A Roadmap for Product Lifecycle Management

Implementation in SMEs

Anneli Silventoinen*
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Department of Industrial
Management, P.O. Box 20, 53851 Lappeenranta, Finland
E-mail: [email protected]

Jorma Papinniemi
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Department of Industrial
Management, P.O. Box 20, 53851 Lappeenranta, Finland
E-mail: [email protected]

Hannele Lampela
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Department of Industrial
Management, P.O. Box 20, 53851 Lappeenranta, Finland
E-mail: [email protected]
* Corresponding author

Abstract: The focus of the paper is on the challenges, benefits and

requirements of implementing product lifecycle management (PLM) in small
and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Customer needs on product properties
are related with all stages of the product lifecycle (PLC). There are several
challenges for today's enterprises, including SMEs, such as dynamic and
individual customer needs, rapid technological development, collaboration in
innovation, product development and production, not forgetting efficiency
requirements of internal processes of the enterprise and profitability. In
addition, challenges of SMEs are related with their limited financial and human
resources. The practical aim of the research is to plan a model of PLM
acquisition and implementation for an SME.

Keywords: Product lifecycle management; PLM implementation; SMEs;

maturity;

1 Introduction

This study aims to discuss the implementation of product lifecycle management (PLM) in
small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) from the point of view of knowledge and
information management in product-related processes. PLM is seen as a new method for
companies to better manage product development and service processes from beginning
to end in product lifecycle [1]. Especially in industrial manufacturing companies,
managing product information through the whole lifecycle is seen as an answer to
growing demands in product development, for example in shortening time to market and
managing more complex products, and the estimated growth rate of the PLM systems
market was 13,5 percent [2], [3]. One of the “next level PLM systems”, a product
development integration framework (PDIF) by IBM enables faster engineering changes
and linking design and development to other business processes, as well as providing
enterprise level information to executives [4].
A typical problem concerning product and customer needs is that the information is
scattered or is not available when it is needed during product lifecycle (PLC) processes:
product concept, product design, order configuration, manufacturing, delivering, in-use,
maintenance and disposal. By utilizing new operations model /framework and PLM
information systems SMEs can better serve their customer and supplier networks and at
the same time speed up information exchange across lifecycle processes, which in turn
speeds up both the product development and delivery processes.
The focus of the paper is on the challenges, benefits and requirements of
implementing PLM in SMEs. Customer needs on product properties are related with all
stages of the PLC. There are several challenges for today's enterprises, including SMEs,
such as dynamic and individual customer needs, rapid technological development,
collaboration in innovation, product development and production, not forgetting
efficiency requirements of internal processes of the enterprise and profitability. In
addition, challenges of SMEs are related with their limited financial and human
resources. The practical aim of the research is to plan a model of PLM acquisition and
implementation for an SME.
The main research question of this study is, what kind of special characteristics and
challenges are related to PLM implementation in SMEs and what kind of benefits support
the adoption of new practices?
The sub-questions in this study are:
What are the benefits associated with PLM systems, and are they similar for large
and small companies?
What kind of organization is mature to acquire a PLM system and how to assess the
maturity?
What should the implementation process of PLM for SMEs be like?

2 Literature overview

Current literature on PLM is mainly focused on large companies with ample resources,
and their processes. In the literature of SMEs, the PLM aspect of business processes has
been an increasingly interesting topic, but the research is still scarce. Traditionally,
product data management (PDM) has been discussed mainly in the domain of product
development and design, but the concept has evolved and expanded to include all the
processes during the lifecycle of a product or lifecycle of a customer relationship. The
product process and the customer process can be seen as the core of all business
processes, and PLM brings these together by enabling the integration of all product-
related information. Despite the bright prospects promised, SMEs face big challenges in
implementing the PLM ideology and they don't always see the benefits of it, because the
existing research has emphasized larger company focus.
2.1 Benefits and challenges of PLM systems for SMEs
There are both internal and external drivers and needs for PLM systems: the internal
reasons include the need to improve the efficiency of innovation process and to speed up
the innovation as well as improve or enable network collaboration [5], (see Table 1
below). The mass customization strategy emphasizes customer needs focus, and
furthermore the current PLM software features offer possibilities for managing vast
amounts of complex, scattered information [5], [6].
The external needs for increasing use of PLM systems are the common macro trends
in many industries: globalization and competition which often lead to distributed co-
operative product development, in order to save costs or gain access to resources,
competencies and markets [7]. In this environment, PLM gives the possibility to manage
complex products which have shorter life cycles than before and also enable quality
improvement by responding to diverse collaboration needs with suppliers and other
partners.

