Caught in the Paradox

Caught in the Paradox

In my previous post I talked about the OOTB Paradox.  This time, I wanted to use some data to explain the impact of being caught up in the paradox.

Just to refresh, the OOTB paradox is a contradiction in how Legacy PLM systems are evaluated.  The norm is to dig into a given system to evaluate item types, workflow capability, permissions, lifecycles, etc.  All of this can be done in demos and Conference room pilots.  But the contradiction is that firms NEED to customize and they spend little to no time evaluating how hard it is to customize the system in question.

We were looking at the CIMdata 2013 PLM Value Gap Survey.  Check out these charts from that report:

value-gap-chart

I find it interesting to see the amount of time necessary for Legacy PLM projects to reach the finish line.  Over a third of projects are over 3 years from completion.  This is pretty scary!  Why?  Think of the technology developments in the last 5 years - tablets, motion sensing controls (Xbox, Leap Motion), self-driving cars, wearable tech, and 3D Printing to name a few.  All of these are within your grasp NOW as a consumer.  The developments in PLM related fields are no different.

So while you were waiting 3-5 years for your Legacy PLM system to complete its customizations, technology is passing you by.  While you are in the development/deployment process everyone is focused on the processes that were agreed upon.  And focus is great, but tell me that in the 3-5 years we are talking about your business process hasn’t evolved?  Continuous Improvement is out the window!

Let me be clear about customization - It is needed to truly make a PLM system your own - plain and simple.  When I go buy a suit I may get close off the shelf but I need to have the pants and jacket customized to fit my shape.  Similarly, your business process is part of your competitive differentiation and a PLM system needs to be customized to empower it.  I wish I was smart enough to be able to make a PLM system that everyone could use OOTB with no changes - I would have a sweet house in the mountains, a Skyline GTR and my own Quinjet.  It's just not possible.

Even taking a segmented approach falls down.  Take Boeing and Airbus - both Aras customers.  They both have unique design philosophies - just ask the pilots that fly them.  This leads to unique process philosophies.  Asking them both to use the same Aerospace standard process is not going to work.  Their design and process philosophies differentiate them from each other and necessitates customization.

The data clearly shows how long it takes to get Legacy PLM projects completed.  At Aras we have broken that pattern.  If you refer to my previous post about our candle maker friend Jack, I discussed our Model-Based SOA and how our model-based methodology allows you to rapidly model your processes.  With this capability anyone in your organization can model solutions for their domain.  Design Engineers can model item types, BOMs, change processes and requirements.  Manufacturing Engineers can model mBOMs, MCOs, tooling items and Manufacturing Process Plans.  Bring all of this together with your IT team to create any needed code and you have a production ready phase 1 release in months - not years.

Circling back to Airbus they noted our "Open architecture with high-end data modeling “on the fly”, no development involved" as being a key factor in their decision to partner with Aras.  Our customers are not clones - they all have different ways to accomplish things that are important to them.  They have adopted Aras Innovator for its ability to quickly customize and upgrade to fit your needs - today and into the future.

In a follow up discussion I want to take a look at upgrading.  I am also putting together some ideas to walk you through the process of customizing Aras Innovator with some solutions that are small enough to talk to yet give you a good appreciation.

Thanks for reading!

 

-Dave