PLM as part of a digital transformation needs to be addressed too - how and what can be done intermediate

1. Some lessons learned from the field
HOW ENTERPRISE-WIDE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION
AFFECTS PLM
Jos Voskuil
www.virtualdutchman.com
Twitter : @josvoskuil
Event : QPITVtweets
#PIOC

2. Digital ?
3000 BC
1 GB ≈ 37.000 kg
30.000 BC
Not Shareable
1300 BC
New lightweight concept 1970 - AutoCAD & others
1995 - 3D filestracing paper
>> 3300 yr

3. Digital Transformation

4. PLM and Digital Transformation ?
Role of PLM ?

5. 4 data-drivenplatforms in adigital enterprise: #1 ERP

6. 4 data-drivenplatforms in adigital enterprise: #2 CRM

7. 4 data-drivenplatforms in adigital enterprise: #3 MES

8. And PLM ?
 Document-driven approach
 Products
 Inside out: push to the market
 Waterfall

9. CONTINUOUS
DELIVERY
 Data-driven approach
 Systems / model-based
 Outside in: pull from market
 Agile
Modern PLM – a product innovation platform / digital PLM

10. Main probing question is: HOW ?
Are we developing new business models
because of digitalization ?
• Yes – we have to move to modern PLM
• No – what will be the impact on our
future ?
• Evolution ?
• Disruption ?
• Bimodal ?

11. Main probing question is: HOW ?
Are we developing new business models
because of digitalization ?
• Yes – we have to move to modern PLM
• No – what will be the impact on our
future ?
• Evolution ?
• Disruption ?
• Bimodal ?
Evolution will be too slow
and too complex:
• Old PLM is not designed
for new PLM
• What about data ?
 Data is different data
 Was there a design data
governance ?

12. Main probing question is: HOW ?

13. Main probing question is: HOW ?
Bimodal PLM implementation:
• Expensive ?
• Not done before ?
• What about the data ?
 Connect to what exists ?
 Is there reliable data ?

14. Bimodal pro’sand con’s
 Bimodal is too complex –
We tried it before
 Bimodal is too expensive
 It has never been done
before
 The risk of failure is too big

15. Bimodal pro’sand con’s
 Bimodal is too complex –
We tried it before
 Bimodal is too expensive
 It has never been done
before
 The risk of failure is too big
o Where has it failed ? Is the situation still
the same ? Often it is more a political
game.
o Develop a 5 – 10 years budget estimation
with decreasing old and increasing new
software. Other business models ?
o That’s the challenge – companies are
trying – old generation PLM deciding ?
o Balance the risk when doing an
evolutionary approach

16. A potential initiativetowin time – Model Based Enterprise
o A Model-based Enterprise moves
the record of authority from
documents to digital models
including MCAD, E-CAD, SysML
and UML managed in a data rich
environment.
o Model-based drives a consistent
specification and possibility to
analyze and proceed to
manufacturing in an automated
manner

17. Moving toa Model-Based Enterprise isa journey
Image: J.B. Herron – Action Engineering – Re-use your CAD

18. A potential initiativetowin time – Data Governance
o No data continuity in siloed enterprise
o Need for data governance
o Top-down initiative focus on the
customer journey
o It is a master data management project
o Data Quality standard ISO 8000 emerging

19. A bimodal attempt
o An automotive supplier (APQP)
ERP
PDM
• 700 000 Excels
• Engineering silo
6 digits

20. M
The importanceof datagovernance
o An automotive supplier (APQP) – after phase 1
ERP
PDM
• One information flow
• Search discovery in PDM
LP
No properties at
all in CAD !*
Check digit 

21. M
The importanceof datagovernance
o An automotive supplier (APQP) – after phase 1
ERP
PDM
• One information flow
• Search discovery in PDM
LP
No properties at
all in CAD !*
• Future properties defined
• Delayed ROI and reuse
Check digit 

22. Conclusions
o Digital transformation is real
o PLM is often the “forgotten” platform
o Evolutionary approach will be too slow.
The bimodal approach is new
o Model Based Engineering and Data Governance – act now !

23. A Digital PLM platform makesyourcompany lean
5 years later
Now