Forgot password?
|
|
|
|
We were unable to sign you in.
Please verify your user name and password and try again. If you do not have a TEC account, register now.
Read Comments

In the past decade or so of our coverage of numerous topics in the enterprise applications space, every now and then, we come across a vendor whose value proposition, product offering, and install base deserve much more credit and awareness than IT pundits acknowledge. One example of this is privately-funded Omnify Software, the Andover, Massachusetts, (US)-based provider of product lifecycle management (PLM) solutions. The vendor’s product content management solutions have helped over 200 original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and tier two and tier three electronic manufacturing services (EMS) providers shorten development cycles, accelerate product innovation, and improve profitability.

Most of Omnify’s customers are companies with less than $500 million (USD) in revenues. Some are even pre-revenue startups, with the Omnify Empower PLM suite being their very first system of record, given they have no need for a transactional back-office system yet. Given that the vendor’s solution currently supports only English, the Omnify’s primary geographic markets are North America and Europe (specifically the United Kingdom and the Nordic region), with the industries served being electronics, mechanical, medical devices, and defense.

Omnify’s PLM modules have been successfully deployed with over 1,000 installed individual user licenses (in a floating, concurrent user licensing manner) within various businesses, helping them to more efficiently develop products, including wireless network platforms, soft-switch gateways, enterprise border controllers, advanced voice services platforms, aerospace navigation and control systems, digital and sonar imaging products, patient monitoring technology, and semiconductor equipment. As mentioned, Omnify customers encompass an array of business types, from start-ups such as Pacific Biosciences, Rivulet Communications, Still River Systems, and Wavestream to well-established corporations that include L3 Communications, Astronics, Acme Packet, and Cynosure.

Besides its headquarters in Andover, Omnify has offices on the US East and West Coasts. In addition to providing direct sales, consulting, and support services, Omnify Software has established a network of partners to deliver its PLM solutions as business ready. Currently, the vendor has 10 value-added resellers (VARs), which cover the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Nordic countries, which have the expertise and experience to help plan, install, and support the Omnify PLM solutions. Omnify assigns a channel sales representative to each reseller group, which, together with the direct sales force, adds up to over 100 sales and applications support personnel.

Omnify Software Genesis

Omnify Software evolved from Trilogic, Inc., the largest electronic design automation (EDA) VAR in the United States, and still a major Omnify reseller. In 1998, after many years of consulting with customers to help them create or define board-level design process flows and component information databases, Trilogic began to develop the Omnify Tool Suite. The result is today’s PLM system, which addresses the needs of companies seeking to improve their overall concept-to-design-to-manufacturing process.

The origin of Omnify technology is a universal bill of material (BOM) system developed in 1998 by the Omnify founders, and which is still in use by numerous OEMs today. OmniBOM is Omnify's BOM creation and processing tool for creating, editing and processing BOMs. With OmniBOM, users can import BOMs generated in other systems or formats (such as computer-aided design [CAD] and computer-aided engineering [CAE]), normalize, check, and analyze the data; and then automatically feed BOMs directly to other systems such as ERP/MRP or any downstream tool to easily integrate engineering BOMs with manufacturing systems.

According to one case study, OmniBOM provides a clear, concise view of all the changes to the initial BOM, and BOM comparisons are used to catch changes in the BOM from the customer, down to a single-digit change in the manufacturing part number. OmniBOM is lauded, by one customer, as its “most valued daily-use documentation tools [which also] ... enhances documentation communication with [its] customers ....” (For more commentary, visit http://www.omnifysoft.com/customers/Omnify-IMS-PLM-SuccessStory.pdf)

In any case, the PLM technology development began at Omnify in 2000 in earnest. In September of 2001, the Omnify product suite came to fruition with its first beta customer installations, while first customer shipments of the PLM system began in early 2002. Omnify Software was later incorporated in October of 2002. The solid electronic design and manufacturing process knowledge, and customer service-oriented background of the Omnify founders has given the company both a strong sensitivity to customer needs and a deep knowledge of what it takes to integrate engineering concepts, data management, and business systems.

Reflecting this customer-oriented philosophy, the company remains focused on allowing its customers to have a direct impact on the direction of the Omnify technology, ensuring a solution that truly meets their customers’ specific product development needs. To maintain this strategy, which has been in place since the company’s inception, Omnify technology provides an open-architecture PLM system that gives direct access for all groups involved in design and manufacturing processes and allows relatively easy integration to existing engineering and manufacturing systems.

Fast forward to early 2008 when Omnify Software announced exceptionally strong year-end results for 2007, exceeding revenue goals, increasing sales by 30 percent over 2006, and remaining profitable for another year. Omnify has reported steady growth, year after year, as the company continues to deliver comprehensive PLM solutions. The launch of Omnify's next-generation PLM solution, Empower PLM, was reportedly a key factor in the company's 2007 success.

Omnify recently transitioned its PLM technology platform to Microsoft .NET Framework in order to leverage advanced technology that provides a faster and more secure environment. The Framework enhances Omnify's existing open platform for third-party integrations and offers easier customization of user interfaces (UIs) and reports through Web services. This further supports Omnify's commitment to delivering a system that is easy to implement without disrupting existing processes.

While the product suite will be detailed shortly, for now, it suffices to highlight that project management, quality and corrective and preventive action (CAPA) management, and training record management are a few of the key new features or modules in Empower PLM. This new functionality has extended the capabilities of the system beyond traditional PLM to give users direct access to important product data that is often managed in separate systems. Empower PLM thus provides a mechanism to capture design, manufacturing, quality, service, and customer information and tie it back to the product record all within a single environment.

PLM’s Value Proposition, Revisited

Due to constantly changing product content information and shrinking product life cycles, electronics OEM and EMS providers need to enhance communications throughout the design-to-manufacturing process. Omnify Software offers a solution that streamlines the flow of product information among the design environment, both within the enterprise and its supply chain.

The drivers behind Omnify’s existence start with the typical (and yet unfortunate) disconnect between the engineering and manufacturing departments, where manufacturing is not aware of new product releases and revisions, while engineering is unaware of design issues impacting manufacturing and procurement processes. To make things worst, the traditional manual or paper-based processes mean no automated part request process and no electronic engineering change order (ECO) processing. As a result, everyone relies on ineffective (if not even counter-productive) means, like e-mails, faxes or phone calls, and spreadsheets to correct problems.

Last but not least, enterprise systems are still not integrated across all disciplines, so islands of information still exist. Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems do not contain enough product data and are difficult to integrate into engineering tools. In other words, due to the inherent transactional purpose of an ERP system, most do not contain the detailed information that engineers need to drive design, including part specifications, design and test notes, and vendor-supplied documentation. In addition, ERP systems typically do not provide the security or capability to enable external manufacturing or supplying partners with direct access to product data or the ability to participate in development processes (for more information, see Can ERP Speak PLM?).

With no enabling technology to collaborate with external resources, the engineering department usually has no system to help manage “pre-release” product data. To that end, the PLM software enables companies to manage and support all the information surrounding their various products and parts—from the initial idea and subsequent design and engineering diagrams via BOMs, manufacturing documents, sourcing details, and maintenance data to product discontinuation, in other words, a “cradle to grave” cycle).

As its name suggests, PLM software was designed to manage product data throughout the entire product lifecycle, but is crucial during the design phase, where engineers need instant access to product data, including specifications, engineering parameters, and documentation. A sound PLM system centralizes all of this information for easy access by all team members by tracking and managing component data, BOMs, product documentation, engineering changes, and revisions, as well as compliance data. PLM systems should also offer the flexibility to support the many iterations of a design before it reaches the prototype and manufacturing phases.

A contemporary PLM system is composed of several elements, including foundational integration technologies like extensible markup language (XML)-based Web services (see Understanding SOA, Web Services, BPM, BPEL, and More) or more traditional enterprise application integration (EAI) tools. Its core functions typically entail data vaults; document and content management; workflow and program (portfolio) management; and information authoring tools and functional applications (see Critical Components of an E-PLM System).

The various sets of these PLM systems’ highly configurable software modules should be easily integrated with underlying engineering, design, and product data systems. Smaller companies often start with basic PDM to provide broader access and reliable documentation, but once the data is under control, more sophisticated workflow, collaborative design, and project portfolio management (PPM) or program management might follow (see The Many Faces of PLM).

