Friday, April 29, 2011

Enterprise Search - PLM Challenge


Aras and Enterprise Search
Aras is following OSS strategy to solve their momentarily interest in search. Built on top of Microsoft technological stack, Aras made an experiment with Microsoft based Search solutions. Most of them are coming today from SharePoint space.
I found the SharePoint search story a bit controversial. The actual cost of SharePoint solution can grow significantly depends on the size data storage and system configuration. Navigate your browser to the following interesting blog article to read more about The Real Cost SharePoint Search. You can also learn more about SharePoint search using ArnoldIT Overflight Search system. Navigate to the followinglink to browse through information about SharePoint search.
PLM, Enterprise Search and Open Source
Alcove9 and NorthRidge presented their solutions and vision of enterprise search related to Aras and PLM. Take a look on the following slides and make your conclusion.
Aras Enterprise Search Strategy
I found Aras’ strategy in the space of search interesting. I can expect customers are interested in search these days. PLM vendors experience challenging position in this place. We have seen OEM agreements and acquisitions made by other PLM vendors. Aras is taking an alternative way and playing with Lucene/Solr enterprise search platform to bundle it with Aras using community partnerships. Here is what Peter Schroer said about Aras Search Strategy.
What is my conclusion? The amount of information in manufacturing companies is growing. PLM vendors clearly see the need to solve this problem. The solutions seem to be beyond the level of databases. The information is located in multiple applications, systems, files, databases. Search is one of the possible options to help people to solve the information problem. Aras’ choice to follow “open source” path is complementary to Aras’ vision of Enterprise Open Source. It seems to me a good balance to Dassault/Exaled and OEM agreements made by other PLM vendors. I expect this space to become more active in the future. Just my thoughts…
Courtesy - Oleg

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

PLM: Share Data or Die


I’m still digesting a huge amount of information I learned fromPLM Innovation Congress earlier this week in London. However, there is one trend that I can identify that struck me as a major one coming across all presentations and talks. I can call it “integrate and share” trend. The problem of integration and share of data is not new in manufacturing organization. The need for integration of various elements of data for product development, manufacturing and supply chain is clear. Software vendors and customers are working for on this for years. However, something new happens now that allow me to have a fresh look on this.
Integration Processes
The sound of integration needs is very loud, and you are able to see it in presentations. I put few examples of pictures I made during the event to show how customers explain their critical business issues related to integration of data and processes in organizations. In a nutshell, inability to provide smooth integration prevents streamlining of organizational processes. It appears in communication between engineering and manufacturing, sales and production, support and sales.
Share Data
The need to share data is obvious. However, data sharing was never realized in an easy way. There are multiple reasons for that. Some of them are including the nature of people (keep my data close to me), company organization (departments, hierarchy, etc.) and competition between vendors (lock-in data inside of proprietary formats and data structures). At the same the value of data sharing is obvious. Organizations are losing money, projects are going out of schedules just because of that. PLM aimed to solve this problem during the past decade. I have to note a significant success in multiple implementations I had a chance to see. I personally participated in some of them. However, the ability to share data efficiently is still more science that ordinary process.
What is my conclusion? The need to integrate and share data is urgent. However, the way organizations are doing it, reminds me space shuttle programs. There is a need to downgrade and simplify these integration efforts to become more similar to transatlantic flights or even car trips. Just my thoughts…
Courtesy - Oleg

PLM: How to Fix Technologies and Stop Fixing People?


