the pragmatic answer lies somewhere in between the two extremes. PLM as conceived by the strategists is actually only a vision and by definition unobtainable. So while it is important to keep it in mind, companies are better served by critically examining processes and implementing technology where it makes sense for their business.