Sounder SIGN UP FOR FREE
Peer Check
Peer Check

Episode · 4 weeks ago

#17 - The State of PLM in 2022

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

PLM software first emerged in the late 80s/early 90s. Since then, PLM has established itself as a foundational tool for engineering companies.

But now, the next digital wave in engineering has arrived. Cloud collaboration tools are becoming the norm across every industry, and mechanical teams are finally starting to catch up to the cloud revolution.

Oleg Shilovitsky, CEO and Co-founder of OpenBOM, has written more than 4000 blog posts about PLM and related topics. In this episode, Oleg and Adam dive into the current state of PLM and how companies can develop a tech strategy that looks at PLM and cloud tech holistically.

Listen to their conversation to hear:

  • How the discussion around PLM has changed over time
  • Why there’s no such thing as “the best PLM”
  • The obstacles that prevent large companies from making better, faster decisions about technology
  • Why user adoption needs to be central to your tech decisions and strategy 

More information about Oleg and today’s topics:

To hear this interview and more like it, subscribe to Peer Check! Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website—or just search for Peer Check in your favourite podcast player.

Welcome to Pierre Check, a colab podcast. This is a show for engineering leaders who want to challenge the status quo for how design teams work together. You're about to hear a conversation about the ways the engineering world is changing and how top teams are carving a new path forward. Let's do it. Welcome to Pierre Check. I'm your host Adam Keating, and today we're talking about the future of PLM. I'm joined today by a Like Shilowitzki, who is the CEO and co founder of open Bomb and a prolific blogger with beyond PLM. He's been building software products for the engineering, data management, and manufacturing space for the last twenty years, working with teams like smart Team to sell systems and for Vix before it was acquired by Autodesk and Autodesk all before starting open Bomb. Oh Like, Welcome to the show. Thanks to see you again, Adam. Thank you find the viting me. Oh Like, so I gotta start with the blog because you tell me beforehand how many blogs you've written, and I actually, like audibly gasped four thousand blogs since two thousand nine across beyond PLM open bomb. Like that is an incredible dedication to educate the industry. Why did you get into writing about p L and why do you care so much about PLM. Well, first of all, I was I was very very inspiring to be around the people that building physical products. It was very inspiring me for many years. My dad was mechanical engineered, so he was from the very early days he was sort of showing me all the stuff that he was working on. And then I wanted to be an architect because of the same reason. I thought, it's a physical object that's very very inspirational. But the blogging was a part of my work at smart tim at the Saucy Stem, I was I was appointed CTO with the challenge how to communicate better what we do to our customers. So it's a kind of challenge. You know, you build great technology, and I could now go go to customers and try to explain themselves as meeting tons of people back in those days. But then I thought, so how better educate people because I was going to meet people and then said, but we don't know this, we don't know that. And I remember it was back into thousand and eight, eight seven like before, and and the blogs were around, but professional space like knowledge was no one no, no one was concerned like we need to do a blog. Companies didn't do blog. I remember the first time I asked can they do a blog? Someone looking at me and sansica, do you want to share all our secrets on the blog? So like, well, that's you know, separate conversation. But somehow I passed through all these legal hurdles and everything back in the es and yeah, so that was an idea how to share, how to share and knowledge and how to share experience. And then I how I get into this because it basically was...

