Oxford, England. January 16, 2013
One of the reasons for the long-running confusion about the definition of PLM has been uncovered by the recent PLM-ERP Workshop Series.
The workshops in Bristol, Atlanta and Friedrichshafen analysed the current PLM and ERP scenarios in detail in order to to generate a common understanding of the two subjects.
- 'Pure PLM'
- 'True PLM'
- 'Nominal PLM'
The classical definition of PLM as the "cradle to grave management of products" can be classified as 'Pure PLM'. This is the kind of PLM that professors, theorists and early purists would refer to, and it remains a very important concept. Without it, the overall enterprise-wide viewpoint can be lost.
ERP is a part of 'Pure PLM' (as are elements of other product-related applications); and yet in real companies it is clear that PLM and ERP sit side-by-side, and need to be integrated. PLM and ERP at this level are classified as 'True PLM' and 'True ERP'.
The third viewpoint arises when a company has bought "a PLM system" and "an ERP system" from different vendors. These are classified as 'Nominal PLM' and 'Nominal ERP'.
Understanding these differences is a great step forward in positioning PLM and ERP with respect to each other, and the definitions are expanded in detail in the forthcoming PLM-ERP Handbook.
The PLM Interest Group
The PLM Interest Group is the leading neutral industry group for PLM. The PLM-ERP Workshop series ran from September to November 2012 in Bristol, UK; Atlanta, USA; and Friedrichshafen, Germany; and the combined results form the most in-depth neutral analysis of PLM-ERP ever undertaken.
For more information, please contact:
Roger Tempest
PLMIG
