Debating why PLM seems to mean something different to everyone (and that is perhaps part of the problem)
PLM, or Product Lifecycle Management, should be straightforward: managing a product from concept to completion. Yet mention “PLM” in a boardroom or project meeting, and you’ll see a flurry of interpretations. For some, it is about R&D/engineering data; for others, it is a company-wide digital strategy. And with consultants, solution vendors, and marketing teams each defining it differently, PLM has become a shifting concept that can be hard to pin down. One thing for sure is that PLM is not, and has never been, a single IT system; at best, it is an ecosystem of datasets, business processes, data flows, workflows, technical repositories and interfaces—deployed across business functions and made accessible to multiple user personas to foster collaboration and value creation.
This ambiguity complicates management’s understanding, as each version seems to offer something new without clarifying the whole. But instead of evolving PLM’s definition endlessly, the ambition should be to brand PLM in a way that aligns with the organization’s needs and unifies its stakeholders. Ultimately, PLM is about democratizing product and associated project data—from product requirements to sustainability, quality, compliance, and customer feedback loops. Let’s unpack the main challenges behind PLM’s identity crisis and why getting back to basics could benefit everyone involved.
The “P” Word Conundrum: When “PLM” Means Whatever You Want It to Mean
In many organizations, perhaps influenced by solution providers and consultancies, PLM has become a catch-all term that everyone wants a piece of, turning it into a shape-shifting concept. To some, PLM means managing technical specifications and CAD files; to others, it is about creating seamless customer experiences or supporting digital transformation. And in some cases, it is all of the above. PLM has come to mean whatever the speaker needs it to mean—and this flexible, all-encompassing definition leads to confusion and conflicting priorities.
For executives, this makes PLM a moving target. They hear that PLM is a must-have, but its precise scope remains murky as each team defines it differently. The constant expansion of what PLM is “supposed to be” can create a disconnect that makes it difficult for leadership to understand its true value. Instead of adapting PLM to every new trend, organizations should first clearly defined, then brand and use PLM in a way that aligns with their specific purpose and goals.
Simply put, PLM is about “driving innovation through the gateways” while ensuring product and project data is accessible to all relevant teams—from engineering to sustainability, manufacturing, procurement, supply chain, marketing, and beyond. How it is branded is secondary—it should be whatever aligns best with the organization’s structure, needs, and maturity.
Making PLM Simple Again: Aligning Purpose and Data Democratization
At its core, PLM should enable product and project data to flow across the organization, promoting transparency and supporting collaboration from New Product Development (NPD) to New Product Introduction (NPI) and beyond. This access to data creates essential feedback loops—enabling teams to consider sustainability, integrate customer feedback, and align with evolving market requirements in real time. In other words, PLM should empower teams to make informed decisions, drive continuous improvement, and innovate sustainably, without the need for constant re-branding.
To “make PLM great again,” we need to simplify it, focus on its purpose as a comprehensive lifecycle management tool, and establish an organization-wide understanding of its role. And yes, creativity has its place—brand PLM in a way that resonates with your teams and reflects your company’s values and goals. Effective branding does not mean endless reinvention; it means crafting a compelling story for PLM that aligns with stakeholders and sparks enthusiasm and innovation.
PLM, by any name, is ultimately about guiding the product lifecycle in a way that drives growth while respecting compliance/sustainability regulations and customer expectations. For PLM to succeed, it does not need to reinvent itself every six months; it just needs to work—and it needs to be understood.
What are your thoughts?
Disclaimer: articles and thoughts published on v+d do not necessarily represent the views of the company, but solely the views or interpretations of the author(s); reviews, insights and mentions of publications, products, or services do neither constitute endorsement, nor recommendations for purchase or adoption.
About the Author