During the last week at COFES, I had a chance to listen toJohn Gage keynote – But Can It Slice a Pineapple? Gage talked about innovation, computers, changes, language and culture. One of his phrases resonated – “Technology is easy. People are hard“. It made me think about PLM concepts, technologies and implementations.
PLM and Product Development Process
In my view, product lifecycle management is about products development processes first. It originally started as PDM, it was very focused on data management. CAD models, Drawings, Revisions, Parts, Bill of Materials. It took almost 15 years to produce a reliable data management system that can handle all these things. However, the problem happened in between. Organizations became very complex. Many additional systems grew up to solve other business and development problems. Significant presence of ECAD and later software development introduce a new set of problems. So, product development process becomes more and more complicated. PLM companies eventually reflected the complexity in the taxonomies of their data and processes.
PLM Methodology
The question people often ask me – “what is the right PLM methodology?” It isn’t a new one. Since the complexity introduced in product developmnet continues to grow, PDM and PLM companies are trying to solve it by using various methods. One of them is to come with a clear methodology of work and system implementations. It started as “best practices” and then moved to the different colors and flavors of “how to” be related to PLM implementations. The biggest problem I have with this approach is that it actually requires a significant non-software influence in an organization. Which goes back to “people”.
PLM Technology
I think the question what is PLM technology is actually very confusing one. Nevertheless, I clarify it as a technology to manage data, processes and collaborate in a scope of product data development. So, what happens on this side? I don’t see any revolutionary changes since early 2000s. The massive amount acquisitions put vendors on a pathway of integrating acquisitions and converging technologies. The latest spark of PDM/PLM technologies happened in the last 1990s and early 2000s. Back that time, the concept of a flexible data model was invented. Finally, companies could create configurable applications. However, the outcome was an increased amount of service implementations and lots of methodology developments.
What is my conclusion? People are hard. I agree completely. To change them is near to impossible. By creating products that dependent on change of how people work, we are exposed to very long adoption cycle, expensive marketing and complicated implementations. Is it PLM fault? Yes, partially. People were exposed to a complicated stuff. However, fixing some technological issues can be a good idea to make products more friendly to people. I see a problem when PLM implementations are focused on how to change people’s work habits. The challenge is how to bring intelligent products that can handle the change for people. Just my thoughts…

PLM, Supply Chain and Cloud Adoption


Cloud is one of the most discussable topics in the industry. In the consumer web, cloud seems to be a proven option. I think, people are feeling very comfortable in the cloud these days. Days when people afraid to put their credit cards on the website for e-commerce gone forever. Earlier with Google and lately with Facebook, cloud becomes an obvious thing. However, when people talk about cloud adoption in the enterprise and manufacturing industry, things are not always as simple as Facebook climb towards 700 million users. I read Driving Automotive Industry to the cloud article by Ronald Teijken of IBM/Sterling Commerce. Ronald is speaking about the cloud opportunity in the Automotive supply chains. Here is my favorite passage:
Many manufacturers are wary of moving particular processes to the cloud, due to questions around trust and visibility. However, as manufacturers increasingly rely on IT to ensure the smooth running of their supply chains, the question of whether or not to move to the cloud is unavoidable. It provides some much needed elasticity both in terms of cost and more importantly the agility needed in the supply chain to support future growth.
This article made me think about some aspects of cloud implementation that can make the supply chain a low hanging fruit for cloud adoption.
Collaboration Space
When it comes to the communication between suppliers, the ultimate need is to have a space where both sides can collaborate easily and exchange information. In most of the industries (automotive is not exclusion), companies are not allowing a complete transparency between their internal data spaces. Therefore, to have a separate cloud-based environment can be a solution to improve communication between OEM and various suppliers.
Security
This is another big question on the “cloud roadmap”. It is always presented as a case why manufacturing companies won’t be interested to go alongside with the cloud. Put aside companies internal stories. To communicate with suppliers, data needs to go out anyway. This is a chance to public or near-private cloud to show up and establish a trustful position. Cost, reliability and availability can be factors to lead manufacturing to adopt it.
What is my conclusion?
Cloud is an interesting space these days. Leverage huge consumer market adoption, it will inspire people in the enterprise to adopt some of the best cloud examples. Will automotive manufacturing supply change be a “low hanging fruit”? I can see it possible… Just my thoughts, of course.

Courtesy - Oleg

PLM and Microblogging


PLM and Microblogging
The term “collaboration” is one of probably most confusing. PDM and PLM vendors presented multiple concepts and products that supposed to help people to collaborate. None of them was able to shift the way people communicate and email was king of the road all the time. Microblogging tools may create a new way to communicate also inside organizations. Is it possible to use the same tools like Yammer to communicate between people in product development organization? I think positive about that option. One of the key elements to succeed in this transformation is to connect information to this communication. This is a tricky part of this transformation game.
conclusion? The internet and mobile tools created new ways to communicate. Tools like Yammer and Sociacast can transform communication paradigms. Manufacturing organizations and product development can use these tools to make communication easier. PLM tools will integrate towards mainstream communication platforms to leverage the power of microblogging and social networking.