Thus, one of the key components of a PLM system is that it provides an automated change management facility that allows dispersed team members to electronically propose product changes (so-called “redlines”) to BOMs, documents, and vendor or supplier information. By leveraging a workflow engine, these changes are then automatically routed to the appropriate resources for electronic signatures, and once all constituents have approved the change, the PLM system automatically updates the affected products with the suggested changes and then provides the updated information to the ERP system.

An electronic change process eliminates manual data entry errors, streamlines routing, and allows all involved resources to view and sign changes simultaneously. All of these factors should result in a significant time and errors reduction in the ECO process. Automating product design processes can enhance overall product development by shortening cycle times for engineering changes and new-part requests. It also improves data integrity by eliminating human error from hand-entering and re-keying data. By enabling data to be shared between engineering and manufacturing staff, an automated system ensures that all product data is accurate, by creating a single version of the truth.

Several macroeconomic trends seem to be helping the PLM market, starting with the rampant offshoring of facilities and the expansion of outsourcing and contract manufacturing overseas (see Global Product Development Seen as a Boon for Product Lifecycle Management Vendors). There are also escalating mergers and acquisitions (M&As) within multiple business sectors and the inexorable spate of regulatory and compliance mandates within many industries and geographic regions (see Thou Shalt Comply [and More], or Else). This dovetails into the relentless pressure to innovate and bring ever more functional (and even “cool”) products, that have shorter life cycles, more quickly to the market. This is the key differentiator, especially in the electronics and consumer packaged goods (CPG) sectors.

What distinguishes PLM from ERP is a tight focus on products rather than transactional business operations, respectively. Namely, PLM software is designed to handle the swiftly changing, unstructured data associated with product design, while ERP manages highly structural financial or inventory transactional data. What PLM software brings to the enterprise is the chance to enable company- and supply chain-wide collaboration to create whatever products are in play, by providing marketing, production, sales, services, and even external suppliers, with increased visibility and early engagement in product development decision-making.

In fact, a recent benchmark research report by Aberdeen Group indicated that best-in-class companies are at least twice as likely as industry average companies to capture and reuse product development knowledge; to have formalized change processes within design engineering; to integrate their product development data into their business processes; to have centralized their product data; and to have developed formal metrics to measure their product development process.

Enter Omnify Empower PLM

To fulfill these requirements, in mid-2007 Omnify Software announced Omnify Empower, its latest PLM solution based on the Microsoft .NET Framework (see Subtle [or Not-so-subtle] Nuances of Microsoft .NET Enablement). Omnify Empower leverages Web services to deliver the next level of open architecture for easier data sharing and customization of UIs and reports. The ability to tailor UIs creates a more familiar environment for users, assuring a simple transition from legacy practices, while custom reporting offers high-level views of key development data and key performance indicators (KPIs) to identify trends and issues early in the development cycle.

 New functionality, such as Project Management, Quality Management, and Training Records Management extends the capability of the system to capture manufacturing, quality, and customer information, and tie it back to the product record. These capabilities also aim at further improving visibility into all aspects of product development for manufacturers and extending the current capabilities of the PLM solution to support better design practices, improve product quality, and shorten development cycles. As described in Omnify’s brochure, the product has key new modules and enhancements, including the following:

  • Project Management Module. Automates the management of tasks and project schedules for a more accurate view of project progress and completion. The module also offers the Automated Tasks feature that allows external and system actions to automatically update project progress. Capturing all product and program data in Empower offers executive views for more accurate prediction of deliverables, and analysis features facilitate recognition of common problems that impact deadline-sensitive development activities.
  • Quality Management Module. Automates capturing and routing of data related to product issues and defects (e.g., corrective action request [CAR], nonconforming material request [NCMR], supplier corrective action request [SCAR], field complaints, etc.) in a closed-loop CAPA system. This ability provides a mechanism to identify, classify and resolve quality issues. The system's Resolution Tasks feature help manufacturers identify the resources and actions required for closure on issues.
  • Training Management Module. Tracks and documents all internal and external training, and provides a facility to associate required training or testing directly with events, such as new product launches, implementation of product changes, and internal process changes. The module assures regulatory compliance for manufacturers and, when combined with Quality Management, fulfills the specific needs of medical manufacturers required to meet the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 820, Quality System Regulation.

For more information, visit, http://www.omnifysoft.com/Omnify-PLM-Product-Brochure.pdf.

Additional enhancements included increased system performance, improved reporting, and extended vendor data and service objects management. A new Help Desk feature supports multiple formats including video, hypertext markup language (HTML), portable data files (PDFs), among others and allows users to incorporate their own help and guidance to ensure adherence to corporate guidelines.

As previously explained, a floating license model with concurrent user access licenses starts at an agreeable $1,000 (USD) in a tiered pricing manner, depending on the product offering. Term and perpetual licensing models are also available and will affect the price. In addition to the aforementioned OmniBOM product, the available PLM product offerings (see the product overview at http://www.omnifysoft.com/products/Default.aspx) start with the Engineering Suite that includes the Component Data Management, Document Management and Engineering Tools, and ERP/PLM Integration capabilities. Then comes the BOM Management Suite, a middle-range product that includes the Engineering Suite, plus the BOM Management module. Finally, the Enterprise Suite, logically, contains the BOM Management Suite, plus the Change/ECO Management module.

In summary, the upper range Enterprise PLM Suite offers Product Record Management, BOM Management, Documentation Management, Engineering Change Management, Project Management, Quality Management, Training Record Management, and Support for Quality Standards and Regulatory Requirements. From the aspect of automated business process flows, the suite enables new part requests (NPR), change or engineer change orders (ECO), routing, closed-loop CAPA, and ERP system uploads and updates.

Security and collaboration

It is, however, important to note that Omnify’s PLM product suite furnishes a single, secure environment for sharing product data among design groups and throughout the extended enterprise. Indeed, a customary concern about PLM is that many of the applications are inherently Web-based, which can then open the door to security breaches if these applications haven't been proofed for vulnerabilities like cross-site scripting, structured query language (SQL) injections, or cookie tampering.

Omnify’s Web-based architecture promotes secure collaboration with disparate design and manufacturing teams, whereby local area network (LAN) clients are intended for internal groups and users within the firewall (such as, engineering, operations, printed circuit board [PCB] design, etc.). On the other hand, via Web clients, the architecture provides a direct database connection for “external” (outside the firewall) team members, like design service bureaus, remote sites, and contract manufacturers. Based on authorization and authentication profiles, full user-level permissions control item views, BOMs, documents, and field data.

This enables a single environment for all parties to share information, so they are “on the same page” and for all team members to be automatically notified of new products, changes, revisions, configurations, etc. As a result, the all too common “built to the incorrect revision” issues can be eliminated.

Bridging the Integration Gap

Since its inception, Omnify’s philosophy has been to help customers create an integrated environment and make product data accessible to distributed product development teams. This is evident in its open integration technology platform and functionality that allows customers to associate all aspects of product development data to a single product record.

As this is absolutely necessary, Empower provides a single location for all members of the design and manufacturing teams to share essential information for designing, manufacturing, and supporting products. The system is designed to manage all product content information, such as BOMs, component attributes, design drawings, datasheets, and vendor (manufacturers and suppliers) information. It facilitates requests, tracking, and executes changes on product information and supplies electronic processing with new part requests and ECOs, with the aim of improving communication and eliminating redundant data entry.

Omnify uses a web-enabled technology designed to integrate with a customer's existing design and manufacturing systems, and with external design and manufacturing partners via the Internet. The idea here is to provide the benefits of PLM, while minimizing disruption to current processes and leveraging existing IT assets. For instance, Omnify provides direct connections to Mentor Graphics’ DXDataBook and Cadence’s OrCad Component Information System (CIS) for electrical engineering component search-and-selection tasks.

For a long time, Omnify integrated with existing enterprise tools via a flexible, language neutral programming environment with triggering and reporting capabilities that came standard with the product. However, the latest product release features industry standard communication protocols, multitiered technology options and, emerging technology focus. In other words, Omnify’s application programming interface (API) supports standard database protocols, such as open database connectivity (ODBC), Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects (ADO), and SQL views and procedures. There is also support for XML- and simple object access protocol (SOAP)-based .NET Web services (which can also be hosted, if necessary), and for standard programming languages like C++, Microsoft C#, Visual Basic (VB), and Java.

