Making PLM Social

I’m writing this in response to Oleg’s post on the same topic. He states Social Media applications have revolutionized the way people interact, and poses the question “what about PLM”. He goes on to say the consumer revolution is about content and therefore the Socialization of PLM will also be about user generated content…

His mistake is to say that very few people in the Enterprise can handle CAD and Product Structure. While it may be true that very few can authour CAD, it is not accurate to say everyone else does not understand the result of CAD. The CAD output is a representation of the product, which is exactly what the Enterprise is working to define and deliver. The same is true about Product Structure.  While not everyone in Enterprise authours a Product Structure, they certainly understand the concept and certainly use it as a navigational aid. Definitions of the Product in either 3D, 2D or as a Product Structure are all user generated content that makes sense to anyone involved through out the Product Lifecycle.

Yes content is king, but it is not as simple as user generated content. You must question why content is king and why content connects people. So lets explore a bit further the connections in a Social Media application.  If I post a picture on Flickr, it has no affect on the masses. The Social engine takes off when people with a common interest, or an interest in the theme of the picture, find the picture and take an interest in this picture. If your picture is about Gothic architecture and I am looking for information on Trees, I will never connect to you through this picture. I would conclude that the connections are made through a common interest and people’s ability to engage as they see fit.

The content is a representation or proxy of a common interest, or something that “potentially” binds us!

This concept carries over perfectly to product development and to CAD and Product Structure. A CAD file is a proxy or representation of a part/component within the product. This can also be true for excel files, word files and email discussion about the part. For example an email discussion about the cost of the part that also contains a cost calculation excel file,  are representations of a part. These representation connect people within a context, cost of the part. If I have an interest in cost then I may engage this content, either through search, RSS or just by navigating back to the location of this content. Cost is not as simple as a value maintained in a database. Cost represents an ongoing exchange, debate, negotiation and compromise among the extended team. If you wish to understand how the ending value was defined you must understand all the exchanges between people with a point-of-view.

You can continue the above cost example for any other attribute about the product. The same story would hold true for color of the paint, material selection and product features. I would conclude that the product development process is already Social. What needs improvement, or to become more Social capable are the tools used actively through out the day.