...the way to communicate with people. And over these years, for example, now the conversation is moving heavily to LinkedIn, and it's so naturally. You see a lot of professional people in LinkedIn and they do care. And for example, I see your posts and there are a lot of a lot of communications. But back in those days, it was not a case. Lincoln was the place to story your resume at the best. No communication. So I've seen the blogs where places where people were collaborating. If you go back in ten years old blogs, you will see like dozens of comments in every blog. Now people don't do it because they prefer that the content the same content and share it in LinkedIn and people are talking. Again, depends the professional people are talking on LinkedIn. So yeah, that was that was just the way to start communication with people and you know, just continue. It's just a habit. So yeah, well, first of all, I appreciate it because I think I've learned a ton from the blog. I mean that's how I found thinking. I heard I heard about you five years ago. They were like, do you know Oleg. He's the guy who writes the blog. And I was like, I have it, I have it his blog. I don't know him, And then I messaged you and I was in Boston you met up with me. So I'll always appreciate you're taking the time early on because back in those days it's hard to figure out, you know, this big mystical landscape of CAD and p l M and like how does it all fit together? And uh, it's always been interesting. You know. Today we're talking about the future of PLM. I think we should start with like where are we right now? Like I'd love to get your synopsis of like what is this current state of p l M as it is today? Like where are we and then we I know, you had a whole bunch of thoughts about where we're going with openness and architecture and different systems, Like how would you describe the state of PLM today. Well, that's that's a great question, you know, and you know I'm sitting on Those questions are very hard. Usually it's a kind of questions that always so where are we in PLM? I would say, you know, let me improvise this morning, it's just after my coffee. I think we have a new normal. So I think we passed the idea that the PLM is good. Because again, like if I go back in the PLM is do we need PLM? We don't need PLM. So that's if you go down fifte years ago, that's a small bunch of people who are saying we need PLM mostly for very large companies coming from defense and everyone else. And you know, I don't need PLM. I'm too small for PLM, or you know, I'm I'm good with PM. Like Solid Works back those days was very strong saying that you don't need PDM, P PLM. You you just do p D, p D. It's okay. It's I remember many years ago, like strike advertising. They said it's toasted. So people said the PDM is okay, you don't need PM. But I think now is more like people came to agreement like we need PLM, right, so we need it because...

...it's important, because it's like the development is complex and multidiscipline. The processes are crazy. The demand for speed, the demand for cause, the demand now for supply to know everything is crazy. So but I think the new normal comes in the place that what was established as the PLM just doesn't meet the requirement because if you take the recipe for PLM, and this is again single sorts of truths, let's install the system and the company, let's set up processes so they all this setup, it doesn't feed the reality because just just think about an average PLM system and let's take all this top four like biggest PLM contributors like ds CEMENS, BTC, and let's add Arrest to this because they kind of growing into this now. So all their setups are the same. It's like a sequel database in the middle with a little IT application stack with a variety of object browsers, you know, sitting on top in the company struggling to get people attention beyond engineering. So that's that's more or less what we have. So I call it new normal. If if you go to outside in the world, you will see companies with their relationships, multiple companies working together, you get design contractors, you get different type of suppliers and everything. Staff show me a single system that knows how to define the processes across multiple om and suppliers. For example, an automotive Tier one supplier has a process with them all the time, so who can support it and how? So I think the new normal is that we are learning that the reality is different from what PLM system is capable to do. But on the other side, companies are struggling with complete requirements, so I think it's a really finished. The PLM is coming though, and the cloud is technoledge purity technology, but it will play a role because with cloud will be able to do like the traditional systems would be able to. I've seen that too. Being a massive there's not a whole lot of debate anymore. The PLM for complex products is necessary. I think the implantation a lot of times is a question. I just came back from PTCs user conference and most of the debate was about how best to do this, not should we do this? I think that reflects the industry. My question for you is, like thinking about what you just said and like this redefinition, which trends do you think are most important? There's a push towards best in breed versus all on one, there's cloud, there's sas, there's like really investing in open architecture. They're bolding on other types of systems. Like how do you think about which of those trends actually matter most in the redefinition. I don't think there are different trends here. I think the trend here is what you call the companies...