The platform enables integration with existing engineering and manufacturing systems via bi-directional data sharing and synchronization. Empower PLM integrates into an organization's existing environment offering bi-directional interfaces with a plethora of design (computer-aided design [CAD], computer-aided engineering [CAE], content management) and manufacturing (ERP or supply chain management [SCM]) systems, such as Mentor, Altium, Cadence, SolidWorks, Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC), Oracle, SAP, Consona, Sage Software, NetSuite, Infor, Epicor Software, Expandable Software, etc.

In that regard, Empower should house data, such as part data or specifications, BOMs, changes or ECOs, documentation, approved vendors list (AVL) or approved manufacturers list (AML), change history, where used, and so on. Engineering systems, on the other hand, provide data like schematics, attributes, printed circuit board (PCB) design, mechanical design, documents, datasheets, etc., while ERP systems cater the information on accounting, sales orders, inventory, purchase orders (PO), costs, lead times, status, suppliers, etc. While all these individual enterprise systems may bring unique value to their operations, only when combined do they provide a streamlined, collaborative environment that bridges the gap between manufacturing and engineering.

In late 2007, Consona ERP and Omnify announced a formal technology partnership. The companies, which were previously honored with a START-IT Power of Partnerships award based on the success of mutual customers, then solidified their relationship with a formal ERP-PLM alliance, as well as shared sales, services, and support for both existing and future customers. The partnership was seen as a natural fit due to the companies’ common technology platforms, target market, and success of mutual customers.

The integration between the Intuitive ERP and Omnify PLM solution allows small and midsize manufacturers to share and synchronize engineering and manufacturing data through an automated process. As part of the formal partnership, a PLM integration has also been developed for Consona ERP's other flagship software application, Made2Manage ERP, whose customer base is seeing the very same benefits that Intuitive users have seen, including reduced data duplication, faster product development life cycles, and an improved go-to-market process.

Generally speaking, potential benefits from Omnify’s open platform may come from providing multiple system integration options for any existing enterprise system (built to older or newer technology standards), while no third-party software or application program interface (API) and software development kit (SDK) licensing is required.

Listening to the Voice of Customers

In addition to the platform’s openness and direct data sharing with engineering and business systems (with no technology displacement required), Omnify believes that its technology is focused on the needs of mid-sized enterprises, thereby often competing with Agile Software (now part of Oracle), UGS (now part of Siemens), and MatrixOne (now part of Dassault Systemes). However, the appetizing price point and lower total cost of ownership (TCO) enables Omnify to work with small enterprises (and compete with Arena Solutions) on one hand, while the scalable technology allows it to provide solutions to large enterprises (and face off with PTC or Dasaualt Systemes’ Smarteam) on the other hand.

Given no venture capital (VC) and associated pressures, Omnify cites competitive advantages, including healthy organic growth and profitability since 2002, which allows the vendor to continue to let its customers drive the product direction rather than outside investors. Omnify prides itself on being a true partner with its customers, and for striving for the technology that addresses their needs “out of the box.” We could, in fact, say that Omnify has nearly 100 percent customer satisfaction, since the only time it has ever lost a customer was when the customer dissolved. The vendor even had a recent case of a customer not only keeping its PLM solution, but also upgrading to the new Empower system, even though the customer was purchased by a larger company whose multiple locations were all on another, better-known PLM system.

In late 2007, Omnify announced the results of its annual customer survey, which polled more than 100 Omnify customers, both new and legacy, in order to research and evaluate common product development challenges before and after their PLM implementation. The vendor reported that approximately 91 percent of respondents indicated they were able to overcome product development challenges using PLM software.

The following is an excerpt from Omnify’s press release:

Survey results showed that there is a significant need among manufacturers for more efficient engineering change, BOM, and component management, as well as ease when communicating product information to various departments. The survey confirmed that customers were able to resolve these product development challenges by implementing a PLM solution and were pleased with how they were able to streamline their operations and develop products much easier and faster.

Prior to implementing a PLM solution, the majority of respondents reported that managing product information in different locations and outgrowing Microsoft Excel or homegrown solutions were key issues. These practices could not support the growing amounts of data involved in designing and manufacturing a product. Employing PLM technology was a strategic initiative to create more efficient product design and development processes by managing product data in a single, secure location, and eliminating silos of information throughout the enterprise.

Ease of implementation and depth of capabilities, followed by ease of use, remain key factors when selecting a PLM system. According to the survey, customers selected Omnify over other PLM vendors mainly for the ease of implementation and use as well as its rich PLM feature set. The solution from Omnify allows customers to be trained and implemented within days due to its intuitive user interface (UI) and open technology platform.

(Source: PLM Survey Results Show a Need for More Efficient Engineering Change, Bill of Material, and Compliance Management.)

Indeed, Omnify is one of those rare software companies that quietly offers customers the best choice for functionality within a reasonable budget. Some customers are even gushing about how much they have been able to accomplish at a mere fraction of the cost of other PLM systems. They regard Omnify as accurate, reliable, dependable, and loyal to its customers, and genuine regarding the vendor claims ease of use (minimal customer resource requirements) and ease of implementation (rapid deployment, measured often in days).

Some customers tout achieving a rapid return on investment (ROI) in terms of a speedier time-to-market (product development times reduced by over 50 percent), increased product innovation (engineering cycle times reduced by over 50 percent) and improved product quality (product return rates cut in half). Now, other PLM vendors’ customers might cite similar stats and help with maintaining their competitive edge, but at much higher investment levels (such as, time, money, and human resources).

Compliance Savvy

The survey also uncovered that today, the most common market trend manufacturers are seeing the need to meet diverse compliance requirements such as Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS), US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and International Standards Organization (ISO). Respondents reported that they feel Omnify is in a strong position to support these trends with the system's ability to manage detailed product data, track change history, handle quality and CAPA information, and its strong reporting capabilities. Over 82 percent of customers stated that they are currently using or plan to use Omnify to manage their compliance processes.

In fact, Omnify has long been helping electronics manufacturing companies that do business globally, ensure their operations are RoHS compliant before and since the 2006 deadline imposed by European Union (EU) countries (see "Evergreen"—Environmental Regulations for High-tech and Electronics, Chemical, and Oil and Gas Industries). The RoHS directive applies to electrical and electronic products and their component parts and mandates a reduction in the amount of hazardous materials used in these products. It impacts the entire business strategy for manufacturers—from design and development to final output.

Omnify PLM supports companies with a solution that provides a means of identifying the complete material composition of a part. It can easily classify compliant and non-compliant parts, provide search and reporting features, and perform analysis at any level of a product's structure. The product also allows manufacturers to store all material declarations or certificates of compliance from suppliers. Among the companies that are using Omnify Software for compliance objectives are LuminentOIC (now Source Photonics), Crystal Technology, and Cognex.

In early 2006, EMA Design Automation, a full-service provider of Electronic Design Automation (EDA) solutions, integrated the Omnify product content and change management software into the EMA’s engineering data management (EDM) environment making its adherence to RoHS and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) compliance directives even easier. (For more information, see Off-loading Some Green Compliance Burdens: Can Enterprise Applications Meet the Challenge?)

Integrating Omnify into EMA’s EDM solution has provided the five key capabilities that bolstered the VAR’s compliance-by-design philosophy, which is described in the following excerpt from EMA’s press release:

  1. Configuration Management. OEMs need to manage data related to all aspects of their products including electrical, mechanical, and software or firmware items. Due to the level of change and product configurability associated with RoHS compliance, companies need to be able to access and control revisions to all items throughout the entire product structure. EMA's EDM solution now encompasses managing data and controlling revision levels on the customer's entire product.
  2. BOM Management. The RoHS and WEEE requirements affect the entire product. The BOM management function manages all revisions and understands the life cycle of a BOM. Since the BOM items link directly to active part data, customers can analyze and generate compliance reports from any level or from any version of their BOMs.
  3. Document Management. It is critical for both RoHS and WEEE initiatives that due diligence is exercised in the collection and storage of supporting documentation. Items such as the component datasheet, Certificate of Compliance, Material Declaration, and testing information need to be stored at an individual vendor part number level. In case of an audit, these documents must be quickly and reliably accessible for at least four years. EMA's EDM solution now provides document versioning and vaulting for all documents associated with the product or vendor records. Changes made to documents are performed under a user-defined and controlled process.
  4. Change Management. Changes made to product data usually require validation by all affected parties. EDM provides a controlled change management process that allows users to define product and documentation changes and allows them to vote on the suggested changes. The system handles the automatic routing to users (via e-mail) and updating of product records when changes are approved by all parties. RoHS and WEEE directives are causing many changes to products (part replacements, AVL changes, part number changes, availability, etc.). These changes must be captured and performed in an automated fashion.
  5. Enhanced Reporting. When delivering reports to satisfy RoHS and WEEE requirements, the entire product structure must be considered. Reports and analysis must be available at any point in the product development process. With EMA's EDM solution customers can generate reports from any level of the product structure. The system can also automate the generation and packaging of these reports. Since EDM captures data during product development, these reports can be generated, products can be analyzed, and adjustments can be made at design time. (Source: EMA Adds Five Key Capabilities to EMA Engineering Data ManagementTM [EDM] to Facilitate RoHS/WEEE Compliance; New Capabilities Powered by Omnify Software).