PLM Definitions- Multiple Dimensions


 Martin Eigner of the University of Kaiserslautern. Prof. Eigner also known as a founder of Eigner PLM system. Take a look on the following video and make your opinion (video is courtesy of PTC).
Prof. Eigner is talking about three dimensions of PLM integration: Lifecycle, Discipline and Supply Chain.
What is my take? PLM is very often using the context of “integration” when defines what is PLM about. These are very relevant aspects. For me, another, very important aspect of integration is openness. In my view, this is a missing link in many PLM implementations. Later this week I’m going to attend Aras Community Event (ACE 2011) in Detroit. You can follow my twitter and #ArasACE hash tag for more information.

Courtesy - Oleg

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Alcatel-Lucent Ups Competitive Edge with Agile PLM


Brad Magnani of Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise describes how the Oracle Agile PLM and Oracle EBS solutions help speed time to market, eliminate wasted cash, secure data, and ensure product quality, enabling innovation and success.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Dropbox and PLM


What is DropBox and why I like it?
If you are not familiar with DropBox, this is your time to take a look on this. The following video is short and nice explanation about how you can share everything using dropbox folder.
Dropbox is my favorite (after Google App) tool to sync files between laptop and other devices. You may ask me why after Google App? Since Google App is already synchronized. However, not everything fits Google Apps and this is specially important if you think about your CAD files and PLM Excels..
DropBox and PLM model
Is it a model for PLM future? I think, this is kinda of simplification. Dropbox is a good example of virtual storage. Files are on cloud – you shouldn’t worry. Wait a sec… what about security? If you feel comfortable with DropBox security, you can synchronize your CAD files between people and teams using DropBox virtual folder. Microsoft has similar ideas in SharePoint and some other tools and apps. The idea of drop box is not original. What is DropBox magic sauce?. My take on this is simple: usability and simplicity. It works and requires zero time to learn.
What is my conclusion? People are looking for simple tools. This is what made DropBox successful. PLM is complex. PLM companies have similar functionality in their hands today. However, the simplicity wins. Security is another question. This is a matter of trust. Do you trust Google? DropBox? Dassault? PTC? Use the cloud you trust… Just my opinion.
Curtesy - Oleg

PLM Integration Failures


I read Reasons Why PLM Integration Fails?” article on the To-Increase Blog. To-Increase is a company from Netherlands specialized in the Microsoft ERP products (Dynamics AX, NAV) and product configuration software e-Con. Read the article and make your opinion. The author is making point of various difficulties related to PLM integrations. Here is my favorite passage from this article:
A fundamental risk within any manufacturing firm, especially a firm with global operations, is the risk of information becoming siloed within individual teams.  For example, if information concerning a flaw in the development of a product is available only to the engineering team, and kept from marketing, there exists the risk of gearing up product launch tasks too quickly – resulting in wheel spinning at best, and a significant loss in resources at worst.
In much the same way, if a PLM system is implemented – but not integrated with all other systems related to manufacturing processes (think Enterprise Resource Planning systems, think Manufacturing Execution Systems) the risk exists for information to be siloed in one system.
PLM Integration and Competition
The focus on PLM-ERP integration is interesting. These are two systems that very often are trying to establish a dominance in a culture of manufacturing organization. Are you PLM or ERP driven? What system “owns” Part or Bill of Material information? Who is authoring BOM? I heard such statements many times when talked to customers during implementations. The integration point is often becoming a competitive advantage. I believe for To-Increase, integration with other products is a significant competitive advantage. Manufacturing companies would be thinking twice before deciding what system will drive product development processes.
Partners and Integration Complexity
Integration is not a simple task. You need to have enough technological and process knowledge as well as technical skills to make it work. In addition, you can rarely find two identical integration solutions. Each manufacturing company will have their own practices, systems and specifics. Because of such high level of complexity, software vendors are trying to rely on partners to deliver an integration solution for end users.The ability of partner to deliver integration becomes a key in the ability to make an overall implementation success .
PLM Integration is hard. The cost of implementation is high. The cost of failure is even higher. Vendors are pushing integrations out of the scope of their deliveries. Partners, like To-Increase can provide a significant advantage by helping customers to make integration happen. These are realities of ERP and PLM implementations.
What is my conclusion? Integrations are important and complicated at the same time. Integration failures are one of the main sources that can cause overall implementation failure. The reliance on services increases the implementation cost and creates dependency of customers on implementation services. I’d expect software vendors to re-think their view how they can make integration easier. It can be a significant differentiation factor in future PLM systems. Just my thoughts…

