highperformanceplmebook2012july-120710131130-phpapp01

7/29/2019 highperformanceplmebook2012july-120710131130-phpapp01

1/18

Key Success Factors for PLM Strategy, Implementation, and Adoption

High Performance PLM:

Data and Analysis from Tech-Clarity and PTC Global Services, PLM Key Success Factors Survey, 2012


2/18

Page 2

An international survey of 190 manufacturing companies by Tech-Clarity and PTC Global

Services highlights FOUR KEY SUCCESS FACTORS that dist inguish high

performers in Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) from the rest of the pack:

Strategic business alignment

Process-based solut ion design Reduced customization of PLM software

Comprehensive, role-based learning and adoption

Most executives understand that each of these can be important contributors to PLMsuccess. But the practical reality is that the companies that actually follow these approachesin detail achieve business results far greater than those which take shortcuts in planning,implementation, and adoption.

In fact, the high performers in the survey achieved RESULTS FIVE TO TEN

TIMES GREATERthan the others in the top three business metrics: improving time to

market, increasing product development efficiency, and reducing product cost.

This eBook provides data and key findings from the survey. To learn more about the survey,please see the contact information on page 18.

The Bottom Line


3/18

Page 3

PLM solut ions have always involved large, complex software implementations and these are never easy

in an enterprise environment. As the scope of PLM programs has grown in recent years, these imple-

mentations often require collaboration across mult iple functions and processes across the organization.

Indeed, according to the analyst firm Gart ner, PLM applications rank among the most vital for

accelerating delivery and supporting new innovative products, and THEY RANK AMONG

THE MOST COMPLEX TO DEPLOY .

Speed vs. Scope

InvestmentTiming

Short- andLong-Term Value

ResourceLimitations

Legacy Processesand Systems

OrganizationalDynamics

The Challenge


4/18

Page 4

In April 2012, PTC Global Services, the consulting and training arm of PTC, joined forceswith Tech-Clarity, an analyst firm that specializes in product life cycle management, to surveymanufacturing executives in Europe and North America about their experiences with PLM.

The goal of the survey was to understand key success factors in planning, implementing,

and adopting PLM solut ions in complex manufacturing environments.The telephone survey* focused on senior business and IT leaders with current PLM experi-ence, and highlighted four types of quest ions:

Strategy and approach to PLM Challenges Implementation and adoption techniques Results

Survey participants included representatives of a wide range of manufacturing companieswith commercial software-based PLM solutions in place.

* The survey was conducted by ITSMA, an independent research and consulting firm that specializes in IT services and solutions,

on behalf of Tech-Clarity and PTC Global Services.

GlobalServices&Tech-Clarity

About the Survey


5/18

Page 5

North America Europe

Source: Tech-Clarity and PTC Global Services, PLM Key Success Factors Survey, 2012

Years with PLM Solution

0-1 Year

1-2 Years2-4 Years

$400-499M

$500-999M

$1B+

4 + Years

Survey

Participants

The survey included 190 senior representatives from aerospace,automotive, consumer product, high tech, indust rial, and othermanufacturing companies. The majority of participants workedon the business side of their organizations, and all participantshad direct experience with PLM solut ions.

Senior Business IT


6/18

Page 6

Note: Up to three responses allowed.


Business

Objectives

for PLM

Improve product

development efficiency

Reduce product cost

Improve sourcing or

supply chain performance

Improve service

operations or profitability

Increase product innovationDevelop more sustainable/

green products

Improve time to market

Improve product quality

Manufacturing companies today are looking to PLM to support a broad range of business objectives. As PLM has

evolved from its historical roots in product data management inside the engineering department, it has nowbecome a broad-based business program with implications across the organization.

Business Objectives


7/18

Page 7

Note: Up to three responses allowed.

Source: Tech-Clarity and PTC Global S ervices, PLM Key Success Factors Survey, 2012

Operational

Objectives

for PLM

Automate/streamlinemanual processes

Standardizebusiness processes Integrate development

& execution (PLM & ERP)

Make it easier tofind information

Support distributed/global teams

Provide a single sourceof information

Consolidate ITsystems

Improve externalcommunicationand collaboration

Improve internalcommunicationand collaboration

To support their business objectives, companies are focusing on PLM solutions that can support a broad range of

operational and technical improvements, including automating and standardizing processes, integrating systems,

and improving global collaboration.

