Throughout my 35-year journey in the world of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), I’ve been deeply involved in the selection phase of PLM systems, initially from the client’s perspective and soon after, from the vantage point of software publishers and integrators.

Time and again, I’ve been struck by the superficiality that tends to overshadow this pivotal decision-making process, even for projects of several tens of millions of euros/dollars.

Here are some key observations and insights:

  1. Internal Expertise: Often, a company’s internal teams lack the in-depth PLM expertise necessary for informed decision-making. Such a void leads to choices based on surface-level knowledge, missing the deeper intricacies of what makes a PLM system genuinely effective.
  2. The Consultant Dilemma: Many independent consultants, instead of providing unbiased advice, tread cautiously to avoid offending software publishers, fearing blacklisting. This conflict of interest invariably compromises the integrity of their recommendations.
  3. Use Cases: More Surface than Substance: The use cases presented usually lack depth and comprehensive understanding, leading to a disconnect between system capabilities and actual organizational needs.
  4. Overlooking PLM Theory: In the quest for immediate solutions, the foundational theory of PLM, the core models, and basic algorithms are often undervalued. A deeper appreciation of these fundamentals can significantly inform better system selection.
  5. The Misconception of Equivalence: A prevalent false belief is that all PLM solutions are created equal. However, in reality, there are significant disparities between them. Overlooking these distinctions can lead to settling for a system that doesn’t truly meet organizational needs.
  6. Technical Aspects: Often Undervalued: A PLM system’s technical foundation plays a monumental role in its efficacy. Yet, this facet often takes a back seat during the selection process, leading to potential pitfalls down the road.
  7. Political Choices: Sometimes, PLM system selection is swayed by internal politics rather than the system’s capabilities or the organization’s genuine needs. Such decisions can often lead to complications in the future, as a politically driven choice may not align with operational requirements.
  8. Overvaluing End-user and Middle Management Opinions: While it’s crucial to consider the perspectives of end-users and middle management, over-relying on their opinions can skew the selection process. This overemphasis can bolster superficial criteria over deep technical or functional considerations.
  9. Publishers’ Misrepresentations: Sadly, I’ve witnessed instances where software publishers, in their eagerness to secure a deal, provide responses that range from overly optimistic portrayals to outright misrepresentations.

Selecting a PLM system is not a decision to be made lightly. It requires a holistic approach that considers technical capabilities, aligns with organizational needs, and is backed by genuine expertise. As stakeholders in this process, it’s imperative that we challenge superficiality, advocate for thoroughness, and champion the value of deep knowledge.