Adobe’s Solutions for Manufacturing

Adobe Systems has historically focused upon creating multimedia and creativity software products, with a more-recent foray towards rich Internet application software development [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_software]. With ubiquitous products like Adobe Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Fireworks, Acrobat, Flash etc I was surprised to see Adobe's offerings for the manufacturing world. (Maybe it’s there for some and maybe I have just noticed while writing my previous blog post “3D PDF Technology – Where it fits in”).

"Adobe and partner software can be used to publish, protect, review, and archive product data as part of these and other product lifecycle management (PLM) workflows: 3D model-based definition (3D MBD), Item master creation, First article inspection (FAI) reports, Engineering change orders (ECOs), RFPs/RFQs etc." [http://www.adobe.com/manufacturing/solutions/product_development/]

This image shows where Adobe is trying to push its product in the PLM world:

I am not sure how successful Adobe has been in its endeavor to optimize product development since they are so much PLM vendor dependent to tie up with actual PLM systems. However I do think Adobe will be successful in helping organizations create and deliver more effective technical communications and enhance customer service because of their history. From their site: "Leverage 2D and 3D engineering data in the creation of technical publications (Work instructions, Field service manuals, Training manuals etc) for manufacturing, assembly, sales, service, and support. Provide technical publication users with a much richer, easier to understand learning experience by sharing 3D data in a more secure, easy-to-use format — 3D PDF. Whether it's a local field service technician repairing a commercial pump or military personnel in a remote desert outpost maintaining an F/A-18, anyone, anywhere can view rich, interactive 3D manuals electronically with free Adobe® Reader® software, which is installed on over 90% of Internet-connected PCs." [http://www.adobe.com/manufacturing/solutions/work_instructions/]

3D PDF Technology – Where it fits in

I happened to read about PROSTEP PDF Generator 3D in CIMData’s website this weekend which lead me to explore the world of 3D PDF’s. I find interactive 3D PDF files pretty amazing. For those of you who haven’t had a chance to view them please click on this link: http://www.adobe.com/manufacturing/3dpdfsamples/3dsolutions/ to view sample 3D PDF files. There are several examples listed like:

→     Turbine engine (PDF, 4.5M, Original CAD format: SolidWorks)

→     Jet concept design (PDF, 4.7M, Original CAD formats: Siemens NX, CATIA V5, and Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire)

→     Crankshaftassembly (PDF, 3.0M, Original CAD format: Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire)

I observed many tools when I opened these files in Adobe Reader including those to isolate Parts, different Part Rendering Modes including Transparent, Wireframes, Illustrations etc, different Model Rendering Modes, Model Tree highlighting - will highlight different parts in the model, 3D measurement tools, etc. PDF Generator 3D Reader Extensions Module offers the option of activating a large number of additional functions for using the generated 3D PDF documents in Adobe Reader. The recipient can, for example, add comments or fill in certain fields on a form. PDF Generator 3D Rights Management Module allows the information contained in the 3D PDF documents to be protected against access by unauthorized persons. Access rights can be restricted to a specific period of time and if necessary can be revoked when, for example, a document is no longer valid. Overall I feel it’s a good tool for visualization even though rendering and loading takes some time even with a powerful computer. For those interested in the details of the components of PDF Generator 3D have a look here:

I see 3 major advantages of using 3D PDF technology:

→     Standardization: No doubt there are visualization tools from nearly every CAD vendors which will help view a multitude of product data (e.g., MCAD/ECAD files, MS Office documents) without the authoring application. But all such tools need the downstream consumers to have the same tools which might be difficult considering that manufacturing and support services are likely to be outsourced.  I think Adobe tries to solve this problem with Interactive 3D PDF. “Interactive 3D PDF files look exactly like the original 3D design, regardless of the application used to create it or the environment in which it's viewed.” [http://www.adobe.com/manufacturing/solutions/3d_solutions/] The currently supported CAD formats are:

→     Reduction in Total Cost of Ownership: If your product data needs to be viewed across the Realise (Manufacturing), Use/Support (Customer service), Retire/Dispose phases (The phases are from John Stark's PLM Grid) then each user associated with the individual phases will need licenses for a visualization tool. With 3D PDF that cost is cut down. Since Adobe Acrobat is installed in the majority of users – this would also mean a reduced load on IT for installing and maintaining the visualization tool. However a details cost benefit analysis should be made comparing the total license costs of the currently used desktop-based visualization tool versus the cost of the 3D PDF Generator tool (a professional server solution that offers full functionality and accommodates up to 50 users for less than € 10,000).