Challenges Exist Notwithstanding

Despite Omnify's apparent customer loyalty (owing to the vendor delivering outstanding training, development, and support with a team of experienced technology professionals), it is too naive to believe that the company is without some outstanding challenges. The most apparent ones are the vendor’s low brand recognition due to its size and quiet, privately-held nature, and limited global opportunity, due to its English-only support. Its privately funded status has its advantages, however, such as allowing Omnify to decide about its own destiny and directions, but the downside is that it has less visibility and noise compared to much larger and public competitors.

Ironically, Omnify’s other challenge is often to allay misperceptions of PLM software being an overkill for midsized prospective customers, a courtesy of the pricey upper-range PLM products implemented at the likes of Boeing. Yet, not all midsize manufacturers have simpler operations; their operations are sometimes actually more complicated than much larger enterprises, because so much of the complex design stuff gets outsourced to them through the supply chain. Thus, Omnify will have to further refine its message to prospects, explaining the misperception that PLM is expensive (because these companies will have heard about some multimillion-dollar PLM deployments). Also, many companies are challenged by imagining how to implement PLM, or are unaware of what a PLM solution can do for them and their manufacturing partners.

Proving a tangible payback or ROI for PLM can also be tricky, since it is more likely that an enterprise will avoid incurring unnecessary costs with a PLM suite in place rather than see cost cutting results. In fact, it can be difficult to quantify people's time, which is mostly what PLM systems do, by, for example, reducing time, errors, duplication of work, etc. It can also, in some instances, be hard to argue that PLM is a mission-critical application when companies have long gotten by with a mishmash of point products and spreadsheets. As the aforementioned survey indicated, it is only when companies reach that critical point of dealing (and feeling overwhelmed) with too many product lines, parts, and too many issues that they need to automate.

Therefore, instances where Omnify might lose are when a prospective company already has a more prominent PLM system in place at a parent or sister company or, on occasion, a company only wants a hosted or on-demand solution, which the model Omnify currently does not offer. At the low-cost end, there are on-demand providers, which offer remote hosting and charge as little as several hundred dollars per viewing user, annually (and a bit more for power users). Often, taking the on-demand or software as a service (SaaS) route (see What Is Software as a Service?) to PLM will cost only a fraction of what traditional, on-premises software does. Arena Solutions, with over 300 customers, proves that point—and we do think that the SaaS model will only continue to grow and attract more vendors and customers.

However, Omnify still finds that many manufacturers are still reluctant to use a hosted PLM solution because the system holds their products’ intellectual property and there is a concern about security and the control and protection of data. The vendor has not experienced a strong demand in the market for it to change its strategy and deliver a hosted or on-demand PLM solution. Some of the larger vendors that created on-demand versions of their product are now pulling back.

In addition, some companies cannot use a hosted solution, such as those in the defense industry, while FDA compliance requirements are causing medical manufacturers to shy away from hosted solutions. Namely, these regulations call for adherence to specific processes and data sets when using automated or electronic systems. They also have an impact on how customers need to test and validate the software they use to help build their products.

Unfortunately, these validation processes add yet another layer of complexity to SaaS systems since customers will need to go through a validation process before they are allowed to install or use the system for day-to-day operations. In other words, a system that gets frequently updated (software revision changes) and is automatically made available to its users (such is the case with most SaaS products) is not acceptable here. Now, some of this “interpretation” of regulations is left up to the original equipment manufacturer (OEM), but Omnify claims to have had many cases where FDA regulated companies have told it that they simply cannot use SaaS applications since they need to validate all new revisions of software in a test environment (which could take days, weeks, or months) before rolling it out to their users. Again, with most SaaS systems, the software is updated and immediately made available to all users. Even if the SaaS provider maintains the old version of the code for customers, the fact that the new system is publicly available presents significant issues for validation.

Other PLM vendors have waded into the SaaS pool, but many have backed off simply due to insufficient demand and Arena’s first-to-market advantage. The typical concerns of customers are still valid: security, reliability (on both ends), ownership, usability, integrations with other systems, etc. With the maturity of the market and emergence of competition, the on-premise PLM price has been driven down to the point that the cost difference between traditional and SaaS systems are not enough of a factor for many customers. Still, the continued success of Arena and Oracle Agile PLM on-demand offerings might force Omnify to change its strategy later on, possibly when it becomes too late and too costly to do so.

User Recommendations

Small and midsize electronics and electro-mechanical device manufacturers in North America and English-speaking European countries in high-tech, medical devices, and defense sectors, with significant regulatory requirements, should evaluate Omnify Empower. This is especially true for companies that still rely on a combination of inflexible legacy systems and pesky spreadsheets for product design, but, they should rather opt for packaged applications to improve the timeliness, accuracy, and visibility of product data. The Omnify PLM solution is ideal for manufacturers with complex products that require a large number of changes, where the change management facility and workflow engine support efficient engineering change control processes and helps customers react quickly to product changes and maintain high quality products.

Generally speaking, prospective customers should vigorously demand contesting PLM vendors’ references that are their size and in their industry. Prospective customers are likely to demand a Web-based system, which is easy to integrate with the ERP and CAD system currently in place and is configured to serve their business (see PLM Is an Industry Affair—Or Is It?).

Also, the selected vendors have to demonstrate integration skills, and training and support for knowledge transfer to the user enterprise’s staff. While all functional departments should be involved in the product evaluation, the engineering, operations, and IT departments should equitably take charge. All too often, engineering or operations groups will leave IT out of the evaluation process, although it is the IT group that will knowledgeably challenge the vendor, ask tough technical questions, and drill into vendor strong and weak spots.