Table 1 Drivers for PLM and challenges for strategy, processes and IT
Driver Impact on strategy Impact on processes Impact on information
technology
Managing Less vertical, more PLM processes Data exchange
extended horizontal integration. enabling collaboration standards, computer-
products Focus on modular with defined aided modeling of
products and platforms interfaces. Process complex products,
to improve component capability to manage integrating business
re-use. Complex complex products. applications.
products.
Globalization Focusing on Improving process Integrating IT systems
differentiation or automation. with partners. Work
standardization. Enterprise-wide flow management.
Complex supply process standards.
chains.
Legislation Complying to Standardized and well Ensuring data
legislation documented processes. consistency. Methods
requirements with Traceability of for long-term
PLM (environment, processes. archiving.
safety, product
reliability).
Source: Modified from [14], [15].

All these factors lead to the increase in the amount and complexity of product-related
information, thus increasing the need for systematic and transparent information
management [5]. This is a challenge especially for SMEs with limited resources, and the
emphasis in implementing PLM can be on different issues than in bigger companies, for
example focusing on the traceability of products and user feedback, to enable customer
needs scanning, quality and feature improvements and proactive service. [8].
Often the SMEs have a possibility to join a bigger customer’s system, when there is
no need to develop own systems, but this means multiple process changes to integrate the
functions between organizations [9], [10], which requires interoperability and
standardization [11], and an online access [12]. Implementing PLM in and SME can be
faster than in bigger companies because of less need for system customization and easier
adoption of new routines, since cultural changes in smaller organizations might be easier
[13].

Benefits of PLM
Companies are not willing to make investments unless they have facts on the business
potential or benefits that are counted as cost savings. PLM benefits are often “soft” by
nature, not easily transferred to monetary benefits. [16], [13]. Implementing PLM can
result in reduction of product development time from weeks to days, and causes
significant changes also in manufacturing, service, maintenance and support. The biggest
benefits can be realized through faster product development time and faster time to
market [12]. In a study on European automobile and airplane industry, implementing
PLM and PDM systems with a strategic focus and utilizing them in a versatile manner
improved the key figures of the companies [17]. PLM systems also have the possibility to
improve organizational learning, and to help knowledge accumulation [5]. According to
Stark [16] general benefits from PLM are identified as:
better access to customer need information,
more innovative ideas,
improved sales process,
utilizing distributed development,
better possibilities for make-buy decisions,
improved user support,
less product defects,
utilizing accumulated knowledge for service and maintenance,
more effective re-use of product parts, and disposal of products.

Because the PLM systems are normally customized, the benefits vary between
organizations and depend on the final outcome of the system configuration. General
benefits of PLM systems are easy and fast dissemination of knowledge, documents and
expertise, and it diminishes some of the risks associated with distributed product
development. Information is better organized and easier to find, which enables
productivity improvement [5]. Standardization and transparency add process and product
quality [13]. Customer claims and feedback can be utilized effectively in development
and production, and product and process problems can be prioritized and solved faster
[18].
Complicated product design and manufacturing processes are easier to control and
reacting faster to changes in markets, standards and legislation becomes possible. Also
the mistakes in product planning decrease, which lowers product development costs
because necessary changes can be done earlier in the process and testing costs are lower
[13], [7]. The simultaneous dissemination of information enables faster decision-making
and sequential information sharing is not needed. Also tacit engineering knowledge can
be better codified and utilized. In companies which use PLM effectively, engineers use
more time for value-adding tasks (53%) than in other companies (47%). This is due to
improved communication and accessibility of information [13]. Work processes become
more standardized and automated, and utilizing existing knowledge and design models
enables faster time to market with better quality insurance. This has a positive effect to
market share, profits and customer loyalty [13].
The improvements in PLM systems make the implementation easier, faster and
cheaper than before [6], so they have become available for also SMEs, although few
Finnish SMEs have seen the need to implement PLM systems so far [7].

