Or do we?
When speaking to customers about 3DEXPERIENCE, I often include a discussion about project management. Quite often customers - especially smaller ones with fewer staff – will say we are too small to justify project management: “We don’t do Project Management”.
In my experience this is rarely the case, but perhaps it would be best to first define what I mean by Project Management.
If you think I am about to start talking about Prince 2 or Six Sigma, then I am sorry (not sorry) to disappoint you.
I am referring to something much more basic.
The advantages of a product lifecycle management ('PLM') system are – generally – widely understood and accepted.
The issue with choosing to take the plunge and move ahead with a solution usually comes down to business justification of the cost and ultimately the Return On Investment ('ROI') calculation.
So, what is the solution to the 'PLM ROI conundrum'?
Here at Desktop Engineering we believe the answer is simple – Reduce the size of your ‘I’.
On Cloud software is the general trend of many applications – starting with email, it has progressed through to accounting software, customer relationship software and even finite element analysis.
PLM was supposed to be a natural evolution, taking advantage of the information associated within 3D data to then flow into all downstream activities. PLM was created (by Dassault Systemes) around 20 years ago and the process was adopted industry-wide.
As you may be aware the industry standard definition of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) is the process of managing the entire lifecycle of a product from inception to its retirement. PLM encompasses people, data, processes and business systems that providing the backbone for companies and their extended enterprise.
While nobody doubted the opportunities available in utilizing the information for downstream activities, the overall investment, along with necessary changes in company’s culture, and process curtailed its wider acceptance. Based on the above, PLM become the domain of larger companies (OEM’s).
Major disruptions present a huge risk to your aerospace program. When they occur, a comprehensive plan must be drawn up, distributed to stakeholders and executed. Yet, sometimes this just isn’t enough.
The complexity of most aerospace programs means multiple projects run simultaneously. With numerous departments and countless internal teams involved, it’s tough to roll out a response to a major disruption that can efficiently minimise the fallout.