You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘PIM’ category.
Back on track after a side step (see: I am back), I restarted my PLM activities, and WOW, Â was I lucky with the first conference on my list: CONTACT Open World 2026 in Bonn.
Melanie Stadtler invited me as a guest (thanks, Melanie 🙏), and for the first time I connected in depth with CONTACT Software, their partners and customers.
I knew CONTACT Software from a few brief interactions, but now I could experience their full ecosystem. As CONTACT Software has historically been active in the DACH region, our paths rarely crossed – most of my activities were elsewhere in Europe.
So my key question was: Who is CONTACT Software, and where would I position them in an SAP/Teamcenter-dominated market?
Around 650 people attended this year’s biannual event. The World Conference Center Bonn, along the Rhine, was a great venue for sessions, networking and evening entertainment.
The conference theme was Industrial AI – from top floor to shop floor.
Before the event, there was a great warm-up party with dinner and a variety show. Beyond the impressive show, it was a great first chance to network and catch up with peers. And then the event started.
Industrial AI — from Top Floor to Shop Floor
Maximilian Zachries, Chief Operating Officer (COO) at CONTACT software, kicked off day 1 sharing CONTACT’s ambition and strategy to grow, with a repackaging of their solution – the CONTACT elements as the image below shows.
In the domain of PLM, I would position CONTACT software as a platform with a few foundational layers and op top of that customers can implement Elements, functional, pre-configured blocks on the platform or connect to other systems in the enterprise architecture.
Maximilian Zachries showed the unification of CIM database, Office, Project and IoT into a single collaboration platform based on Elements – coordinated PLM in my terminology.
Openness is a key driver for CONTACT software, so connectivity is crucial.
The image also shows the intelligence layer, named Fourier, which CONTACT has released and includes Elements related to its AI capabilities.
Initially focused on enhancing functionality within the platform and, in upcoming releases, also adding support for MCP connectivity, agentic AI, AI coding and even the option to bring your own model (BYOM)
The mood of the session was much more down-to-earth and factual than at other conferences I used to go to. The understated German culture was evident in this session and in other sessions too, which was a relief for me as a VirtualDutchman.
CONTACT’s intention to grow is also visible in its recent acquisitions and partnerships, including a significant investment in team neusta SE.
You snooze, you lose.
Markus Dietrich (CEO, team neusta) then illustrated the complementary value they bring: modern front-end development, data-driven capabilities and dashboards on top of the CONTACT platform – the modern connected PLM in my terminology.
The trend, as Markus stated, is from components to systems, and in the long run from selling products to delivering products as a service.
Driven by economic survival, it is crucial for a sustainable, circular economy.
Companies should start exploring data-driven capabilities now – AI only performs reliably when the underlying data is correct and in the right context.
Hence the title: you snooze, you lose.
From Product Truth to Possible Futures – AI and the future of lifecycle management
Frank Patz-Brockmann, Chief Product Officer at CONTACT Software, gave an interesting presentation, discussing AI’s impact on PLM—particularly in engineering.
We already see what AI does in software development. And as the image below illustrates, the real human value is in dealing with the intent—the WHY behind what we do.
Of course, we should not forget that software changes are relatively cheap. A code change typically doesn’t affect the stock in the warehouse or your selected and approved suppliers, as it would in a mechanical world—one reason manufacturers push as many product features as possible into software.
Still, as Frank mentioned, creating engineering artifacts today is expensive and requires specific skills. As AI advances, authoring tools will likely become capabilities of the engineering system, while humans will still be needed to decide intent—the broader context AI cannot address through its trained models.
His ultimate conclusion: in the long run, traditional PLM systems built as the “Single Source of Truth” will be replaced or superseded by a collection of federated data sources, accessed and managed by AI agents. A statement that is supported by many of my forward-looking peers in the PLM community.
From systems to platforms to knowledge infrastructures.
After the guided tours—an excellent way to get a quick impression of sponsors grouped around a theme—it was time for the afternoon sessions.