 
comments powered by Disqus


The Theory of Constraints Enters the Lean Manufacturing Arena | The TEC Quick Case for Made2Manage | Enterprise Resource Planning Vendors Address Lean Manufacturing | So What: The Big Test of Your Positioning Strategy | Manual versus Information Technology Enabled Lean Manufacturing | How to Achieve Lean Manufacturing | Lean Tools and Practices that Eliminate Manufacturing Waste | Microsoft's Dynamic New Approach to Professional Services Automation | Globalization Has a Profound Impact on the Supply Chain and Supporting Information Technology | IDeWeb Provides Best-of-breed Product Portfolio Management Functionality for the Manufacturing Sector | Enterprise Resource Planning Vendor Gains Connectivity through Acquisition of Plant Intelligence Provider | Has SAP Nailed Plant Level Leadership with Lighthammer? | Where is Oracle in the Product Lifecycle Management Software Market? | SAP NetWeaver Background, Direction, and User Recommendations | Multipurpose SAP NetWeaver |
Pelion Systems Champions Manufacturing Process Optimization | Enterprise Resource Planning Giants Eye the Shop Floor | As Hype Becomes Reality, a Radio Frequency Identification Ecosystem Emerges Part Two: The Middleware Dilemma, Partnerships, and What Next? | As Hype Becomes Reality, a Radio Frequency Identification Ecosystem Emerges | Extending Quality's Reach to Manage Quality in the Supply Chain | SSA Global finds Little Known SCM Gems in Filling Out its Solution Portfolio | Exact Faces Challenges | Exact Acquires Vanguard Solutions Group | A Single Software Solution That Enables Business Process Management | Global Software Aspirations | Exact Software Continues with Its Share of Judicious Acquisitions | Project Portfolio Management for New Product Development: Tracking the Project Cycle from Idea to Launch | What Are Your Competitors Telling You? A Case Study: SAP's New Advertising Campaign | Working Toward Truly Strategic Partnerships | How Is Business Process Management Applicable to Financial Services? | Project Portfolio Management for Service Organizations: Bridging the Gap between Project Management and Operations | Easy ERP: A Challenge to Conventional Thinking | Predictive Analytics; the Future of Business Intelligence | New Approaches to Software Pricing | Enterprise Software Service and Maintenance Alternatives | Plant Intelligence as Glue for Dispersed Data? | A Unique Product Lifecycle Management Tool for Private Label Retail | ERP Plus and Beyond | The Strengths of a Vertically Centric Enterprise Software Provider | IT Governance: Maximizing the Business Investment | Supply Chain Vendor Morphs into SCEM with Response Management Vision | Business Process Management: A Crash Course on What It Entails and Why to Use It | Records Management Becoming More Important Due to Compliance Regulations | Integrating Customer Relationship Management through Software As A Service | Comparing On Demand Customer Relationship Management Service Alternatives | Enterprise Software Product Outsourcing: A Fresh Perspective for Mid-market Vendors | The Exacting Needs of Metal Service Centers | If There's One Thing CRM Tells Us: Don't Do PLM the Same Way | What Plant-level Systems Can Do for the Enterprise Market | Plant-level Systems: Facing and Dealing with Obstacles | The Importance of Plant-level Systems | Parametric Technology Corporation's Bold Vision Drives Growth and Innovation | Prepackaged SAP Best Practices—Are They for You? | Best-of-breed Approach to Finance and Accounting | Joining the Sarbanes-Oxley Bandwagon; Meeting the Needs of Small and Medium Businesses | Composing Collaborative Financial Applications | Global Trade Management Software Vendors Under-Perform, But Were Predictions Overly Optimistic? | Using Visibility to Manage Supply Chain Uncertainty | Supply Chain Management Is Evolving toward Interdependent Supply Networks | Partnerships with Vendors and Independent Software Vendors: Rejuvenating Legacy Systems | Server Platform Revitalization in the Enterprise Applications Space | The Challenges of the Lawson-Intentia Merger | Market Impact of Lawson-Intentia Merger | Intentia Prepares for Merger with Lawson | 'New' Lawson Software's Transatlantic Extended Enterprise Resource Planning Intentions | Critical Components of an E-PLM System | Retalix Strives for Leadership in Retail Food Segment | Vendors Strive for Segment Pack Leader Status; Does Retalix Measure Up? | Looking For Software—The Expectations of Small and Medium Enterprises | SCM in a New Flavor: Real Time and Demand Driven | Enterprise Resource Planning: Bridging the Gap between Product Vision and Execution | Stability and Functionality for Process and Discrete Manufacturers | Aligning Java-based Application Strategies | A New Platform to Battle Software Bloat? | Can Java Perk Legacy Enterprise Resource Planning Systems? | Portal Strategy: One Vendor's Story and What It Means to You | Epicor To Give All Its Applications More Than A Pretty Facelift | A New Model for Evaluating Third Party Logistics Providers: Enter Service Oriented Architecture | Product Architecture for Product Endurance? | Programming for Business Analysts? The Promise of Simplified Web Services Implementation and Access | Project Lifecycle Management Implies Long Term Value; Forget the Total Cost of Ownership Fuss | Niche Software at Its Best | Portals: Necessary But Not Self-sufficient | ERP and Warehouse Management: Technology, Challenges, and User Recommendations | Responding to Warehouse Management Needs | Mid-Market Strategy: International Enterprise Solutions | Adonix' Mid-Market FORMULA – Adopting Best of Both 'Organic Growers' and 'Aggressive Consolidators' Worlds | The Blessing and Curse of Rejuvenating Legacy Systems | Technology Enablers for the Lean Supply Chain | Rapidly Consolidating Enterprise Applications Market: The Worlds of 'Organic Growers' and 'Aggressive Consolidators' | Demand-driven Manufacturing and Warehousing: Challenges and User Recommendations | The Impact of Demand-Driven Technology in the SCM Market: IBS | Supply Chain Operations Reference and Other Features in ASW | IBS–Slow but Steady (and Demand-Driven) May Win the SCM Race | Essential ERP—Its Underpinning Technology | Mid-sized SCE Buys Small SCP: No Sure Bet on Short Term Profits | Warehousing Management: Yard Management, Competitive Analysis, and Challenges | Who Needs Warehousing Management and How Much Thereof? | The Technology Choices | Global versus Local Channel Approach, Who Will Win? | The Market Impact of Two Powerhouses | Addressing Channels and the Low-End Market | What Do Users Want and Need? | Technical Staff Management Systems for the Aviation Industry | Marquee Vendors Partner for Deepening Inherent CRM and BI Links | Why Are CRM and Analytics Intrinsically Connected? | Three Cs of Successful Positioning: The Competition | When Customer Relationships Meets Business Intelligence Marketing Analysis and User Recommendations | SAS and Action-Oriented Business Processes: Alliances, Partnerships, and Acquisitions | SAS: Striving to Sustain Leadership | Customer Life Cycle Solutions: Strategic Alliances, Challenges, & User Recommendations | A Tectonic Shift in Communications Customer Life Cycle Management | Amdocs Overhauls Its Marketing | Supply Chain Management Systems for Service and Replacement Parts: Players, Benefits, and User Recommendations | Avoid the Perils of Service Parts Planning in Supply Chain Management | Lucrative but "Risky" Aftermarket Business—Service and Replacement Parts SCM | Interview with Louis Suárez-Potts of OpenOffice.org and CollabNet | Interview with Karl Fogel of Subversion and CollabNet | Interview with Jeff Bates of SourceForge.net, Slashdot, and the OSTG | Concerted Disruption, Climb Aboard | Competitive Challenges for Vanguard | A Demand-driven Approach to BI | Has the Mid-market Found Vanguard BI Solutions? | Integration and Consolidation of Business Intelligence within Business Performance Management | Business Intelligence Status Report: Recommendations | Access to Critical Business Intelligence: Challenging Data Warehouses? | Business Intelligence Vendors | Business Intelligence Corporate Performance Management Market Landscape | Business Process Management: How to Orchestrate Your Business | New Data Triggers for International Supply Chain Finance | Manufacturing Environments and Integration with Other Functions | Managing Your Supply Chain Using Microsoft Navision | Attaining Real Time, On-demand Information Data: Contemporary Business Intelligence Tools | Business Intelligence for SMBs: MBS Excel Applications and Competitive Analysis | Vendors Harness Excel (and Office) to Win the Lower-end of Business Intelligence Market | Unifying Global Trade Management: Challenges and User Recommendations | Dealing with Global Trade Management Complexity | Market Leaders of Global Trade Management | Managing Global Trade Flows | Fighting Terrorism with Global Trade Management | Selecting a CMMS System | Global Trade Solutions: Competition, Challenges, and User Recommendations | Confronting Core Global Trade Problems: Order, Shipment, and Financial Settlement | Tackling the International Supply Chain | Confronting International Regulatory Compliance: Web-based GTM Solution | TradeBeam Keeps on Rounding Out Its GTM Set | How to Cope When Your Service Provider is Acquired | Enterprise Software Migration Alert: Is SAP the Alternative? | Oracle's Product Future: What Can the Past Tell? | Battle Booty from Oracle's Victory Over PeopleSoft | Offshore Outsourcing: Is There a Method to the Madness? Planning for Offshore Outsourcing | When Small Business Packages Have Enterprise Appeal | Employee Performance Management Problems | The Oracle/PeopleSoft Reality Check | What's Ahead for Users on the Enterprise Infrastructure Battlefront? | Competition Heats Up in ERP Market: Oracle Merger, and SAP and Microsoft Reacts | While Oracle and PeopleSoft Are to Fuse, Competitors Ruse--Leaving Customers (Somewhat) Bemused | A New Development Framework on iSeries or i5/OS: Architecture | GTM Solutions--Always Watch Out for SAP | Global Trade Regulatory Software: Vendor Obstacles and User Recommendations | Navigating Global Trade Waters | The Future of SOA-based Applications and Infrastructure | SOA as a Foundation for Applications and Infrastructure | SOA-based Applications and Infrastructure--The Next Frontier? | Customer Choices for Achieving Growth | Competitive Advantage in a Saturated Market: How Will the Big Few Do It? | Achieving Growth: New Accounts versus Up-selling to Existing Accounts | Merging Disparate IT Systems and Exploiting Multichannels | Enterprise Application Alternatives: What You Should Be Asking Oracle and SAP | Enterprise Application Players Keep Refining Value Propositions | Why Open Source is Important to You | Linking Planning and Execution Systems for Retailers’ Nirvana--Improved Visibility and Fulfillment | One Product for Large and Small Manufacturers: Challenges and User Recommendations | When EDI Goes Native, Everything Falls in Sync with IQMS | Benefits of a Single Database Solution: Improved Enterprise Quality Management from IQMS | Solving Enterprise Problems: The Fully-integrated Solution of IQMS | Why Service Matters: Enterprise Solutions, Market Differentiation, and IQMS | IQMS Prospers by Helping Enterprises Work Smarter | The Players of Software-as-a-Service Business Models and Finding the Best Value Propositions | Disruptive Innovations? On-demand Pricing Models and Vendors | Get on the Grid: Utility Computing | Trends in Delivery and Pricing Models for Enterprise Applications: Pricing Options | The Role of PIM and PLM in the Product Information Supply Chain: Where is Your Link? | The Pain and Gain of Integrated EDI Part Two: Automotive Suppliers Gain | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part Six: Weaknesses and User Recommendations | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part Five: Collaxa Acquisition | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part Four: SOA and Web Services | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part Three: Strategy Shifts | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part Two: Strategy | Oracle Further Orchestrates Its SOA Forays Part One: Event Summary and Market Impact | JDA Portfolio: For the Retail Industry Part Six: ERP Vendors and User Recommendations | A Spoonful of SugarCRMCase Study and Review of an Open Source CRM Solution | Atrion User Conference Highlights Need for Regulatory Compliance in PLM | The Name and Ownership Change Roulette Wheel for Marcam Stops at SSA Global Part Four: What SSA Global Gets | SSA Global Forms a Strategic Unit with an Extended-ERP Savvy Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | TEC Talks to OpenMFGFree and Open Source Software Business ModelsPart Two: OpenMFG | Selecting a PLM Vendor | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Eight: Challenges and User Recommendations | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Seven: WMS Market Impact | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Six: Market Impact | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Five: 3PL Support and SCE Optimization | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Four: Global Availability | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Three: Provia and Viastore Systems Alignment | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part Two: RFID Compliance | Provia Tackles RFID in a Twofold Manner Part One: Recent Annoucements | RFID Case Study: Gillette and Provia Part Two: Challenges and Lessons Learned | RFID Case Study: Gillette and Provia Part One: Background | PeopleSoft Revamps World for Its Mid-Market "Express" Conquest Part One: Recent Annoucements | Is MAPICS Getting the Magic of PLM? Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Is MAPICS Getting the Magic of PLM? Part Two: Strategy | Is MAPICS Getting the Magic of PLM? Part One: Recent Events and Market Impact | PLM Coming of Age: ERP Vendors Take Notice | Encompix--Thriving on Encompassing Complexity Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | ERP Systems and the ETO Manufacturing Market Part Two: ETO versus Repetitive Differences | Exact Software--Working Diligently Towards the "One Exact" Synergy Part One: Event Summary | 3M Wraps Up HighJump, While Retalix Shops OMI International Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Onyx/Pivotal Rivalry Through Thin Rather Than Thick | I-Impact Predicts Your Customer Retention! | Oracle Renders Its PLM Outline Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Oracle Renders Its PLM Outline Part One: Event Summary | The Many Faces of PLM Part Two: The Future of the PLM Suite | The Many Faces of PLM Part One: Event Summary | The PLM Program An Incremental Approach to the Strategic Value of PLM | Microsoft Keeps on Rounding up Its Business Solutions Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Microsoft Keeps on Rounding up Its Business Solutions Part One: Event Summary | Financial Reporting, Planning, and Budgeting As Necessary Pieces of EPM Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Autodesk to Bring Microsoft Business Solutions Closer to PLM | Lawson Software-IPO and Several Acquisitions After Part Five: Challenges and User Recommendations | Lawson Software-IPO and Several Acquisitions After Part Four: Strengths Continued | Lawson Software-IPO and Several Acquisitions After Part Three: Market Impact | Lawson Software-IPO and Several Acquisitions After Part Two: Retail and Professional Service Initiatives | Lawson Software-IPO and Several Acquisitions After | Ramco to Its Customers-Let's Get Personal! Part Two: Commitment and Recommendations | Ramco to Its Customers - Let's Get Personal! | The Hidden Gems of the Enterprise Application Space Part Two: Sorting and Selecting SRM Software | The Hidden Gems of the Enterprise Application Space | Evaluating Enterprise Software-Business Process or Feature/Function-Based Approach? All the above, Perhaps? Part Three: Knowledge Bases and User Recommendations | Has Consolidation Made the PLM Market More Agile? Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Has Consolidation Made the PLM Market More Agile? Part Two: Market Impact | Has Consolidation Made the PLM Market More Agile? | Surado! A Rising Mid-market CRM Provider | Analyzing MAPICS' Further Steps After Frontstep Part Five: Challenges and User Recommendations | Analyzing MAPICS' Further Steps After Frontstep Part Four: Market Impact Continued | Analyzing MAPICS' Further Steps After Frontstep Part Three: Market Impact | Analyzing MAPICS' Further Steps After Frontstep Part Two: More Recent Events | Analyzing MAPICS’ Further Steps After Frontstep | The Different Evolutionary Stages of ERP and PLM | chinadotcom in the "Process" of Acquiring Ross Systems Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | chinadotcom In The "Process" of Acquiring Ross Systems | SSA GT to EXE-cute (Yet) Another Acquisition Part Four: Challenges, and User Recommendations | SSA GT to EXE-cute (Yet) Another Acquisition Part Three: Impact on SSA GT | SSA GT to EXE-cute (Yet) Another Acquisition Part Two: EXE | SSA GT To EXE-cute (Yet) Another Acquisition | QAD Pulling through, Patiently but Passionately Part Six: User Recommendations | QAD Pulling Through, Patiently But Passionately Part Five: Challenges | QAD Pulling Through, Patiently But Passionately Part Four: Market Impact Continued | QAD Pulling through, Patiently but Passionately Part Three: Market Impact | QAD Pulling Through, Patiently But Passionately Part Two: Company Background | QAD Pulling Through, Patiently