Management Currency of PLM, Value of PLM/ERP Integration and Collaboration (6), PLM Connect 2011
2PLM NewsletterJohn Stark Associates January 31, 2011 - Vol13 #22 |
|
Welcome to the 2PLM e-zine This issue includes :
|
 |
| The Management Currency of PLM by Roger Tempest |
|
| The recent PLM Innovation Congress in London attracted a number of attendees who had not yet adopted PLM, and were making their second or third attempt to understand how it could be of use to their companies. There were also many delegates from companies with a long PLM track record. In conversations with them, a common theme kept occurring.
The more experienced PLM managers had clear ideas about their own implementations and where they felt they should be heading. They all had an enterprise-wide view of PLM, and had established a wide engagement with company management on PLM issues. Their problem lay in maintaining a cohesive body of thought and understanding, across all of the stakeholders, through the long-term process of debate and change as PLM progresses. The PLM team knows what should be happening, but how can they persuade everybody else, year after year? This is almost impossible to do without a "mechanism" of written material that is clear enough to bind all of the various opinions together, and robust enough to withstand the many disagreements that are part of the process. Such written material is the "currency" that is traded by the PLM Team and the rest of the company as the implementation is managed. As with financial currency, it comes in a range of denominations and is understood and accepted by those who trade with it. Everyone knows how to relate to it, and it enables ideas to be exchanged in an open market. The challenge for PLM managers is to generate and maintain this set of material so that, company-wide, the correct PLM decisions are reached and acted upon. Every time a major decision is to be made, you need all the stakeholders to be working from the same written documentation. It is much easier to get accurate input, and commitment to action, if everything is presented clearly and in writing. |
Some of the working documents will be company-specific, but it is helpful to use standard formats to cover the main issues. The CEO Briefing Document provides a platform for liaison with the board, who will also want to see a Vision, Strategy, and Roadmap. The PLM Maturity Manual establishes a 10-year forward view for the company, and PLM Dashboarding defines the management information framework that should be built over time.
The Self-Assessment Toolkit generates a clear picture of how PLM take-up varies in different parts of the enterprise, and the Benchmarking Handbook enables you to produce more detail by running a high-level internal benchmark. The 2009 and 2010 issues of the PLM Journal include advice on how to manage the board and the Steering Group; how to plan in the long term for PLM and PDM; and how to measure progress via permeation and traction. This framework of documentation is still not complete, but it provides a core toolset for generating the written documentation that PLM needs. As the PLMIG continues its work in 2011, more of this documentation will be generated, and the PLM manager's role should become progressively easier.
Roger Tempest is co-founder of the PLMIG. Membership of the PLMIG is available via membership@plmig.com.
|
 |
| Maximizing the Value of PLM/ERP Integration and Collaboration (6) by Dick Bourke |
|
| Part 6: Some Questions - Some Comments
Preface In the first five parts of this series, I presented an overview of several PLM/ERP topics. The content had been purposefully limited. As a result, some questions have surfaced. I have summarized these questions and my comments in the following. Question: There are more differences between product lifecycle management (PLM) and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems than you have cited. Don't we need to know more about them before starting down the integration path? Comment: Definitely. My point was to sensitize your antenna, pique your curiosity and encourage you to take advantage of the many references identified in the "Additional Sources of Information." Hence, it was a start to a fuller understanding of each systems' functions and capabilities. Such understanding has proven to be a pre-requisite to gaining the benefits of the PLM/ERP bi-directional integration, previously described. Question: You identified PLM and ERP as the two mandatory foundation systems for management of the entire product lifecycle. Don't some companies also want more detailed information from work-in-process (WIP) than most ERP systems provide? Comment: Yes, I agree. So, let me expand on this subject. For some industry sectors, three systems should comprise the indispensable foundation: PLM, ERP and MES (manufacturing execution system). Any company requiring detailed information to manage WIP, or to cope with industry regulations, must consider an MES. Prime examples include those companies in aerospace and defense, automotive and medical product industries. However, even if regulations do not drive the necessity a company still might choose to get more efficient WIP management by implementing an MES system. The above question triggers another comment about any differences between integration methods for PLM/ERP/MES. Comment: At a general level, the characteristics of best practice integrations for MES are about the same as for PLM/ERP, as described in Part 5. In any of the possible combinations of systems integration, one of the essential tasks, of course, will be comprehensive, up-front planning, sometimes called a "vision." And, as tempting as it is to secure fast benefits, moving ahead on a piece-meal basis is not recommended. |
Question: You didn't comment on the highly likely company cultural issues inherent when integrating PLM/ERP. Isn't that a consideration?
Comment: Yes, certainly, I'll stress it now with a direct suggestion: Ask any experienced systems implementer about the relative importance of technology - and of sensitivity to company cultural issues. Technology is necessary, certainly. Invariably, however, their response will be to urge would-be implementers to address the likely cultural issues when planning systems integration. This is because planning for a new system demands a process orientation, including defining workflow and identifying appropriate user roles and responsibilities. Unfortunately, expect heated discussions, such as "Who owns the bill of material?" Another reason to understand PLM vis-à-vis ERP capabilities is to minimize the potential hassle encouraged by parochial system diehards. Thus, as mentioned earlier, one of the objectives of up-front planning should be to eliminate the "we-they" cultural syndrome of these and other entrenched organizational attitudes. My axiom: Management commitment - by itself - will not put an end to cultural resistance to accepting new software-based processes. Consequently, the project team cannot be passive, hoping that time will deal with the resistance risks, or that momentum will sweep along any dissenters. It will take a proactive approach by a project team to win user acceptance of new processes and responsibilities. Question: After a best practice PLM/ERP integration, is there a next step? Comment: Yes, briefly stated, consolidating in PLM all functions for the creation and management of bills of material (BOM) and bills of process (BOP). Some view this unifying approach as a significant step to a "Single source of truth" - but not all agree. I will examine this subject over the next parts of this series.
For more detail, see Additional Sources of Information Contact Dick at dickb@bourkeconsulting.com. |
|
|
| Invitation to PLM Connect 2011 by John Stark |
|
|
The Manufacturer magazine, the UK's leading publication for manufacturing leaders, is hosting PLM Connect 2011 on Thursday February 17, 2011 at The Belfry, West Midlands. To register for the event, telephone Ben Walsh on ++44 207 401 6033 or email b.walsh@sayonemedia.com.
|
|
|
|
| Small Ad Section | |
|
|
 |
|
|
Top
To unsubscribe, please visit My account, - Newsletters- "manage my subscription" and untick the appropriate box.
Subscription is free to registered users. Register now
Post to Twitter