From Connected R&D to Intelligent R&D: Apollo Tyres’ Digital Transformation Journey
I listened with great interest to Hizmy Hassen, Chief Digital Officer at Apollo Tyres. Having worked with tyre companies before, and having a soft Dutch spot for their Vredestein brand, much of his story felt familiar.
What caught my attention even more was their “New House strategy” as shown below:
Too often, I have seen companies start their transformation from their pains and wishes, wrapped in a project based on the known As-Is situation. External consultants like this approach too—it lets them sell interviews and reporting while getting paid to learn the company. It is the traditional business model, and I understand it.
However, I believe in a different approach: define the desired To-Be status from the company’s business strategy for the coming years, then derive the enterprise processes and the underlying data model needed to get there.
From there, you define the journey.
Instead of looking back and fixing what went wrong—an inherently negative mindset—the company looks forward, fostering a positive, aligned attitude when everyone is informed and on board.
Of course, Organizational Change Management becomes crucial here, as systems, the organization, and even business models can and must change.
I saw exactly this mindset in Hizmy’s New House strategy.
One of his best examples: introducing AI/automation as the natural way of working with data in a context where data is available. And as his concluding slide showed, this forward-looking approach is already delivering its first wins.
Success Under Extreme Conditions – What Enables Innovation Under Pressure
During the afternoon sessions, attendees chose from various tracks, and we concluded the day with an inspiring keynote from Jutta Kleinschmidt, a famous race car driver (Dakar), physicist and author, who shared how to succeed in an unpredictable environment.
After a great networking evening on board the Ocean Diva, sailing on the Rhine, we started Day 2 with an interesting opening session: the CONTACT software product management team shared their plans and roadmap.
Roadmap CONTACT Elements: opening the next chapter
What surprised me first was the roadmap’s level of detail. Most vendors talk about roadmaps but rarely share specifics or commit to capabilities before a release is actually available. Here, I saw the opposite.
Some random thoughts I noted down:
- CONTACT Elements is primarily a platform of connected capabilities. It provides a foundation through its Elements, and customization remains possible. I did not hear any Out-Of-The-Box messaging.
- The focus on delivering 3D Search capabilities surprised me somewhat, as I have seen this capability in typical PLM systems before. I also assumed there would be vendor-independent solutions in the market to connect to. Apparently not.
- The roadmap suggests the current mindset is still to deliver more and more standard, traditional PLM capabilities. This makes it harder to distinguish between being a platform and being a PLM system.
- Combining ALM and MBSE into a single Element suggests that the full complexity of managing systems—hardware and software—through a model-based approach is not yet fully developed. Both ALM and MBSE could be domains on their own, with many elements.
Of course, these are first impressions, and as I am not a CONTACT software insider, I am eager to learn more.
In the afternoon, there were more thematic sessions. I want to highlight one close to my heart:
Circular by Design – Anchoring Sustainability in Product Strategy
Comparing the agendas of the 2022 and 2024 editions with this year’s, I noticed sustainability has become less prominent — less hype, fewer dedicated topics. Understandable, as we’re overwhelmed by other immediate global challenges, despite the extreme climate warnings we’re facing.
That’s why I was glad to attend this session. In Europe, we see fewer specialized sustainability discussions; however, more and more companies are being forced to anchor sustainability in their product strategy—mainly due to regulations and, hopefully soon, genuine business benefits and customer demands.
Sebastian Weber gave a great overview of the industry’s current state and CONTACT Software’s approach, where other speakers shared their detailed sustainability experiences (this blog space is too short to mention everything. 🙄 I had much more to tell and digest, but I already passed my 1500-word deadline.)
As a core team member of the PLM Green Global Alliance (PGGA), I am happy to announce we’ll publish a dedicated interview with Sebastian on our PGGA channel in mid-October. There, we will definitely dive deeper into CONTACT software’s contribution to sustainability.