PLM and Enterprise Integration


Manufacturing company enterprise landscape becomes more and more complex every year. Companies are implementing new products and versions of existing products. PLM is one of them. One of the questions asked by any IT organization is how all products can be connected and integrated to support organization’s business processes. Historically, integration business, was considered as a very complicated. To solve a problem of system integrations with significant dependencies is not a simple task. The issue of PLM integration seems to me important. PLM business interest to support product-lifecycle related processes are heavily dependent on how PLM system will be able to maintain multiple integrations with enterprise systems – ERP, CRM, ECM, SRM, etc. The PLM’s rivals in this space is definitely ERP system. Many times, I had a chance to see how PLM – ERP integrations became one of the key topics to be resolved to improve product lifecycle management across the organization.
ERP Integration Challenges
ERP itself experiencing significant challenges in the space of “enterprise integration”. As a consequence of multiple diverse integration made by key ERP players in this space, the question of integration becomes an internal ERP problem. The key challenger in this space is Oracle with their multi-year, multi-billion program of Oracle Fusion. However, other players such as SAP and Infor are also deeply in their “integration tasks”. I recently read an article – Infor on track to trump Oracle in the integration game. Both, Infor and Oracle are making broad statements with regards to seamless enterprise integrations. Here is Infor’s passage:
“Infor ION services are designed to enable companies of all sizes to benefit from advanced yet simple application integration, business process management and shared data reporting.”
Enterprise Integration and PLM Focus
As part of their enterprise integration initiatives (Fusion Platform), Oracle is trying to bring more value into the PLM offering as well. Navigate your browser on this link to see a glimpse of integration architecture proposed by Oracle. Also, take a look on Oracle blog about Fusion Integration practices and you will learn how Oracle is planning to leverage Fusion platform to integration their Agile PLM. Does it make sense to me? Yes, it does. However it seems to me so 1990s…
What is my conclusion? PLM integration game can get back. I haven’t seen any significant announcement coming out of mindshare PLM vendors related to strengths of their integration capabilities. PLM vendors were too focused on the unification of their internal architectures in the past. At the same time, I can see PLM competition at the high-end customer segment will become stronger in coming years. With an urgent need to deliver results, PLM companies will turn their focus on win backs of big accounts. This is a place where PLM will need their integration technologies to fight against ERP vendors. Just my thoughts…
Curtesy - Oleg

