Comments on: Some users do not like the single version of the truth

By: Asset Lifecycle Management using a PLM system « Jos Voskuil’s Weblog

Asset Lifecycle Management using a PLM system « Jos Voskuil’s Weblog — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:30:24 +0000

[...] March 1, 2010 in Asset Lifecycle Management, ISO 15926, MRO, Observations, PLM, Tag numbering | Tags: ALM, Asset Lifecycle Management, MRO, PLM, ROI Although I am still active most of my time in ‘classical’ PLM, some of the projects I am involved with also deal with Asset Lifecycle Management. In general PLM focuses on a product development process, starting from a conceptual phase, going through planning, development and production. The PLM system serves as a collaboration and information backbone for all product IP (Intellectual Property). One of the main capabilities a PLM system provides is a ‘single version of the truth’. [...]

By: Samantha

Samantha — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:22:49 +0000

Craig has pretty much said it all.

In terms of change management a bottom-up approach is necessary to ensure that users will accept the new solution and use it as it’s intended. They are ultimately the ones who will be using it everyday in support of their jobs, so their feedback is important.

When using a top down approach, it’s hard to achieve the same kind of success because the direction and authority is streaming down from the top with little to no input from users and may result in the failure to reach the overall objectives, such as achieving a ‘single version of the truth’ because of low employee buy-in and resistance.

I just found this blog through Oleg. Pretty sweet…I’ll be back!

Samantha
Datastay Corp.

Thanks Samantha for your feedback. I believe the challenge in the mid-market is always between bottom-up with enough top-down guidance/push. Enjoy future readings and looking forward to your inputs

Best regards

Jos

By: Craig Senior

Craig Senior — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:30:48 +0000

When users choose to do other than what WE are supposed to do, where are their team leaders/managers in all this. As a leader, when we decide that WE are doing something a new way, that’s it. We communicate the plan, give training/briefings, monitor conformance, and monitor performance, getting feedback on what is working and not working.

The new way must yield benefits in improved quality and efficiency, understanding that we sometimes might do more work up front to reduce even more work downstream.

Sometimes, leaders must handhold transactions through the first few to ensure conformity and to capture process blockages firsthand because users will often find a defect and workaround that goes unreported, osmosing into “how we do things.”

I found that after people understanding that to improve, we must change and we experience one or two improvements where they see and experience the benefit, they are more apt to adopt future improvements.

You must have an accomodating change process where user feedback is acted upon immediately. How about rewarding people for submitting feedback, so that we reinforce the behaviour we want?

In response to feedback, perform root cause analysis to determine why the defect occurred and on the next improvement, the cause is considered and the failure event is prevented.

Thanks Craig,

I agree with your approach -it is all about the management taking the ownership of the change and do their best efforts to accomodate the changes

Best Regards

Jos

By: Joy Garon

Joy Garon — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:32:55 +0000

Great post Jos – I have seen small companies achieve the ‘single version of the truth’. In these cases the management team did an excellent job of educating their entire team and keeping them on track by acting on feedback and maintaining continuous process improvement for the PDM/PLM system itself.
Cheers, Joy

By: Oleg Shilovitsky

Oleg Shilovitsky — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:10:40 +0000

Jos,
As you said to create “a single point of truth” is not easy, but assuming everybody on board and… wow! We succeeded to create one. What comes to my mind next – yes, change in your system. How to make this change fast without going to the next complex round of implementation? This is the key question from my standpoint. Some of my thought about that is here – http://plmtwine.com/2009/06/18/my-slice-of-plm-single-version-of-truth/.

Best, Oleg

Oleg hi, yes creating a single version of the truth is the same as maintaining it – and you have to analyze what are the cost of maintenance and what is the ROI. Not documenting a modification in an as-built environment can be almost harmless in a beer brewery but killing in a nuclear plant