Conclusion
The CONTACT Open World conference was an eye-opener for me for several reasons. First, it was a warm, open community where I could discuss the typical challenges a medium-sized enterprise faces. Next, the clarity of the presentations and discussions helped me better understand where to position and recommend CONTACT software in the PLM domain as an exploration every potential customer should do.
CONTACT software is currently a niche player, but an interesting company that’s willing to expand. Keep them on your radar.
Next big event to meet
In recent years, more and more PLM customers approached me with questions related to the usage of product information for downstream publishing. To be fair, this is not my area of expertise for the moment. However, with the mindset of a connected enterprise, this topic will come up.
For that reason, I have a strategic partnership with Squadra, a Dutch-based company, providing the same coaching model as TacIT; however, they have their roots in PIM and MDM.
Together we believe we can deliver a meaningful answer on the question: What are the complementary roles of PLM and PIM? In this post, our first joint introduction.
Note: The topic is not new. Already in 2005, Jim Brown from Tech-Clarity published a white-paper: The Complementary Roles of PIM and PLM. This all before digitization and connectivity became massive.
Let’s start with the abbreviations, the TLAs (Three-Letter-Acronyms) and their related domains
PLM – level 1
(Product Lifecycle Management – push)
For PLM, I want to stay close to the current definitions. It is the strategic approach to provide a governance infrastructure to deliver a product to the market. Starting from an early concept phase till manufacturing and in its extended definition also during its operational phase.
The focus with PLM is to reduce time to market by ensuring quality, cost, and delivery through more and more a virtual product definition, therefore being able to decide upfront for the best design choices, manufacturing options with the lowest cost. In the retail world, own-brand products are creating a need for PLM.
The above image is nicely summarizing the expected benefits of a traditional PLM implementation.
MDM (Master Data Management)
When product data is shared in an enterprise among multiple systems, there is a need for Master Data Management (MDM). Master Data Management focuses on a governance approach that information stored in various systems has the same meaning and shared values where relevant.
MDM guards and streamlines the way master data is entered, processed, guarded, and changed within the company, resulting in one single version of the truth and enabling different departments and systems to stay synced regarding their crucial data.
Interestingly, in the not-so-digital world of PLM, you do not see PLM vendors working on an MDM-approach. They do not care about an end-to-end connected strategy yet. I wrote about this topic in 2017 here: Master Data Management and PLM.
PIM (Product Information Management)
The need for PIM starts to become evident when selling products through various business channels. If you are a specialized machine manufacturer, your product information for potential customers might be very basic and based on a few highlights.
However, due to digitization and global connectivity, product information now becomes crucial to be available in real-time, wherever your customers are in the world.
In a competitive world, with an omnichannel strategy, you cannot survive without having your PIM streamlined and managed.
Product Innovation Platforms (PLM – Level 2 – Pull)
With the introduction of Product Innovation Platforms as described by CIMdata and Gartner, the borders of PLM, PIM, and MDM might become vague, as they might be all part of the same platform, therefore reducing the immediate need for an MDM-environment. For example, companies like Propel, Stibo, and Oracle are building a joint PLM-PIM portfolio.
Let’s dive more profound in the two scenarios that we meet the most in business, PLM driving PIM (my comfort zone) and PIM driving the need for PLM (Squadra’s s area of expertise).
PLM driving PIM
Traditionally PLM (Product Lifecycle Management) has been focusing on several aspects of the product lifecycle. Here is an excellent definition for traditional PLM:
PLM is a collection of best practices, dependent per industry to increase product revenue, reduce product-related costs and maximize the value of the product portfolio (source 2PLM)
This definition shows that PLM is a business strategy, not necessarily a system, but an infrastructure/approach to:
- ensure shorter time to market with the right quality (increasing product revenue)
- efficiently (reduce product-related costs – resources and scrap)
- deliver products that bring the best market revenue (maximize the value of the product portfolio)
The information handled by traditional PLM consists mostly of design data, i.e., specifications, manufacturing drawings, 3D Models, and Bill of Materials (physical part definitions) combined with version and revision management. In elaborate environments combined with processes supporting configuration management.