Challenges of PLM
The implementation challenges of PLM in SMEs can be related to the technology on one
hand and knowledge/information management on the other. In big companies, the
implementation is a long-term process, often organized as a massive project. Since the
systems need to be customized, the total costs include the purchase and maintenance. [5].
Also the philosophy of business processes is changing, which means a cultural and
mental change [13].
In small companies, the fear of significant process changes slows down the PLM
adoption and implementation process [19]. The integration to other systems such as CAD
used in the company presents an important challenge. Additional costs come from user
training, which can be made easier by standardized graphical user interface (GUI) that
shortens the training and planning time needed and reduces costs. Technical consulting
can also be acquired from the software vendors [7].
SMEs are afraid of acquiring and implementing PLM systems because of the costs,
infrastructure requirements and possibly changes in processes and strategy [19]. The total
costs of implementation can be three times the original purchase price of the system,
when taking into consideration the process- and configuration changes, so despite the
knowledge management and other business benefits it is such a remarkable investment in
an SME with limited resources that the planning and implementation has to be considered
carefully [20].
The impact of PLM technology in different industries is dependent on the product life
cycle and the product development and market introduction process, as well as on the
development drivers of the industry (marketing, projects, technology, production) [21].
PLM affects the central business requirements such as time to market (product portfolio
management, distributed product development, customization, and information
management during the product life cycle), production volume (networked production,
and component delivery) and profits (management of life cycle processes, extended
product) [21].
In addition to industry-specific factors, company-specific factors and plans for
product development, expansion and networking also affect the need for PLM and the
requirements and functionality of the system. The benefits of PLM are best achieved
when the original purchase price of the system is not the only significant factor, but the
acquisition is done with a strategic intent and the process focuses on the quality and costs
of implementation [17]. The needed level of the functionality needs to be defined and
found, and also the integration with other systems (own and stakeholders) needs to be
considered. Choosing a system to use means complying with a standard that might have
limitations, and the quality management system might also set some limits to PLM [9].
2.2 PLM Maturity assessment of the organization
When a company is planning to deploy PLM or to implement a PLM system, maturity
assessment is one of the main themes to be considered by the company. Has the company
readiness to develop, implement or extend the use of PLM? What is PLM maturity and
how should it be assessed? Which are the main elements of PLM maturity? Maturity
models on PLM are classified in several assessment approaches for PLM implementation
in literature.
Assessing an organization’s readiness for product lifecycle management requires
assessment of all the elements of PLM: technology, not only enabling technology, but its
infrastructure, processes, people and practices [22]. This assessment needs to be done
using a systematic and understandable framework that compares where we are now and
where we need to be in the future. Grieves [22] and Batenburg et al. [15] suggest an
assessment framework of Capability Matrix Model (CMM) that was originally applied in
the information systems area. The CMM has five levels: Initial (ad hoc), Repeatable,
Defined, Managed and Optimized. For instance reuse of design maturity can begin from
‘easier for engineers to design new than reuse (Initial)’ towards ‘automated searching of
BOM for similar components (Optimized)’. Batenburg et al [15] have carried out a study
on a PLM maturity framework adapting the Capability Maturity Model.
The idea of the PLM maturity model by Saaksvuori and Immonen [23], (see Table 2,
refer to the generic maturity model CMM combined with the COBIT standard) is to
describe, on a rough level, how a company and its management team can develop and
extend the use of a corporate-wide PLM concept and related processes and information
systems. The origin of the model lies in the idea of phases or stages, which a company
usually goes through as it adapts to new cultural issues, processes, management practices,
business concepts, and modes of operation. These stages represent the organizational
growth, learning, and development that occur as new methods are implemented in large
corporations.
Table 2 The modified generic maturity model for PLM [23]