PLM Integration Gotchas


Today I would like to discuss PLM integrations. I see PLM as a business software that heavily relies on integration. You need to integrate PLM with multiple design, manufacturing and business systems. Manufacturing companies are using a huge set of multiple systems as a result of their operational history, acquisitions and product preferences for specific solutions.
In my opinion, as soon as you decide to get into the PLM story, you will find yourself in the business of Integration Services. Even after many years of implementation, I don’t think we have a consistent agreement about PLM integration eco-systems and tools that you need for integration. So, where do you start? How do you avoid typical mistakes in such complex topics as PLM Integration? Let’s define the following areas of Product Lifecycle Management where integration is required today. In my view, there are three areas where PLM product (or project) can face different integration use cases: (1) User Interactive Integrations; (2) Process Integrations.
User Interactive Integrations
These are integrations that span the scope of CAD (design) and CAEsystems. Traditionally, these integrations mostly rely on API systems. Additional usage of standard formats for data exchange can simplify integration efforts (3DXMLJTSTEP etc.). More advanced integration in this space can use Mashup technologies to allow mixing data from multiple systems on client and component based integration with portals and other tools. Capturing of data from multiple desktop systems is a significant part of the integration effort. Usage of XML based data mixing and transformation tools can simplify overall integration costs.
Process Integrations
These are integration tools that focus on the integration of multiple transactional systems. In addition, business process management is also part of this process integration game. In this area, you can find potential for heavy usage of integration middleware and ESB (Enterprise Service Buses). Some of the integration techniques are based on proprietary tools developed inside of PDM products. Additionally, you have the potential to use an integration solution from large IT vendors (Microsoft SharePoint,BizTalk ServerIBM WebSphere etc.). You will need to optimize your organization and system usage in order not to fall into complex integrations and expensive implementation in these areas.
Additional Gotchas:
Peer-to-Peer vs. Middleware/SOA based integrations:
This is a very known trade-off in the integration business. You can connect a system directly by custom developed bridges and you can use mediation software for the integration. You need to use a rule of thumb.  I don’t think there is “one-size decision” in this case. On one hand, middleware solutions are naturally more expensive to introduce and support. On the other hand, a number of local bridges can result in a spaghetti-integration mess .
Promising Integration Technologies:
There are a few interesting integration technologies in the horizon that, in my view, are undervalued by PLM products. Mashup technologies can be used to mix information from different data sources and reuse this information for multiple purposes. There are different flavors of Mashups- (1) client/browser and (2) data (or sometime called enterprise) Mashups. There are a few interesting products that have been introduced in this space (i.e. JackBePopFlyDenodo and others)
Out-of-the-Box and Integration Services
You can achieve a pretty good out-of-the-box desktop integration, especially if you can standardize specific data formats and scenarios. Excellent examples are multi-CAD and other engineering systems. At the same time, process and more complex business integration are hard to achieve with out-of-the-box solutions and require implementation in the context of specific customers and scenarios.
Open Source
Since the integration business depends heavily on services and customer-oriented implementation, I see a potential for integration based on open source products. Advantages of open source products for customer are that they can modify it in any time because they fully own them. These integration solutions have a long life span, which can be a significant advantage in the total cost of the solution.
Integration as a Service
This class of new and emerging solutions allows you to use integration products available online from the Web. In my opinion, these solutions are mostly focused on the growing SaaS space. This is a very new zone in which I think needs to be watched more in the future.
The bottom line in this discussion is that PLM integrations have many faces and aspects. The optimization and future development of technologies in this space can bring significant competitive advantages and more integration solutions to customers.

Curtesy - Oleg

3D/PLM and iPad: Future or Baloney?


iPad Apps Gold Rush
The number of mobile and specifically iPad apps is growing. Below I put few links on videos presenting some of the most notable applications I had a chance to see for the last months. Autodesk and Dassault made iPad apps part of their portfolios. Siemens PLM relies on the partner to provide iPad app. PTC announced the mobile version of PTC Arbotext. Aras also worked with partner Porchys to provide a mobile version of Aras Innovator. However, I haven’t seen iPad apps on their list. In addition, I wanted to specially noted CADFaster collaborative app for iPad. I’m sure this list of iPad apps is not exhaustive. Send me links to 3D/PLM iPad apps as well as other iPad apps that relevant in the context of engineering and manufacturing.
AutoCAD WS
DS 3DVia Mobile
Autodesk Inventor Publisher
SolidWorks n!Fuze
Arbotext Service Information Solution
TeamCenter on iPad
CADFaster
Mobile Becomes a New Laptop
A decade ago, laptops provided a first step in the mobility. Today laptops are displacing desktops not only on engineering desks, but also for kids and everyday home computer. I bought my last desktop 4 years ago. Today, laptops become too heavy to hold and carry. iPad is a proper size, and most of the people prefer iPad-size-like-device or even smaller iPhone or Android device. According to numbers ofiPass Mobile Workforce Report 2010, 27.4% of people think iPad can replace laptop for general business use. The same report predicts rise of mobilocracy with corporates globally.
What is my conclusion? iPad and “new tablets” are creating a new device niche. New iPad apps provide us capabilities and user experience we have never seen before. It will take few more years until iPad gold rush will be transformed into valuable business apps, but I definitely can see some of them becomes a reality in Engineering and Manufacturing world. Just my thoughts…

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

How to Present Cloud PLM Solutions?


How you can explain to customers about PLM on cloud (or on demand)?

Quite many times, I’m hearing a phrase “Cloud is not for PLM”.The cloud and on-demand topics were discussed multiple times, and I actually can find some very compelling reasons why cloud is good for PLM. I think everything starts from a good explanation. I found the following video (thanks Josh!) about Google Chrome OS as a very good explanation of why our life will move to cloud.
By the way – lesson #1. We don’t have to say “cloud”. It sounds complicated. Say – Internet! Do you like Internet? Yes, of course, we all like Internet.