PLM data is more focused on internal processes and quality than on targeting the company’s customers. Sometimes the 3D Design data is used as a base to create lightweight 3D graphics for quotations and catalogs, combining it with relevant sales data. Traditional marketing was representing the voice of the customer.
PLM implementations are more and more providing an enterprise backbone for product data. As a result of this expansion, there is a wish to support sales and catalogs, more efficiently, sharing master data from creation till publishing, combining the product portfolio with sales and service information in a digital way.
In particular, due to globalization, there was a need to make information globally available in different languages without a significant overhead of resources to manage the data or manage the disconnect from the real product data.
Companies that have realized the need for connected data understood that Product Master Data Management is more than only the engineering/manufacturing view. Product Master Data Management is also relevant to the sales and services view. Historically done by companies as a customized extension on their PLM-system, now more and more interfacing with specialized PIM-systems. Proprietary PLM-PIM interfaces exist. Hopefully, with digital transformation, a more standardized approach will appear.
PIM driving the need for PLM
Because of changes in the retail market, the need for information in the publishing processes is also changing. Retailers also need to comply with new rules and legislation. The source of the required product information is often in the design process of the product.
In parallel, there is an ongoing market trend to have more and more private label products in the (wholesale and retail) assortments. This means a growing number of retailers and wholesalers will become producers and will have their own Ideation and innovation process.
A good example is ingredients and recipe information in the food retail sector. This information needs to be provided now by suppliers or by their own brand department that owns the design process of the product. Similar to RoHS or REACH compliance in the industry.
Retail and Wholesale can tackle own brands reasonably well with their PIM systems (or Excels), making use of workflows and product statuses. However, over the years, the information demands have increased, and a need for more sophisticated lifecycle management has emerged and, therefore the need for PLM (in this case, PLM also stands for Private Label Management).
In the image below, illustrates a PLM layer and a PIM layer, all leading towards rich product information for the end-users (either B2B or B2C).
In the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) world, most innovative products are coming from manufacturers. They have pipelines with lots of ideas resulting in a limited number of sellable products. In the Wholesale and Retail business, the Private Label development process usually has a smaller funnel but a high pressure on time to market, therefore, a higher need for efficiency in the product data chain.
Technological changes, like 3D Printing, also change the information requirements in the retail and wholesale sectors. 3D printing can be used for creating spare parts on-demand, therefore changing the information flow in processes dramatically. Technical drawings and models that were created in the design process, used for mass production, are now needed in the retail process closer to the end customer.
These examples make it clear that more and more information is needed for publication in the sales process and therefore needs to be present in PIM systems. This information needs to be collected and available during the PLM release process. A seamless connection between the product release and sales processes will support the changing requirements and will reduce errors and rework in on data.
PLM and PIM are two practices that need to go hand in hand like a relay baton in athletics. Companies that are using both tools must also organize themselves in a way that processes are integrated, and data governance is in place to keep things running smoothly.
Conclusion
Market changes and digital transformation force us to work in value streams along the whole product lifecycle ensuring quality and time to market. PLM and PIM will be connected domains in the future, to enable smooth product go-to-market. Important is the use of data standards (PLM and PIM should speak a common language) – best based on industry standards so that cross-company communication on product data is possible.
What do you think? Do you see PLM and PIM getting together too, in your business?
Please share in the comments.
I think that it doesn't take a lot of imagination today to at least create some non-vendor-specific tooling. Build it…
Effective collaboration in product lifecycle management can help teams connect different functions and reduce gaps between development stages. I find…
Hi Jos, Knowing your background in methodology and education, I wanted to share a longer article with you: “What is…
Interesting reflection, Jos. In my experience, the situation you describe is very recognizable. At the company where I work, sustainability…
[…] (The following post from PLM Green Global Alliance cofounder Jos Voskuil first appeared in his European PLM-focused blog HERE.) […]