Level Working PLM Maturity

practice
1 Unstruc- The PLM topic has been recognized and its importance agreed. Work
tured must be done to defi ne and develop the PLM concept and standards.
However, at present, there are no defi ned approaches concerning
lifecycle management; all lifecycle and product management issues are
resolved by individuals on a case-by-case basis.
2 Repeatable Lifecycle and product management processes have developed to the
but stage where similar procedures are followed by different people
intuitive undertaking the same task (i.e. the processes function on ad hoc bases).
There is no formal development, definition, training, or communication
of standard processes; all responsibility is left to individuals. There is a
high degree of reliance on individual knowledge and therefore errors
occur.
3 Defined Processes and basic concepts are standardized, defined, documented,
and communicated through manuals and training. However, the human
factor is important, there is no end-to-end PLM process supporting IT
systems, all work is completely or partially manual from the process
point of view. IT systems support individual parts of processes. The
PLM processes or basic PLM concepts are not best-of-the-breed, nor are
 they uniform throughout the corporation, however they are formalized.
4 Managed It is possible to monitor and measure the compliance between processes
and and to take action where processes are not functioning well. Processes
measurable and concepts are under constant improvement and provide best
practices. IT systems support PLM processes well. Process automation
is used in a partial or limited way. Processes and concepts are developed
through clear vision throughout the corporation. The state of uniformity
of processes is clear.
5 Optimal Processes and concepts have been refined to the level of best practice,
based on continuous improvement and benchmarking with other
organizations. IT is used in an integrated manner and process
automation exists on an end-to-end basis.

In order to successfully develop business- and PLM-related issues such as processes or