But Passionately | PeopleSoft Strategy a Good Deal for JD Edwards Customers | Battery Power Shakes Up Made2Manage Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Battery Power Shakes Up Made2Manage | IBM is Serious About SMB | Customization Drives Complexity - Why It's Hard to Design, Sell, and Produce "Simple" Products | Solomon Stands the Test of Time Despite Changing Masters Part Four: Challenges and User Recommendations | Solomon Stands the Test of Time Despite Changing Masters Part Three: Product Differentiators | Solomon Stands the Test of Time Despite Changing Masters Part Two: Market Impact | Solomon Stands the Test of Time Despite Changing Masters | Scala and Microsoft Become (Not So) Strange CRM Bedfellows Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Scala and Microsoft Become (Not So) Strange CRM Bedfellows Part Two: Market Impact Continued | Scala and Microsoft Become (Not So) Strange CRM Bedfellows | Epicor Conducts Its Own ROI Acquisition Rationale Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Epicor Conducts Its Own ROI Acquisition Rationale Part Two: Market Impact | Epicor Conducts Its Own ROI Acquisition Rationale | Lose the Starry Eyes, Analyze: Reviewing the Ideal Candidate for EMR Innovations ProcessPro | RTI's CRM Applications Rivals The Major League Providers | IBM Express-es Its Candid Desire For SMEs Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | IBM Express-es Its Candid Desire For SMEs Part Two: Market Impact | IBM Express-es Its Candid Desire For SMEs | Can ERP Speak PLM? Part Two: Examples and Recommendations | Best Software Delivers More Insights To Its Partners (As Well As To The Market) Part Five: Challenges and User Recommendations | Best Software Delivers More Insights To Its Partners (As Well As To The Market) Part Four: Market Impact Continued | Best Software Delivers More Insights To Its Partners (As Well As To The Market) Part Three: Market Impact | Best Software Delivers More Insights To Its Partners (As Well As To The Market) Part Two: Event Summary Continued | Best Software Delivers More Insights To Its Partners (As Well As To The Market) | Baan And SSA GT Merge To Form A Mid-Market Empire With An ''Iron Side'' Part Four: Market Impact Summary and User Recommendations | Baan And SSA GT Merge To Form A Mid-Market Empire With An ''Iron Side'' Part Three: Market Impact On SSA GT | Baan And SSA GT Merge To Form A Mid-Market Empire With An ''Iron Side'' Part Two: Market Impact On Baan | Baan And SSA GT Merge To Form A Mid-Market Empire With An ''Iron Side'' | To Gain Market Share in the Mid-Market, SAP Leaves No Stone Unturned | Welcome to the CRM Mid-Market Abyss-PeopleSoft | Frantic Merger-Mania Spiced Up With Vendettas Leaves Customers Anxious | Lose the Starry Eyes, Analyze: Reviewing the Ideal Candidate for Metasystems ICIM | Epicor Reaches Better Vista From This Vantage Point Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Epicor Reaches Better Vista From This Vantage Point Part Two: Market Impact | Epicor Reaches Better Vista From This Vantage Point | Service Lifecycle Management - Tapping into the Value of the Product Aftermarket | A User Centric WorkWise Customer Conference | ROI Systems Defies The Odds Through Delighted Customers Part Three: Strengths, Challenges and User Recommendations | ROI Systems Defies The Odds Through Delighted Customers Part Two: Market Impact | ROI Systems Defies The Odds Through Delighted Customers | Adonix + CIMPRO = A Feature-Rich Process ERP Product, But With Challenges | Selecting PLM Software Solutions Part 5 - User Recommendations | Selecting PLM Software Solutions Part 4 - Comparing 3 Vendors | Selecting PLM Software Solutions Vendors Part 3 - A Timesaving Solution | Selecting PLM Software Solutions Part 2 - Problem Overview | Selecting PLM Software Solutions | SCE Leaders Partner To See Beyond Their Portfolio Part Two: Market Impact | Baan Seeking A New Foster Home -- A Déjà vu Or Not Quite? Part Three: Market Impact and User Recommendations | Baan Seeking A New Foster Home -- A Déjà vu Or Not Quite? Part Two: Baan Under Invensys | Baan Seeking A New Foster Home -- A Déjà vu Or Not Quite? | Microsoft Convergence 2003 portrayed an Enterprise Solutions crossroad! | Commerce One Conducts Its Soul-Searching Metamorphosis Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Commerce One Conducts Its Soul-Searching Metamorphosis | Cincom Acknowledges There Is A Composite Applications Environ-ment Out There Part Two: Challenges and User Recommendations | Cincom Acknowledges There Is A Composite Applications Environ-ment Out There | Lose the Starry Eyes, Analyze: Reviewing the Ideal Candidate for a Pronto Solution | Is J.D. Edwards's CRM 2.0 (With more than 200 Enhancements) Good News? | Ramco Ships Technology And Products. Part Two: User and Vendor Recommendations | Ramco Ships Technology And Products. Is This The Future Of Enterprise Applications? | SYSPRO - Awaiting Positive IMPACT From Its Brand Unification Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | SYSPRO - Awaiting Positive IMPACT From Its Brand Unification Part Two: Market Impact | SYSPRO - Awaiting Positive IMPACT From Its Brand Unification | SAP Weaves Microsoft .NET And IBM WebSphere Into Its ESA Tapestry Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | SAP Weaves Microsoft .NET And IBM WebSphere Into Its ESA Tapestry Part Two: Market Impact | SAP Weaves Microsoft .NET And IBM WebSphere Into Its ESA Tapestry | Lilly Software - Product Enhancements Remain Its Order 'Du Jour' Part Four: Challenges and User Recommendations | Lilly Software - Product Enhancements Remain Its Order 'Du Jour' Part Three: Competitive Analysis | Lilly Software - Product Enhancements Remain Its Order 'Du Jour' Part Two: Market Impact | Lilly Software - Product Enhancements Remain Its Order 'Du Jour' | Will Adonix Provide A Warmer Home To CIMPRO? Part Three: Challenges and User Recommendations | Will Adonix Provide A Warmer Home To CIMPRO? Part Two: Market Impact | Will Adonix Provide A Warmer Home To CIMPRO? | ACCPAC -- Being Much More Than Meets The Eye Part Four: Challenges and User Recommendations | ACCPAC -- Being Much More Than Meets The Eye Part Three: Market Impact | ACCPAC -- Being Much More Than Meets The Eye Part Two: Announcements Continued | ACCPAC -- Being Much More Than Meets The Eye | Ramco Systems' Users - Winning Big And Speaking Out In Las Vegas | Made2Manage Affirms Its Technological Astuteness Part 3: Challenges and User Recommendations | Made2Manage Affirms Its Technological Astuteness Part 2: Strategy | Made2Manage Affirms Its Technological Astuteness | PLM Is An Industry Affair - Or Is It? | MAPICS To Leap Forward In A Frontstep Way Part 3: Challenges and User Recommendations | MAPICS To Leap Forward In A Frontstep Way Part 2: Market Impact | MAPICS To Leap Forward In A Frontstep Way | Best Software To Hold Competition At Bay Part Four: Challenges & User Recommendations | Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) in ProcessPart 3: Process PLM Requirements | Best Software To Hold Competition At Bay Part Three: Market Impact | Best Software To Hold Competition At Bay Part Two: Strategy | Best Software To Hold Competition At Bay | Ross Systems Shows Poise in 'Big Easy' | Is SSA GT Betting Infini(um)tely On Acquisitions? Part Four: Challenges and User Recommendations. | Is SSA GT Betting Infini(um)tely On Acquisitions? Part Three: Complementary Products | Is SSA GT Betting Infini(um)tely On Acquisitions? Part Two: Market Impact | Is SSA GT Betting Infini(um)tely On Acquisitions? | Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) in Process Part 2 Process PLM Motivation | Epicor Picks Clarus' Bargain At The Software Flea Market Part 2: Challenges and User Recommendations | Epicor Picks Clarus' Bargain At The Software Flea Market | Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) in Process Part 1 Proven in Discrete, Ready to Blossom in Process | Cincom Asserts Expertise In CRM For Complex Manufacturers Part 2: Challenges and User Recommendations | Cincom Asserts Expertise In CRM For Complex Manufacturers | MAPICS Moving On Pragmatically Part 4: Competition and User Recommendations | MAPICS Moving On Pragmatically Part 3: Challenges | MAPICS Moving On Pragmatically Part 2: Market Impact | MAPICS Moving On Pragmatically | Microsoft Lays Enforced-Concrete Foundation For Its Business Solutions Part 4: User Recommendations | Microsoft Lays Enforced-Concrete Foundation For Its Business Solutions Part 3: Challenges | Microsoft Lays Enforced-Concrete Foundation For Its Business Solutions Part 2: Market Impact | Microsoft Lays Enforced-Concrete Foundation For Its Business Solutions | J.D. Edwards Finds Its Inner-Self Within Its 5th Incarnation Part 4: Challenges and User Recommendations | J.D. Edwards Finds Its Inner-Self Within Its 