...are trying to figure out how to do it and what is the best way? What is the best way to do it? If if if I think, for example, when I left out before opened Bomb and I was doing consulting, like there was a single question that people were asking me in thousands fifteen, but they contacted one question said what is the best film system? Tell when chill the soul? Where as you know what's the best one? And and again that's this is the completely mistake to approach with the question what is the best system? Because what do you do, like what the problems that you're trying to solve. What is your legacy after all, and then you can make a decision what is the what is the right system for you? Like if you are equipment manufacturer relatively small like doing tons of work with the mainstream kit systems like soltwork, So your your your decision working with tons of design design conteractors, suppliers to your decision about PLM will be different if you defense manufacturer, you know, spent last last twenty years sitting in team center enterprise, you know, so the recommendation of how you can can you do it would be would be completely different. So I think the trend is that companies understand that they need to bring muti college in place, but they do not know how to do it, and they do not know how to deal with the pressure of vendors because look, no one wants to make a mistake, and mistakes and PLM decisions can cost your career. In the plargy company, you know, you pick their own one what you're gonna do, So that's why everyone is trying to make those That's why it's also decisions about PLM in the larger companies are taking years because fundamentally nothing is changing for them, so they didn't have a real incentive to change immediately because there is no large pl and vendor in this world that will drop a customer. Some stupid things sometimes can happen, but in general, if you have one of the big vendors serving you with the hundreds of thousands of seats, no one will do anything to you. They will support you. So you have system in place, and then you decide your long term move better to move and that takes time, and that takes the decision to make and agree two engineers at least five opinions about how to do multiply it with a different the different number of people, how to do it. And you know you had all these you this all these meetings and everything. But what I think the real trend that I see that is taking taking some shift is that thinking about what is a platform. Peel and vendors a very long time consider it to sell what...

...they do as a platform, and that was like, oh, take the Siemens platform, will take the SAB platform, will take PTC platform or areas platform. I think there is a mismatch between how vendors see themselves as a platform and how customers see them as a platform, because I think they see what pil and vendors do more the services today. I mean not not services software as the services. Okay, no, no matter what has it packaged, Okay, different cloud, doesn't matter. But but see the services and they are building their technological stack, and customers are building their technological stack and they feeling slots of services. So and that's would be a very interesting thing because that's change the center of gravity of the implementation. So a company will be saying, okay, so Amazon is my platform, I call my I t s all my servis on Amazon. And that's that's a change. Okay, So that's changing heavily in the last five years. So now it's Amazon is a platform. I want to see what services I can get on Amazon and how they will be interplaying together. So that's the change of center of gravity. Will position PLM as a service providers on the platform, and that can let's I see as a trend because in this case, the PLM companies will stop coming in the position Ovia center of universe and like everything is surrounding, and they will be more judged by how the interoperability or how these services can interplay with each other's and you think about this, For example, it's completely not PLM. Think about machine learning services. So you can you can put machine learnings services on the Amazon and do a lot of good stuff for your company. Some of them will come out of the book, some of them will come as implementation. So I start thinking about this or the as a as a PLM. Okay, I run a bunch of stuff as a company, and now I need some I don't know, I need the bomb two M bomb process. Okay, can I bring the service that can do it for me? So can I plug in this service into what we do and combine it with all other stuff we do? So I've seen your problem. I don't know if you've seen my blog about this, but it was very interesting. Thing was was done by Mercedes bench Cards, Cards, so they published an article about how they would like to interplay between different services. So I think that's the trend. I think that's the difference. So let's shift from service from the Okay, this is the single platform the services. So I've seen that as well. And the question I would ask you though,...

...is you said that the vendors see themselves differently than the customer, Like, how long do you think it's going to take for the vendors to realize this, because what I'm seeing is that some vendors are like a little more open to this mindset because it hurts their business potentially or could help their business. Right, Like if you look at the GitHub ecosystem for software developers, it took a very different stance early on. Salesforce, very different stance early on that they wanted to be able to take. You know them, they are a sort of a platform for sure, but they let you build things into it. And then if you look at like you just described a WS or is your companies are going pretty hard on that. Like our company, for example, is built on one of those stacks and we plug in the right tool for the job. But that's so different than what the PLM vendors are used to. Do you think they get on board with the big companies or do you think there becomes like a bit of a battle between what the customer wants, which is open, interoferable, you know, connect across supply chain, and then what the vendors willing to do, which is like build more services into their own technology and kind of lock you in I think some vendors are more listening than others. I don't want to go now with names. First of all, they can speak by themselves better than I because I'm, after all, sitting outside. But I think vendors are taking thinking notes about what is happening. Also, I think they are working on some of those things because on the other side, customers, the level of stickiness in this space is incredibly high. I think it's even more than in RP space, because in the RP now that they have these multilayered RP architectures when you can hide all the r P and create kind of meta rps, so they have these ideas. But in PLM, I think the level of stickiness is incredible. And if you think about the transition out of existing system, it's very very, very very hard and very rarely happy inning. So it's more that those systems that are piling like one on each other than a merger and acquisitions, they're thinking how to coexist. So I think vendor's legitimately have time so they know this because they talk to this customer is quite a lot. And again I'm talking about large companies, so the situation with the smaller companies is completely different. But then at that place the PLM doesn't exist as a substance. Okay, so it's it's it's interesting. I think I felt that too, Like in the last couple of months have been talking to the vendors and the questions all about you know, when are you going to the cloud? I mean there's there's three approaches here. One as you switch to a cloud PDMPLM. Two, as you wait for your vendor to go to the cloud themselves, which they all have something in the works and they all have announced something recently or working towards it. And the third as you bolt on things that are in the cloud and eventually get there. Most likely it's some common nation I think of two and three. But like for the big company,...