information, the current situation of every business unit, regional unit, or product area
must be recognized and sufficiently understood. The PLM maturity model is valuable
tool for this evaluation and analysis.
The maturity model for PDM by Stark [16] is based on the progress in four evolution
stages: Traditional, Awakening, Adapting and Modern. At each stage a company can be
described and assessed by a pre-defined questionnaire from three viewpoints – the
company, the product development process, and PDM. For example the level of customer
orientation affects the maturity stage of PLM implementation.
The PLM maturity model by Sharma [24] describes the integration progress of
product lifecycle support from intra-enterprise through inter-enterprise to collaborative
information systems. The highest level of collaboration is based on web services allowing
Just in time virtual collaboration.
Schuh et al. [25] have proposed an implementation framework that comprehends
seven maturity elements of PLM:
1. a tangible definition;
2. the specification of the fundamental concepts (PLM foundation);
3. a set of process reference models;
4. a list of vendor neutral software requirements;
5. the profiles of specific software solutions (PLM software support);
6. a knowledge base;
7. the specification of the potential benefits.
The PLM definition provides the boundaries within which the reference models are
detailed. The PLM foundation is based on a robust specification of the product
structuring that provides the necessary fundament for the implementation. The set of
process reference models is located in the middle of the framework and integrates its
other elements. It provides different reference models varying according to a group of
characteristics of a company (sector, size, order type, etc.) which coherently define
typical industrial enterprises. The vendor neutral software description consists of a
structured catalogue that lists the software requirements needed to support process
activities. Detailed software profiles and capabilities to support PLM have been identified
in relation to the neutral functional representation. The knowledge base supplies the
necessary material to support training. Finally, the PLM benefits show the potential
competitive advantages related to each reference process.
2.3 PLM implementation process
In order to succeed in PLM deployment and PLM system implementation, it needs to
follow a systematic process or methodology [19]. By acquiring a PLM system it is
possible to support Business Process Reengineering (BPR) for instance in the fields of
product design and after-market activities. There’s no reason to imagine that BPR
happens automatically by acquiring a PLM system, without business process
reassessment. In fact the PLM system seldom supports working practices right away, but
it requires changes in work processes.
The PLM framework and PLM issues questionnaire developed by Batenburg et al
[15] has been applied to define a PLM roadmap for individual companies. The PLM
roadmap process phases include:
1. Current PLM maturity and alignment
2. Benchmark maturity
3. Desired PLM maturity and alignment
4. Identify items to be improved
5. Define PLM roadmap
The roadmap process is one of the tools that companies, especially SMEs, could use in
their PLM implementation project covering parts of the readiness & design and the
implementation preparation phase.
Schuh et al. [25] have proposed a PLM process oriented framework that can be
applied to guide PLM implementation at the industry. Companies aiming to implement
PLM can refer to the provided conceptual framework to establish their own framework,
linking the company elements in a comprehensive PLM environment. Therefore, the
following ten steps are necessary:
1. Define the goal of the PLM implementation: according to the PLM definition
companies can identify the most important points to focus on.
2. Analyze the existent PLM foundation: the ability of the current product structure
to support PLM must be analyzed and if necessary enhanced.
3. Rank processes: the processes to be implemented can be selected from the PLM
process list, considering company aims and the expected benefits.
4. Identify company maturity level (as-is process): comprehends the mapping of
company current processes (only for the previously selected processes).
5. Select an appropriate reference model: from the provided set of reference models
it is possible to identify the process type that best suits company characteristics.
6. Customize reference model: although processes that target different kinds of
company are available, processes must still be refined to reflect very specific
business needs. The customized processes picture the to-be PLM scenario.
7. Specify requirements for system selection: the vendor neutral software
requirement catalogue related to the already configured processes provides the
system specification.
8. Select software solution: based on previously defined requirements and
considering detailed software profiles.
9. Define the evolution path and implement software solution: the differences
between the as-is and to-be processes allow the definition of implementation
roadmaps, including the necessary implementation of the selected software
solution.
 10. Teach employees: the knowledge base connection to the processes indicates the
new necessary qualification and provide the necessary training material and
context.
This implementation approach in ten steps is derived from classical approaches for
process engineering [26], but it goes a step further for PLM, as it considers the needs and
conditions of this area. As a result, a company specific PLM framework linking process,
IT and knowledge is generated.
For facilitating the difficulties of PLM implementation for SMEs, software vendors
and consultants have recognized and are providing tools and techniques to help reduce
the overall change effort. Aberdeen Group [27] identified the most popular methods that
smaller companies used to meet their PLM goals and then conducted further analysis to
determine which approaches were used by companies that are top performers in meeting
product development goals (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Successful PLM Implementation Approaches [27]

Aberdeen Group found that best-in-class companies are taking advantage of

implementation aids such as templates, adopting industry-specific solutions where
available, and modifying solutions where required. In fact, these approaches were more
common among the top performers than among other companies surveyed – indicating
that these approaches improve the ability to use PLM to better meet product development
targets.
In short, PLM product offerings that help smaller companies achieve the available
benefits are emerging, leading to increased adoption by SMEs. However, achieving value
requires more than just PLM software. It also requires efforts to transform the
organization and business processes, in combination with the underlying supporting
technology.
3 Conducting a PLM case study in an engineering company
The study is based on a literature review and an empirical case study of an SME
planning the implementation of PLM. The study utilizes an action-oriented approach. The
case data was collected with participatory observations and a group interview of the
company management and analyzed by the researchers to achieve interpretations and
organize the data to form a case description. Our research interest was to find out a PLM
reality in a SME size company.
The case company is an Engineering Company (EngCo) designing and manufacturing
special-purpose aluminium boats in Finland. EngCo has only three permanent employees,
but altogether 270 people in the Concern of EngCo’s parent company. Collaboration
within a network of designers and sub-suppliers has a significant role for successful
deliveries.
EngCo’s product strategy is to produce boats from 6 to 12 meters for special
proposes, like for rescue activities. Each delivery is a project customised according to
customer requirements and exploitation conditions of a boat. The most challenging
technical task is the optimisation of critical parameters of each boat variant: primarily
weight and speed taking into account other customer requirements. Design is running in
close cooperation with clients and EngCo is using as much as possible pre-designed
modules. EngCo offers also services for the period of exploitation of boats, like
maintenance and inspection services.
Major business challenge is to make deliveries of tailor-made boats a profitable
business. Modular strategy allows out-sourcing of those elements, which are not critical
for the delivery process or not considered as core competence of EngCo. The company is
under way to build up a product platform system utilising component commonality and
combinability as well as interface standardization and functional binding as described by
Salvador [28].
Currently used IT systems include enterprise resource planning (ERP), 3D-design and
modelling tools, project and document management software as well as software for
manufacturing automation. One of the main challenges recognized is, how to integrate
PLM with the existing data systems.