Curtesy - Oleg

PLM Processes: Flowchart vs. Rule-based?


Process management is an important aspect and activity in Product Lifecycle Management. Multiple activities in product design, engineering and manufacturing can be defined and maintained as a process. Definition of a process is an interesting problem, in my view. Different systems are using multiple techniques to define processes. Most of them are traditionally workflow-oriented. If you talk to engineers in an organization, you will discover that flowchart is widely used way to define a process. You can see below few examples of such a workflows.



We can find such definitions in all PDM/PLM systems. Definition of processes done in this way is very straightforward. However, when processes become complicated, the overall definition of a process can become a bit complicated too. You can see one of the examples below.

At the same time, definition of processes can be done verbally as a set of written rules. Such a workflow definition can be done much easier and can be easy read and interpreted by people involved into people definition. You can see a simple example of such definition created on the whiteboard.

I found both practices implemented in SharePoint Designer 2010. You can find similar implementation in other business process management systems. However, I found MS SharePoint case as a very representative one. You can create flow-based process definition using MS Visio based flowcharts.

At the same time, you can use a very interesting implementation of rule-based processes. I found such rule-based definition of processes as something that can be easier understood by users.

What is my conclusion? The ability easy to define a process is very critical. Process definition is one of the most complicated parts of PLM system implementation. To have a tool that allows you easy to understand and define processes can become an important competitive advantage for any PLM system. I think, systems are evolving and create new ways to implement processes. It will be interesting to hear what are your practices and experience in this space. I’m looking forward to you feedback and discussion.

Curtesy - Oleg

Sample Scripts for Agile 9.3 Events Framework


Oracle is providing sample code for Agile PLM 9.3 Events and Web Services. With these samples, you can learn how to automate Agile PLM to streamline your business processes.
We are providing Events Samples which show you how to:
  • Automatically generate the description of an item using other fields
  • Clear out fields on an item save-as
  • Automatically set the change analyst by product line
  • Automatically assign a find number to BOM items
  • Automatically notify the quality analyst when when a problem report is flagged as Critical
We are providing Web Services Samples which show you how to:
  • Check-in, Check-out and Get documents from MS Word
  • Load or update a BOM from MS Excel
These and more Events and Web Services Samples can be found at: https://www.samplecode.oracle.com
Once you have logged in, click on the Code Samples tab. You can then select Agile PLM under products to find all the samples related to Agile PLM.
Note: These samples are provided for guidance only and should be tested in a development system before being applied on a production system. The sample code is not supported.

More about Agile PLM 9.3 - TOIs, What's New, and UX Blog


There is a lot of content being delivered by Oracle with Agile PLM 9.3. First, the Oracle Usable Apps blog has a new post about Agile: Agile 9.3 Product Lifecycle Management Pushes Productivity to New Heights which covers some of our updated Web Client productivity features. Oracle is also releasing 27 Transfer of Information (TOI) recordings by product mangers which discuss the new features in 9.3 along with a What's New document. Continue past the break for more information on how to access this content.

9.3 New Features Whitepaper

In order to view the 9.3 New Features Whitepaper, login to Metalink and select the Community tab. Select Agile PLM from the My Communities area >> Show All Community Documents.
more-community1.png
Alternately, open KM Note 847088.1

Guide to 9.3 TOIs

The Agile PLM product managers have recorded 27 different Transfer of Information sessions describing the different features in 9.3 The guide below can help you navigate through all the various TOI sessions.
Note that you may need to go through the Metalink process once to get authorized before these links work. In order to get access to the TOI sessions through Metalink, Select the Knowledge tab >> then Tools and Training >> then TOI Online Training. On the resulting page, select Agile.
more-metalinktoi1.png
---
Partners have direct access from OPN through Agile 93 Partner TOI Page.

Agile PLM gets Groovy..