Operational Object ives


8/18

Page 8

Most Companies Have Achieved Their Goals for Operational Improvements

3.9

3.7

3.6

3.5

3.4

Make information

easier to find

Improve internalcommunication

Standardizebusiness processes

Improve supplier/customer collaboration

Support global productdevelopment teams

3.9Consolidate IT

systems Not well Very well

1 5

X

Not well Very well

1 5

X

Not well Very well

1 5

X

Not well Very well

1 5

X

Not well Very well

1 5

X

Not well Very well

1 5

X

Note: M ean rating based on a 5-point scale where 1=not well and 5=very well.


On a purely operational level, survey participants reported that they have done well or very well in achieving their

desired improvements in information management, process automation, and internal communication.


9/18

Page 9

15%

10%

5%

0%

Overall, However, Companies Have Achieved Only Modest

Improvements in Key Business Metrics

Time to Market Product Development Effici ency Reduced Product Cost


4%3% 2%

When we look at overall business results, however, the story is more mixed. Average percentage improvements in

the top three business metrics are not bad. However, they are not the kind of results that companies often expect

when committ ing large investments to new solutions and new ways of working.

(%

improvement)


10/18

Page 10

Note: High performers are those companies with the best business results across the top three business objectives.


15%

10%

5%

0%

High Performers Have Achieved Substantially Greater Results

Time to Market Product Development Effici ency Reduced Product Cost

13.3%

8.9%

1.5% 1.3% 1.1%

5.8%

- Low Performers- High Performers

In the survey, 22% of respondents stood apart

as high performers. The high performers have

achieved substantially greater improvements in

the top business objectives, five to ten times

greater than the result s of the average and

lower performing companies.

(%

improvement)


11/18

Page 11

* Indicates a statistically significant difference.


Virtue

Patience is a

High performers tend to have more experience with PLM. This is not much of a surprise. PLM is a big change init iative.

It takes t ime to get comfortable with new ways of working, new capabilities, and new systems.

62%

High Performers Low Performers

22%16%

0-2years

2-4years

4+years

24%

39% 37%

0-2years

2-4years

4+years

Years with a PLM Solution*


12/18

Page 12

* I ndicates a statistically significant difference.



High Performers Have a Broader Scope of Implementation

Across Processes and Departments

Number of processes implemented*


Number of departments using PLM*

5.3 4.5 4.4 3.1

The high performers also tend to have a broader scope of implementation. First, they tend to include more business processes with

their program, such as quality planning.

Second, the high performers tend to involve more functional areas across the business, too. Most companies involve engineering, of

course, and many include manufacturing and supply chain. High performers are also more likely to include the quality organization,

sales and marketing, and/or general management.

Check out Jim Browns blog post on Broader Scope PLM.http://blogs.ptc.com/2012/06/12/broader-scope-plm-yields-greater-business-value/


13/18

Page 13


High Performers

Low Performers

The Most Significant Differences Relate to HOW CompaniesPlan, Implement, and Adopt PLM

Learning & Adoption

Software Implementation

Solution Design

Strategy and Planning


14/18

Page 14

Note: Multiple responses allowed. *Indicates a statistically significant difference.


High Performers Are More Likely to Align Strategy

and Use Detailed Roadmaps and Scorecards

Aligned PLM strategy with business strategy*

Developed executive agreement on value

Created detailed implementation roadmap*

Managed implementation with value scorecard*

Star

t

51%34%

76%36%

49%41%

63%46%(%

ofRespondents)

High PerformersLow Performers

Most program managers understand that program risks increase dramatically if the organization is not wellaligned around the strategy, key objectives, investment requirements, and timeline. But the survey datasuggest strongly that it is the depth and breadth of that alignment and the detail of the planning thatmatter most.