4 Case study findings

By conducting this case study we got several interesting results. First of all we found
out that a small engineering company has very different working environment compared
to medium- and big-size engineering companies. Small amount of personnel and projects
induces that amount of EngCo’s internal and external interrelations is relatively low as
well as that there is no need to have strict procedures or necessity to apply information
systems for knowledge and information sharing. But anyway management of complex
system products, like a special-purpose boat is, requires customised product management
in order to be efficient and competitive in this kind of business. Therefore we found that
PLM readiness in SMEs has specific features and adaption requires first of all changes in
mental approaches (see Figure 3 below). Small companies having small number of
personnel rely on individuals more than on collectives, therefore written procedures are
not common. This environment has opportunity for experimentations, innovations,
prototyping and even adventures, but rigorous rules and procedures or planning much
beforehand is not so popular. Atmosphere favours heroes rescuing problematic situations.
 Figure 3 Two mental approaches to design process

Some clients require that during design phase Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCA)
should be performed in order to predict and when possible to prevent harmful impact
throughout the lifecycle. Therefore, recycling and disposal are also considered in LCA in
order to take them into account in material selections and other design solutions.
Regulatory requirements to assess the conditions of exploitation during lifetime are
affecting to design solutions too. Follow-up data would be gathered during whole
lifecycle, especially in-use of the boat. Assessment procedures and record keeping shall
create a new field for information and knowledge management.
EngCo predicts increasing demand of special-purpose boats, hence modular product
strategy would be developed further, as modularity would allow to offer to customers
certain range of ready, proven solutions as well as speed-up design and manufacturing
processes. For sales process a kind of configurator is considered to increase re-use of
product solutions and reduce time used for definition of the delivery (physical product
and additional services). Figure 3 shows two different views on the product: for customer
the boat is one entire object, but for designers the boat has many sub-systems.

Figure 3 Transformation of customer requirements into product structure in design phase

 Product liability and warranty issues are also requiring product data management.
EngCo foresees that data collection, analysis and storage are required also during
exploitation of boats in order to provide sufficient information for maintenance purposes.
During exploitation major notices of defect result in root cause analysis, which requires
traceability, i.e. design, manufacturing and maintenance data as well as information and
parameters of exploitation.
For all above mentioned reasons and first of all for strategic reasons EngCo is
considering develop PML system. Our preliminary analysis shows that EngCo has just
passed to level 2 according to the Maturity model showed in Table 2. Based on the
literature review and the case company experiences, a simple PLM implementation
process model (roadmap) from level 2 to level 3 could include the following steps (see
Figure 4):
1. As-is situation analysis: PLM strategy, goals, practices, tools, professional
competence and information flows in order-delivery process.
2. PLM training of top management: conceptual understanding of PLM
elements, experience of other companies.
3. Review of product strategy / product platform development: product
modularity, modularization principles, standardisation possibilities.
4. Item management and document management: standardisation of items,
document naming, used digital formats, document vaults.
5. Change management process: efficiency for design and manufacturing
process
6. System integration: information system configuration, master data location.

Figure 4 PLM road map for building up defined processes in EngCo

Our research shows that a decision on PLM implementation in SMEs has mainly strategic
character. The PLM roadmap for advancing from level 2 to level 3 contains several
analyses of the current situation, business goals, maturity analysis, as well as, training,
product strategy reviews and procedural changes.