Here is the solution: with Agile 9.3, Oracle provides scripting capabilities inside the PLM system. It allows you to write Process Extensions without any knowledge of the Java language and how to create and deploy .jar files etc. That´s how it works: just open the Agile Admin Client, create an Event Handler of type "Script PX", enter the script code, tie it to an event and you are ready to go. 
You may ask, why GROOVY ? It´s not because of the name of this script language :-) It´s because of its great support of Java, it actually compiles into Java Bytecode. Theoretically you could just copy Java code into your Script PX and run it without any changes. But, you should only consider that if you are a Java PX expert, but you should get Groovy quickly, code is much easier to write and to read.
If you want to learn more about Groovy, check out this page: Groovy Home at Codehaus

Steps to PLM Success - Integrating best practices, standards will boost PLM returns


Properly executed PLM strategy will offer three benefits:
  1. A sound PLM integration plan produces positive results and cuts costs.
  2. PLM makes information transparent with centralized access to product design data.
  3. Success is dependent on standardization of procedures to eliminate ambiguity.
By taking advantage of existing technology and by building in flexible business processes and solutions, manufacturers, with their integrator partner and PLM software vendor, can infuse more exacting standards into their product life cycles to reduce time to market, cut down on product costs, and increase yields on their new product investment. There are some great innovative product ideas out there, but harnessing them, turning the concept into reality, while streamlining the engineering and manufacturing processes can, at times, bottleneck any manufacturer.