→     Long Term Archival and Retrieval Solution: If the lifecycle of your product extends several decades then a question worth pondering is whether the CAD format would still be supported. While the PDF specification was available for free since at least 2001, PDF was originally a proprietary format controlled by Adobe, and was officially released as an open standard on July 1, 2008, and published by the International Organization for Standardization as ISO 32000-1:2008. In 2008, Adobe published a Public Patent License to ISO 32000-1 granting a royalty-free rights for all patents owned by Adobe that are necessary to make, use, sell and distribute PDF compliant implementations. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format].3D PDF is the perfect candidate for a long term archival and retrieval solution. More information at 3D PDF Consortium http://www.3dpdfconsortium.org/pdf-standards-info.html.

Thanks for reading! I would be happy read your comments.

What Google+ failure can teach about PLM implementation and User Adoption?

A few days back, Google engineer Steve Yegge wrote a classic tirade about Google's inept handling of the Google+ platform. (You can read it all here). Google+ was supposed to be a Facebook killer, but slowly it is turning to be another Google Wave/Buzz. One of the most interesting things pointed out in the blogpost was “The Golden Rule of platforms is that you Eat Your Own Dogfood”. The fact that Google doesn’t even eat its own dog food is very evident in this post from a few days back.

As I read this post, I realized how many times we have implemented PLM at various sites and, what the end result has been - all along we have known for a fact that the one of the key measure of a winning and thriving PLM implementation was effective user adoption. And this not mere consultant conjecture, this has been validated by research too - According to a study done by the Sand Hill Group and Neochange, the most critical factor (70% listed as number 1) for software success and return-on-investment is effective user adoption. Software functionality came in at 1% surprisingly, with organization change at 16% and process alignment at 13%. No wonder Google+ has been a nonstarter (Paul Tassi has even written “A Eulogy for Google Plus”)

So what can we learn about Google+ hopeless case and how it relates to a successful PLM implementation from a user adoption standpoint? Several I would say:

1.     Not Enough Power Users (or Management Support or Practice what you preach): Google's Schmidt finally took to Google+ only a couple of days back. Most members of the company's management team aren't still using Google+. Likewise if your PLM implementation has to be successful the concerned top level management has to use it. No point if the VP or Director of Engg/Rnd still uses emails to approve designs or wants printed copies or whatever completely bypassing the system.

2.     Have Real Value for the End User: If the current PLM system is just a replacement for the old one with lots of cute UI’s and bells and whistle – quite likely the reaction is going to be the same as was with the old one once the initial hype cycle dies down.

3.     Launch when ready: Most people would advocate implementing PLM in phases. Good point. But just because you have to close out one phase to start another doesn’t mean you need to roll out a half baked product/service to the user community.

4.     Vendor Size Doesn’t Matter: Even with an 800 pound gorilla’s backing, Buzz, Wave and now + failed. Likewise even if the vendor is large or their PLM system caters to the biggest of the big Fortune 500 companies, it’s not necessary that it will cater to all your user needs. Give your users what they want to be successful in getting their job done. Don’t focus almost exclusively on tiny little features that few people will ever use.

5.     Customize if needed: Oh yeah, that’s a bad word – We don’t want to customize and keep on paying for the maintenance! Right – But what is the point in using terminology or vendor mandated business processes which the user community doesn’t understand? I still don’t get circles, stream, hangouts or whatever.

6.     Motivate People to Use it: People simply didn’t move in droves from Facebook to Google+ as was expected. There was no motivation to do so. FB was sufficient to satisfy the needs of most of the users. Just because something is mandated by the organization doesn’t mean that the users will use it or be happy to use it (sometimes you don’t have a choice – like using LotusNotes or HP’s Quality Center for example!). Motivate the end users to use the new PLM system – Have a plan much before go-live!

7.     Integration: Well Google+ has probably integration with lots of websites and stuff, but Facebook is better! Host of games and apps and I can even sign into/comment on a bunch of websites using my Facebook id. Similarly if the PLM system doesn’t have integration to systems like corporate LDAP, or the SMTP server or inaccessible externally users would have tough time getting on-boarded.

Probably I can go on and on but I hope readers get the point! Don’t take user adoption unconscientiously – it’s the key to a triumphant implementation. (I wouldn’t underestimate Google though – Maybe this time they will get it right – eventually)