5 Discussion and conclusions

The contribution of this research is better understanding of the requirements, benefits and
challenges related to PLM when the implementing organisation is a SME. The
implementation of PLM in a SME has special challenges such as fear of costs and
integration of new information technology to the existing ones, the need to change or
rework company processes and working habits which also bear costs, and the fact that
SMEs are not necessarily aware of PLM benefits for their case. Such factors need to be
taken into consideration when planning the implementation of PLM processes and
systems in SMEs. The results also highlight the important role of customer needs
information in different stages of the product lifecycle. Our case company was found to
be at level 2 (of 5), close to lower line as defined by [23] Saaksvuori et. al., in respect to
PLM processes such as document management, product structure management and
description of work processes. The company is following Quality Manuals, but they
consider mainly manufacturing processes therefore design processes have less structured
form. In the course of the maturity analysis and acquaintance with PLM the company was
able to work out the specific reasons why it would benefit from a PLM system and define
what would be the most beneficial implementation sequence for PLM processes and
which components of the information system would need to be implemented first.
For the management of SMEs, this study gives practical advice on how to proceed
and on the aspects that need to be considered especially in SMEs when planning PLM
adoption and system implementation. Important themes include, for example, the need to
educate management and key personnel on PLM before even making the As-Is analysis,
the fact that relatively easy questionnaire-type tools are available to do a maturity
analysis, and the realization that PLM implementation should not concern only
technology, but in first hand work processes and habits and the whole organizational
culture and approaches, including attitudes of personnel to information management as
part of their work. Furthermore, the suppliers of SMEs need to be informed and included
in the planning process to a relevant extent at an early stage. Information systems
designers can benefit from this study when designing new PLM systems and sales
/product configurators, especially for SMEs’ needs.
One limiting factor in the study is, despite a thorough literature review and in-depth
interviews, that the empirical analysis is based on one case company only. A further
research topic would be to study, how well the developed simplified PLM
implementation roadmap for SMEs would suit other companies, also in different
industries. Another future research question is, how to integrate the necessary cultural
change aspects better in the implementation process, as the current implementation
models do not discuss this in very much detail.
References and Notes
1. Grieves, M.W. and Tanniru, M. (2008). PLM, process, practice and provenance:
knowledge provenance in support of business practices in Product Lifecycle
Management, Int. J. Product Lifecycle Management, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.37–53.
2. Datamonitor.com (2007). Product development worries trigger investment in PLM.
MarketWatch: Global Round-up Jun2007, Vol. 6 Issue 6, p180-181.
3. T & P (2008). Tooling & Production Nov/Dec2008, Vol. 74 Issue 11/12, p39-39
4. Schuldiner, H. (2007). PLM’s Next Level. Ward's Auto World Feb2007, Vol. 43 Issue 2,
p25-25
5. Ameri, F. & Dutta, D. (2005). Product Lifecycle Management: Closing the Knowledge
Loops. Computer-Aided Design & Applications 2(5), 577-590.
6. Boswell, B. (2007). Six things you didn’t know about PLM. Machine Design 11/21/2007,
Vol. 79 Issue 22, p52-53
7. Lempiäinen, J., Aalto, H., Söderlin, P (toim.) (2007, in Finnish). Digitaalinen suunnittelu
ja valmistus eli tietotekniikka koneenrakennuksessa. Nykytila ja kehitystarpeita
Suomessa. TEKES Masina-projekti. Available at:
http://akseli.tekes.fi/opencms/opencms/OhjelmaPortaali/ohjelmat/MASINA/fi/Dokument
tiarkisto/Viestinta_ja_aktivointi/Julkaisut/Digiraporttiver1.5.pdf