Map out PLM integration
When it comes to profitability, today’s economic malaise is no different than the heady days of a few years ago: A manufacturer needs to produce positive results while cutting down on costs. Suffering through down times does not mean a manufacturer has to slow or stop product innovations. Instead, to win out, a manufacturer has to harness out of control costs that go into the product life cycle. There is no room for error.
That is where a PLM integration plan comes in. It is the key to growth for any company, but it is much more than that. When speed to market is of the essence, a properly integrated PLM solution allows manufacturers to quickly design and validate products and processes in a virtual environment, rather than a physical one. Working in a virtual environment will truly cut down on time and will create a setting where innovation can occur almost overnight.
Traditionally, enterprise resource planning (ERP), supply chain management (SCM), and customer relationship management (CRM) help squeeze surplus costs out of the operational side of business. But by themselves, they have not been able to increase a company’s revenues or control expenses associated with managing a product’s life cycle.
PLM can reshape a manufacturer by:
  • Maximizing revenue by beating the competition to market with products that justify premium pricing.
  • Delivering first-to-market advantages that will hike sales.
  • Cutting down on costs by reducing operational expense by curtailing unnecessary rework, implementing lean initiatives, rapidly adjusting to changing compliance regulations ,and reducing material, structural, and warranty costs.
  • Extending the profitability of product lines by economically delivering alternatives and spinoffs.
Companies need their people, processes, and intellectual capital to work together and not against each other in an effort to accelerate new product development while at the same time reducing operational costs. PLM will digitally transform the life cycle used to conceive, design, manufacture, service, and improve product offerings.
What a PLM integration plan allows a manufacturer to do is to capture all knowledge, from tacit to explicit, and leverage it in a life cycle process that improves the efficiency of the product from start to finish. With a true integration plan of attack, a PLM plan becomes a product innovation strategy. To accomplish that, an integrator and a manufacturer working together as a team can think across all systems and integrate everything to truly experience a complete and successful product life cycle.
Understand, plan, execute
Speed to market is more imperative today than ever. Products continue to grow in complexity, governmental regulations become even more of a factor, plus being able to comprehend, integrate, and collaborate with partners and suppliers, all remain key ingredients to the recipe of success.
In addition, a manufacturer needs to satisfy customers and meet target launch dates. The old way or traditional approach to conducting business just does not cut it anymore. Manufacturers need to always stay one step ahead of the competition.
In order to achieve the maximum return on their PLM investment, a manufacturer cannot have departments working in a vacuum; it needs to provide centralized access to product design and information. The manufacturer also has to offer controlled access to this data, while supporting cross departmental collaboration and communication, which will cut down on costs due to errors and rework.
A PLM integration plan will also go toward improving quality and accelerate time to market. One of the other key benefits will improve change management processes.
Auto supplier drives forward
One global automotive supplier knows all about the need for a product innovation strategy. The supplier knew it had a problem, but needed help finding the right solution. Through the investigative stage of the project, the integrator found because of a series of acquisitions and mergers over a short period of time, the supplier was working off multiple business processes. With the auto industry facing the most difficult challenges in this economy, they needed to cut way down on process costs, while at the same time introducing new initiatives. If the integrator came in and just installed a PLM solution, the supplier never would have been able to achieve success, but it would not have been as great as it was if they did not work out a true product innovation strategy. In doing so, the supplier was able to reduce time to market for new products, hike product quality, and increase process quality.
By reducing time to market for new products, the integrator and supplier team was able to:
  • Improve engineering release and change management
  • Automate bill of material maintenance
  • Integrate visualization
  • Increase consistency in data exchanged with partners
  • Easily identify non-compliant components
  • Synchronize part changes with tool changes
  • Realize design anywhere, build anywhere
  • Gain better support of supplier integration
  • Keep the knowledge base within, resulting in reduced training costs
Standardize for success
For a manufacturer to succeed in any PLM integration, however, the key ingredient is to standardize their procedures. All systems have to work in harmony and everyone has to be on the same page. There can be no ambiguity. But this standardization does not need to include heavy technology costs. Rather, through the integrator’s efforts, manufacturers will be able to garner a better return on their existing investments.
Poor management of product information due to a lack of organization or failing to provide a standardized process for documenting, archiving, tracking, and managing changes can end up being a nightmare for any manufacturer. On top of that, people needlessly spend way too much time looking for information that should be at their fingertips. That is where the strength of standardization comes into play. Since so many people handle data in different ways, and with information constantly changing, it can make it difficult to figure out which plan everyone should be working off of. Without standards, it is very hard to have any idea of the changes made as well as figure out the changes’ impact.
With pressure on hiking productivity and profitability continuing at its breakneck speed, manufacturers can ill afford to have any flaws in development processes threaten their ability to deliver goods. They need to operate full speed ahead on all eight cylinders.
Integrator partner
For a manufacturer to eliminate these roadblocks and succeed in moving toward a successful and profitable product innovation strategy, they will need an integrator with true manufacturing industry experience that runs the gamut from solution design and integration to disciplined program management and support offerings. An integrator can install systems and support them, but what it can also do is allay fears of pending change. Retooling a series of processes, while technologically challenging, can also be a very difficult change in culture and mindset. That is where an integrator with a strong industry background can come into play.
In today’s business environment, manufacturers need to focus on what they do best and that is innovating and producing their product. Through a product innovation strategy with the manufacturer, the integrator will focus on three main steps to develop a plan: Consultation, design and build, and operation.
In the consultation phase, the integrator develops a strategy and identifies potential in the PLM process. In the design and build area, the integrator will design and implement an enterprise-wide information backbone to ensure product data is consistent, implement a solution that allows for collaboration with partners, suppliers, and customers, and allow integration with other IT applications like Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES), ERP, SCM, or CRM.
In the operations phase, the integrator can offer a secure cost-efficient operation, support and maintenance of the PLM IT environment, while keeping this mission critical system at uptimes of greater than 98%.
After working through and executing the plan, the integrator should help the manufacturer:
  • Increase competitiveness through quicker product launch and marketing with time-to-design costs reduced by up to 70%.
  • Reduce costs through shared information and consistent processes by 25% to 40%.
  • Realize cost and value potential in procurement, production, sales, and service by incorporating all persons involved in the product life cycle, thereby reducing time-to-manufacturing costs by up to 50%.
  • Reduce non-conformance and failure costs through appropriate configuration database, improve data quality despite growing complexity and expanding variety of products.
As a part of working with an integrator, the team would develop a closed-loop process that can prioritize PLM investments on the basis of expected business value.
This plan will help ensure a rapid return on the PLM investment, a delivered solution aligned with strategic business goals and performance metrics, and a continuous improvement of objectives.
By employing industry best practices, the integrator will be able to:
  • Develop a standard business process framework.
  • Design a business transformation roadmap that reconciles processes with organizational maturity and cultural change requirements.
  • Document and execute a supporting IT roadmap for optimal use of tools, systems, and infrastructure along with a supporting investment plan.
  • Deploy a disciplined methodology covering solution design, architecture validation, deployment processes, and operational procedures
  • Mandate a disciplined governance based on objective metrics believed by executive leadership.
By partnering with a strong industry-focused integrator, manufacturers will be able to benefit from advanced business architecture frameworks that can bring together, standardize, and reuse processes and enterprise computing assets. By having everyone working off the same page, manufacturers will be able to build a stronger consensus between business and IT organizations and standardize and simplify resource management and product planning metrics and processes.
Curtesy : Ed Shinouskis