5th Incarnation Part 3: Market Impact | J.D. Edwards Finds Its Inner-Self Within Its 5th Incarnation Part 2: FOCUS Announcements Continued | J.D. Edwards Finds Its Inner-Self Within Its 5th Incarnation | PeopleSoft Internationalizes Its Mid-Market Forays Part 2: Challenges & User Recommendations | PeopleSoft Internationalizes Its Mid-Market Forays | Frontstep Ups The .NET Ante Part 2: Challenges and User Recommendations | Frontstep Ups The .NET Ante | Will Glovia Glow Again Through Its Hub And VARs? Part 2: Challenges and User Recommendations | Will Glovia Glow Again Through Its Hub And VARs? | Lose the Starry-Eyes, Analyze:An Ideal Customer for Relevant INFIMACS | Process PLM Vendor Sequencia Adds Portfolio Management | Ramco Systems - Diversity Marshaled Through Flexibility Part 3: Challenges and User Recommendations | SAP Farms More Business Out Amid Its Staff Reductions | Ramco Systems - Diversity Marshaled Through Flexibility Part 2: Market Impact | Ramco Systems - Diversity Marshaled Through Flexibility | SAP Opens The ‘Miss Congeniality’ Contest | Lilly Software Visualizes Its eBusiness Offering, NOW. Part 2: Market Impact | PeopleSoft Remains Rock-Hard And Economy Proof | Lilly Software Visualizes Its eBusiness Offering, NOW | Glovia On B2B Reinventing Trail | Kewill And Microsoft Great Plains To Further Mutually Complement | Syspro Hatches 'Encore' IMPACT On SME Manufacturers. Part 2: Market Impact | INFIMACS Becoming Ever More RELEVANT For Project-Based Industries. Part 2: Market Impact and User Recommendations | INFIMACS Becoming Ever More RELEVANT For Project-Based Industries. Part 1: Recent Developments | Clarity of Vision: Clarify Sold to Amdocs by Nortel | Collaborative Commerce: ERP, CRM, e-Proc, and SCM Unite! A Series Study: IFS - Part 2 of 2 | Way To Go, Ross Systems! | Collaborative Commerce: ERP, CRM, e-Proc, and SCM Unite! A Series Study: IFS - Part 1 of 2 | MAPICS Unifies The Brand And Interacts For CRM Solutions | IFS Glows Amidst The Mid-Market Gloom | Oracle Makes A U-Turn At The 'All Things To All People' Exit | 'Collaborative Commerce': ERP, CRM, e-Proc, and SCM Unite! A Series Study: SAP AG | 'Collaborative Commerce': ERP, CRM, e-Proc, and SCM Unite! A Series Study: Baan and Parent Company, Invensys | Frontstep Still Awaiting Better Times | Will V8 Help SSA GT Regain Lost Ground? | PeopleSoft Keeps Truckin’ On A Potholed Road Ahead | Epicor Shows Resilience When It Needs It The Most | J.D. Edwards Fires Siebel, Hires YOU | SAP Thrives On Competitors' Plight, In Part | Made2Manage Manages Throughout Soft Market | Microsoft Great Plains Procures eProcure At Last | SAP - A Humble Giant From The Reality Land? Part 5: Challenges and User Recommendations | SAP - A Humble Giant From The Reality Land? Part 4: SAP's Strategy | i2, SAP, Oracle Poised For Showdown in Q4 | SAP – A Humble Giant From The Reality Land? Part 3: Market Impact | SAP - A Humble Giant From The Reality Land? Part 2: Expanding Functionality | SAP - A Humble Giant From The Reality Land? Part 1: Alliances | PeopleSoft Supply Chain Is Music To Mid Market Ears | It Is Possible - SAP And Baan Strange Bedfellows | Oracle Claims The Worst Is Over And Turns To KISS For A Boost Part 3: The Challenge of Gaining Competitive Advantage | Oracle Claims The Worst Is Over And Turns To KISS For A Boost Part 2: The Implications | Oracle Claims The Worst Is Over And Turns To KISS For A Boost Part 1: The News | Baan Achieves A Speedy Recovery Despite The Tough Times | Will QAD Finally Get The Break (-Even)? | ROI Systems - A Little ERP Fellow That Gets By | PeopleSoft - Catching Its Second Wind From The Internet Part 3: Predictions and Recommendations | PeopleSoft - Catching Its Second Wind From The Internet Part 2: Strengths and Challenges | PeopleSoft - Catching Its Second Wind From The Internet Part 1: About PeopleSoft | Epicor To Try The Divestiture Tack, Too | MAPICS Clings To Its Customers' Loyalty | SAP Remains One Of The Market’s Beacons Of Hope | SSA Acquires MAX Hoping To Leap From Its MIN | IBM Buys What’s Left of Informix | Invensys Announces New Division - Baan Process | SAP Acquires TopTier To Further Broaden Its Horizons | Oracle Sails Slower In The Low Tide, But Mayday Signal Is Quite Far-Fetched | IFS Aspires To Capture North American Market Against The Low Tide | Is Intentia Truly Industry’s First In Food Traceability? | QAD Finally Breaks The Red Ink Streak, But… | Epicor Software Corp.: Completing Painstaking "e"Volution Part 2: Evaluating Epicor | J.D. Edwards Saved By SCM, Narrowly, And Only For Now | Epicor Software Corp.: Completing Painstaking "e"Volution Part 1: About Epicor | Infinium Attempts To Better Gain Some Markets' Ear | MAPICS XA Expands BI Offering Through Partnership With Vanguard | Has Intentia Turned The Corner? Almost. | Ross Systems Closes Ranks For A (Possible) Turnaround | PeopleSoft Plays Hardball | Is Made2Manage Made2Survive? Seems So. | Frontstep (Nee Symix Systems) A Step Closer To A Turnaround | SAP Defies Economic Slowdown, For Now | Can Lilly Software Get More VISUAL? | Fourth Shift Hopes To Thrive On China’s Greener Pastures | PeopleSoft Joins The Hunt For SMEs | Extricity Makes a Move into IBM’s Sphere of B2B Influence | Microsoft And Great Plains – A Friendship That Turned Into A Marriage | Oracle Sails Despite Market’s Low Tide; How Far Will It Go? | J.D. Edwards Reaches $1B Milestone In Another Losing Year | e-Catalysts Delivers Digital Marketplace | Made2Manage Systems, Inc.: M2M From A2Z For SMEs? | Ross Systems Continues To Slip, But Pledges to Fight Tooth And Claw | IFS Has A Magic Growth Formula; But What About Profitability? | SAP Claims Big Gains In The Low-End Battleground | IBI + IBM = EAI | Baan – What Will The Future In Invensys’ Stable Bring? Part 2: Evaluating Baan | Infinium Ends Its Most Challenging Year | JuxtaComm And IBM Integrate Their Integration Products | Great Plains Unveils New E-Commerce Solution | Great Plains Taps The Web To Deliver Product Support | Epicor Delivers On Milestones, But Its Situation Remains Bleak | Onyx Software: CRM Vendor Battling For Viability | Baan – What Will The Future In Invensys’ Stable Bring? Part 1: About Baan | Intentia Possibly Seeing Daylight | SAP Q3 Results Cause Mixed Reactions | Fourth Shift Tightens Belt To Weather The Drought | PeopleSoft Delivers Oxymoron In 'Supply Chain in a Box' | PeopleSoft – Again A Force To Be Reckoned With? | Another Type Of Virus Hits The World (And Gets Microsoft No Less) | J.D. Edwards – A Collaboration Thought Leader Or A Disguised ERP Follower? Part 2: Evaluating J.D. Edwards | J.D. Edwards – A Collaboration Thought Leader Or A Disguised ERP Follower? Part 1: About J.D. Edwards | ROI Systems Catching Up With e-Commerce | IBM Aims Renamed UNIX Server at Sun | Catalyst International to Tread Water With SAP Through 2000 | More Vendors Bail on Oracle in Favor of IBM | Great Plains Supply Chain Series To Be Powered By Logility | Infinium and Elcom Walk Down ASP Aisle | Question: When is Six Sigma not Six Sigma? Answer: When it's the Six Sigma Metric!!© | Razorfish Wants to Get its Name Out on Broadband | SAP Details CRM Plans | J.D. Edwards Closes Out Millennium on an Up Note | SAP and HP on the Web Together | Oracle is Word One at Ford | Intentia Floats Vaporware Agent to Replace Business Planning | IBM Announces Netfinity 4000R Super-Thin Server | SAP AG - ERP Leader with a "New Dimension" | Baan Company N.V. - Is the Worst Over? | PeopleSoft on Client/Server and Database Issues | PeopleSoft - Are Business Intelligence and e-Commerce Enough? |


Use this index to search for white papers related to commonly used search terms A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Others 
Recent Searches
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Others
A: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
B: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
D: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
E: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
F: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
G: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
H: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
I: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
J: 1 2 3 4 5
K: 1 2 3 4
L: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
M: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
N: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
O: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
P: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Q: 1 2
R: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
T: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
U: 1 2 3
V: 1 2 3 4
W: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
X: 1
Y: 1
Z: 1
Others: 1 2 3


©2013 Technology Evaluation Centers Inc. All rights reserved. Search powered by Google