8. CIMdata (2004) Enterprises of all sizes can benefit from PLM. CIMdata Position Paper.
Available at:
http://www.md.kth.se/mmk/gru/mme/mf2011/CourseMaterial/Seminar4/4_2_CIMdataPo
sitionPaper_EnterpriseBenefits.pdf
9. Jansson, K., Karvonen, I., Mattila, V-P., Nurmilaakso, J., Ollus, M., Salkari, I., Ali-
Yrkkö, J., & Ylä-Anttila, P. (2001, in Finnish) Uuden tietotekniikan vaikutukset
liiketoimintaan. Teknologiakatsaus 111/2001. Tekes. Helsinki. 66 s.
10. Fenves, S.J., Sriram, R.D., Choi, Y. & Robert, J.E. (2003). Advanced engineering
environments for small manufacturing enterprises, National Institute of Standards and
Technology, NISTIR 7055, Vol. I, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA. Available at:
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/03.reports/pdf/03tr013.pdf
11. Subrahmanian, E., Rachuri, S., Fenves, S. J., Foufou, S.& Sriram, R. D. (2005). Product
lifecycle management support: a challenge in supporting product design and
manufacturing in a networked economy. International Journal of Product Lifecycle
Management 1(1), 4-25.
12. Abramovici, M. & Sieg, O. (2002). Status and Development Trends of Product Lifecycle
Management Systems, Proceedings of IPPD 2002, Nov 21-22; Wroclaw, Poland. ISBN:
83-7085-667-5.
13. Durai, S. (2006). Industry requirements and the benefits of product lifecycle
management. M.SC. Thesis. Cranfield University. School of Industrial & Manufacturing
Science. Department of Manufacturing. 140 pp. Available at:
http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:8080/bitstream/1826/1609/1/Thesis%20-%20Final.pdf
14. Golovatchev, J. D. & Budde, O. (2007). Next generation PLM – an integrated approach
for the Product Lifecycle Management. Proceedings of ICCPR2007: International
Conference on Comprehensive Product Realization 2007, June 18-20, 2007, Beijing,
China. Available at: http://www.purdue.edu/discoverypark/PLM/SME/F_ICCPR233.pdf
15. Batenburg, R., Helms, R. W. & Versendaal, J (2006). PLM roadmap: stepwise PLM
implementation based on the concepts of maturity and alignment, International Journal of
Product Lifecycle Management 1(4), 333 – 351.
16. Stark, J. J. (2004). Product Lifecycle Management: Paradigm for 21st century Product
Realisation. London: Spinger.
17. Jantunen, J. (2000, in Finnish). Kilpailukykyä PDM:llä. Valokynä 3/2000, 6-10.
18. Raunio, E. (2005, in Finnish). Tuotetiedon hallinnasta tuotteiden elinkaaren hallintaan.
Valokynä 4/2005, 11-12.
19. Gaaloul, H. (2007). Product Lifecycle Management Implementation and Industrial
Benefits for Mid-Size Market. M.Sc. Thesis. Cranfield University. School of Applied
Sciences. 179 pp. Available at:
http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:8080/bitstream/1826/2172/1/Gaaloul-2007.pdf
20. Helms, R. W. (2002). Product data management as enabler for concurrent engineering.
BETA Research institute, Eindhoven University of Technology. Available at:
http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra2/200211339.pdf
21. Ming H. X. G., Lu W. F. & Zhu C. F. Technology Challenges for Product Lifecycle
Management. Available at:
http://www.simtech.astar.edu.sg/Research/TechnicalReports/TR04PR13.pdf
22. Grieves, M. (2006). Product Lifecycle Management: Driving the next generation of lean
thinking, New York: McGraw-Hill.
23. Saaksvuori, A. & Immonen, A. (2008). Product Lifecycle Management, Berlin: Springer.
24. Sharma, A. (2005) Collaborative product innovation: integrating elements of CPI via
PLM framework, Computer-Aided Design 37 (2005) 1425–1434.
25. Schuh, G., Rozenfeld, H., Assmus, D. & Zancul, E. (2008). Process oriented framework
to support PLM implementation, Computers in Industry 59 (2008) 210–218.
26. Davenport, T. (1993). Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information
Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
27. Aberdeen Group (2006). The PLM for Small to Medium-Size Manufacturers Benchmark
Report. Enabling Profitable Growth for SMEs. Boston: Aberdeen Group Inc. pp. 21
28. Salvador F. (2007). Toward a Product System Modularity Construct: Literature Review
and Reconceptualization, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 54(2): 219-
240.