What I Learned: The PLM Lifecycle Myth Continues

What I learned this week
… was through some continued conversations with
people that are considering - and some not considering - PLM.
People are still getting hung up on the term “Lifecycle” in
“Product Lifecycle Management” and losing sight of some of the most
important value.

The Myth
The myth comes from
the misnomer (say that ten times fast!)  The term “PLM” still
confuses people. The pat definition of PLM being “the management of
product data throughout the product lifecycle, from cradle to
grave” doesn’t help either. It’s a circular definition, at best. At
worst, it’s limiting and confusing. The “L” came about because
product data management (PDM) didn’t go far enough in managing
product information. It was good in the engineering and design
phases, helping to develop and manage the engineering BOM, but was
not designed to manage the complexities and uniqueness in
manufacturing BOMs, let alone the “as built” or “as maintained”
versions. So the “L” was added to represent one extension to
the purpose of PDM, but doesn’t come close to covering the full
extend of PLM today (extended across departments, across a broader
array of product information, across a variety of business
processes, and extended outside of the company
boundaries).

The Implications
So what? The
“what” is that people don’t think they can benefit from PLM because
they don’t have a lifecycle problem. Consumer
packaged goods companies, for example, may not be too concerned
about lifecycle. But do they have a product innovation challenge? A
product development necessity? Absolutely. And PLM can help. They
may not have 30-year old planes with unique configurations by tail
number like the aerospace industry does, but they have other issues
that are as pressing or more for them. “Lifecycle” throws people
off of the real value of PLM - enhancing product profitability by
improving the innovation, development, design, engineering and yes,
“managing the full lifecycle” of products. So for those with
lifecycle challenges (aero, defense, industrial equipment, med
device, etc.) PLM is still the right choice, but it can do a
lot more. For those without lifecycle challenges, maybe you can be
creative and pretend the “L” means something more meaningful to
your own business.

The Disclaimer
I am not
saying to trade the term “PLM” in for something else as an industry
term. It is a category name the same way that “ERP” is. Most people
don’t think about ERP as “Enterprise Resource Planning” any more
than people think of “IBM” as International Business Machines. The
original meaning is not as important as the new context. At
Aberdeen Group, we covered “product innovation, product
development, and engineering” to avoid the confusion. I think we
were on the right track somehow, but I am also sure that “PIE” is
not the next big thing… So “PLM” is in place and is fine with me
(as if it is up to me), but let’s make sure that we all think
beyond the original acronym.

So that is one of the things that I learned this
week, or at least observed. Let me know if you see the same
thing.