Read Rob Leavitts blog post on 6 Steps to Effective PLM Planning

http://blogs.ptc.com/2012/05/28/slowing-down-to-speed-up-6-steps-to-effective-plm-planning/


15/18

Page 15

Note: Multiple responses allowed. * Indicates a statistically significant difference.


High Performers Prioritize Business Process

Improvement and Use Software to Enable Change

39%

22%22%35%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

22%

15%17%

21%

Processes & SoftwareImproved Concurrently*

Processes ImprovedIndependently

Process Improvements Basedon Software Definitions

Software Customized toSupport Existing Processes*

The relationship between process change and software change is always a tricky one with large technology solutions.

The business value comes from changing the way we work, but its usually the software that enables those changes.

The high performers are more likely to focus first on process improvement, and then on application and system change tosupport the improvements. An integrated process is best to make sure that process change doesnt get too far ahead ofsoftware capabilities. Customizing new software to support old processes tends to be the least effective approach.



16/18

Page 16

18% 28%28%

15% 13%

Note: M ean rating based on a 5-point scale where 1=no customization and

5=significant customization.


High Performers Customize their Software Less

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

10%

32%

9%

13%

37%

No Customization Significant Customization


With all enterprise solutions, the mantra in the marketplace today is off the shelf. We dont want to getbogged down in expensive software customizations that end up costing more, taking longer, and creating

systems that are more expensive to maintain and less flexible for future expansion, integration, and upgrades.

The reality is that most companies are still doing a fair amount of customization but the high performers aredoing a bit less than the others. And because the high performers typically have had their solutions longer, thedata suggest that they have made a greater effort to minimize customization.


17/18

Page 17

Note: Multiple responses allowed.

* I ndicates a statistically significant difference.

Source: Tech-Clarity and PTC, PLM Key Success Factors Survey, 2012 High PerformersLow Performers

High Performers Take a More Strategic Approach

to Organizational Learning and Adoption

The best designed PLM solutions accomplish little if the users fail to accept the changes and integrate thenew processes and tools into their daily work.

Similar to the up-front strategy and planning, the reality is that many companies under-invest in organizationallearning and adoption. In contrast, the high performers are more likely to take a strategic and morecomprehensive approach, including strategic planning, organization-wide communication, and role-based training.

Strategic plan for training and adopt ion*

Built awareness of need for change

Custom training for different roles*

Training or sandbox test environment*

51

%

19

%

51%31%

59%45%

63%41%(%ofRespondents)

Read Rob Leavitts blog post on 4 Keys to Ensuring PLM Adopt ionhttp://blogs.ptc.com/2012/05/29/4-keys-to-ensuring-plm-adoption/


18/18

Page 18

Get in Touch!Interested in learning more about the research? Want to talk about the implications for your organization?Have a related experience to share? Please get in touch and let us know. Wed love to talk.

2012, Parametric Technology Corporation ( PTC). All rights reserved. Information described herein is furnished for informational use only, is subject to change

without notice, and should not be construed as a guarantee, commitment, condition or offer by PTC. PTC, the PTC logo, Creo, Pro/ INTRALINK, Windchill, Windchill

PDMLink, Windchill ProjectLink, Pro/ENGINEER and all PTC product names and logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of PTC and/or its subsidiaries in

the United States and in other countries . All other product or company names are property of their respect ive owners . The t iming of any produc t releas e,

including any features or functionality, is subject to change at PTCs discretion.

J0370 - PTC Global Services - Infographic / eBook

For more Insights from the Global

Services team, please visit

blogs.ptc.com/category/strategy/.

Or scan this codewith your mobile device.

Rob Leavitt is Director of Thought Leadership at PTC GlobalServices, the consulting arm of PTC. A long-time advisor totop technology and IT services f irms, Rob works with PTCconsultants, part ners, and customers to advance

understanding of key issues and challenges in productdevelopment, manufacturing, and after-market service.

Contact Rob at: Rob Leavitt, Director of Thought LeadershipPTC Global Services

[email protected]+1-781-370-5719

Twitter.com/PTC_Consulting

About the Author

highperformanceplmebook2012july-120710131130-phpapp01

Documents

Transcript of highperformanceplmebook2012july-120710131130-phpapp01