LinkedIn post 1
We have found the solution for PLM & ERP!
Anyone who knows Martin and me personally knows that we are never at a loss for words 😉.
Well, can PLM & ERP be solved at all?
However, we are convinced that we have come a great deal closer to a solution.
Here is the thought process from my perspective:
What strikes us again and again in industry discussions is the enormous increase in the complexity of discussions about digitalization, PLM, ERP, CPQ... 🤯
We are experiencing a level of complexity that is almost impossible for companies to cope with. However, mankind has proven time and again that it is capable of solving complex problems if it succeeds in describing them precisely and thus making them communicable and teachable.
This is a task for science, i.e. for professors.
In this case, not for classical research-based science, but for application-oriented science in the transfer to industry. What is exciting here is that the approaches we have to use must be taken from the humanities, i.e. specifically, for example, the science of logic according to Hegel, instead of the precise sciences such as engineering.
This involves outlining a language level at a suitable level of abstraction that enables a uniform, neutral (i.e. IT system-neutral) discussion of the topics.
As this does not exist today, it is not possible to create precise maps of what is.
So you could say that in business science, in PLM and ERP, we are in a time like Columbus back then, when there was no map of the world and it really wasn't certain whether you would be lost at the edge of the world.
In short, we are convinced that we have found a fundamental methodology on the basis of which a complete and consistent mapping system can be created for companies, from strategy development to implementation. If we succeed in doing this - and we are very confident that we will - then I think we can say that we have found the solution for PLM & ERP. At least in part 😊
What do you think? We look forward to hearing from you, for example at: Contact STZ-RIM now - here are your options
What would you like to see from application-oriented science for your strategy and implementation projects? 💡
Our LinkedIn post has led to many comments and reactions. For example picked it up and elaborated on it in his blog Beyond PLM: Beyond PLM Blog How to Solve PLM & ERP?
Furthermore, the post in the LinkedIn newsletter "Best of ICT" published by FRENUS.
#DigitalTransformation #Innovation #ERP #PLM #BusinessStrategy #Industry40 #ComplexityManagement #Humanities #BusinessExcellence #Research #Science #BusinessConsulting
LinkedIn post 2
Why doesn't anyone know that? - PLM & ERP insights - for experts only 🧠
When we talk about large IT systems such as ERP, PLM, MOM, CPQ, CRM, etc., there is a blind spot. A level of information architecture that we use in the language that we are not aware of. It is interesting to note that frameworks such as TOGAF, for example, also have a blind spot at this point.
Martin and I have already pointed this out in the article "We finally solved PLM & ERP".
Here are more details.
I/we are convinced that what is happening is taking place at a level that we have been using for a long time but have not yet understood sufficiently scientifically.
Take a look at the picture in the article. There is the concrete, real world in which things are tangible. This includes, for example, a real machine tool and an already implemented PLM or ERP system, whether cloud or on-premise.
In order to be able to talk about it, we use language, images and our ability to think. This takes us to an abstract level. This is what happened when designing and implementing the data models of PLM and ERP systems, for example. The result was very different domain-specific data models that can already be implemented in many IT systems in the real world today.
The objects in the respective data models have different levels of abstraction. This means that completely different aspects of the real world have been extracted and summarized from different perspectives (domain-specific). In the picture, we see a machine tool that is represented in ERP and PLM at different levels of abstraction and for different purposes (capacity carrier/cost causer vs. object for geometric simulation).
Now comes a crucial point. Today, these systems are often used in the real world. Through customization and adaptation, the application and thus the meaning of its abstract entities has moved away from the original intent in the data models.
This creates/creates a new reality every day, which has to be abstracted again. At RIM, we have created new methods that can do just that. They may even lay the foundation for a new scientific approach.
Sounds complicated - and it is 😊. But only until we have sketched it out sufficiently.
In practice, you probably don't think much about it. You realize it, for example, when you want to bring ERP and PLM together and the mapping of the data models in the application does not work.
What do you think? 🤔
#PLM #ERP #Information Architecture #ITSystems #Innovation #Frameworks #TOGAF #Customizing #DigitalTransformation #Industry40 #Technology #DataModels #Science
LinkedIn post 3
The solution for PLM & ERP?
Do you know the fear of falling off the edge of the world? Sailors knew it! What does this have to do with PLM & ERP? 🌍🧭
The fear of falling off the edge of the world has changed with the idea of the earth as a sphere and precise maps. 📜🌐
In the case of enterprise maps, PLM & ERP, we are still stuck in the time of Columbus, around 1492.
We do not yet have precise maps and there are many gaps in our conception of the matter itself.
I'm sure you've heard many a sailor's yarn from "top" advisors 😊.
I am convinced that we have a significant blind spot in our perception of how companies see things.
I was encouraged by Oleg, who calls for the Unified Data Model in his article (https://beyondplm.com/2024/07/12/how-to-solve-plm-erp/).
I liked the answer from Matthias, who spoke in a comment about the maps we have, e.g. ArchiMate, UML, SysML, TOGAF, Data Flow Diagrams, Semantic Web or OWL etc..
All of these methods focus on either data architecture or business architecture.
And the blind spot?
I am convinced that an essential layer is missing between the two. We at RIM call this information architecture.
The information architecture is the abstraction of the data model into the language and interpretation space, i.e. the level that must be present before a data model can be formulated.
Why is this so important? Quite simply. The original meaning of the entities of the data models of PLM, ERP and CRM ... systems are changed during implementation and use to their meaning in use.
Have you ever wondered what the material in SAP or the item in Teamcenter now stand for? 🤔 Have you also wondered why part and material in SAP and Teamcenter are not representations of the same thing?
This means (explanation according to TOGAF) that there is a previously unknown layer between the business architecture and the data architecture.
The information architecture. It describes the leap from the real world to the language space in which we speak.
This also means that we do not need to find a unified data model for PLM and ERP.
It is only necessary to sufficiently penetrate the information architecture with maps in order to then derive the requirements for the domain-specific data models.
This is what we at RIM do with our Company Cubing do.
What do you think? 💡🔍