...do you see many of them switching to like a cloud first PLM or most of them waiting for, say if they were to sell or PTC or Siemens to build their cloud out the transition with them? Like what do you where do you see the big companies moving? It sounds like probably the ladder. Yeah, big intentional companies. I think the cloud is less relevant for them at this point. I mean, all debates about the tendency, and I think it's irrelevant because large companies are so much uneducated internally, so their I T is just starting to adopt the cloud model, and for them means cloud. Okay, so I get my del right before, and now I get my virtual servers and Amazon great, Now I'm in the cloud. So I think for most of them, you will see the demand that all the same stuff that worked for them before and they had to maintain and operate an upgrade, they will demand it now from vendors. That's why you see and all all large pill and vendors basically comply. So you see ARRS called it Enterprise sus very interesting name, but that's fine. So Enterprise has basically said, let's host arres for customers on Azure. And then there is a win Chill I think Winchell plus it's called now so it's basically the same. And then there is a Team Center X, which is more or less the same how to host existing team center. So I think they go with this idea and the most important thing that they bring to all ideas is the pain of upgrade. So they say, all right, so you pay us moall to make it the service, we will take care of the upgrades. I think that's I think that's how cloud looks for today to me, for the large large vendors. Now, the interesting part is that what I just said doesn't solve fundamental problems, but they are not there yet. Because you think about if you have Team Center installation that wasn't upgraded for the last ten years. Oh, you have some processes not supported, which hurts you the most. Okay, the first one, right, So let's first let's sort of all figure out how we get rid of this painful upgrade the processes. You know, let's let's come later to this processes. Maybe in two three years. We'll figure out first of all, like we have it upgraded, we can support the last environment. We don't have by the way, we don't have security risks. The large companies are concerned. If you go and there are public reports, they concerned about security and vulnerability. So okay, so how to get rid of this unsecured servers that's taken our backyard because we cannot upgrade them. Well, here's the cloud. So that's the large thing again. Nothing about effectiveness, like know about processes, I think about nothing. They're...

...just not there. They're just not there. That's why everything goes very slow for them, and that's not where the innovation will come from. And they paid tons of money to lecture. Yeah, yeah, were just at the conference recently. PCs users upgrading train was like, by far the number one pain point for those people. You heard about it all the time, right, The biggest fear of the cloud was what does this mean? Right? What does this mean for the transition? And I agree with you, like that is such a hard problem to maintain, but definitely top focus. I'm curious on that statement, Alan, So like we've got a lot of work to do to get into the cloud before we've really leveraged the full benefit at the PLM level. There's obviously things you can do in the meantime to get some benefit from the cloud. When do you think PLM in the large companies is mainstream cloud? Like? How many years? If you were looking into a crystal ball, like, how many years do you think it actually makes to to get all like, you know, the of mainstream large enterprises in the cloud and people, I'm like, how many can make a man? Your best guests? No, I can not. I'm not playing this crystal ball game. Sorry, you know some of the people that I know, quite like twenty years ago said that to the drawings will disappear, and I still talk to these people. That's quite quite an embarrassment. I think the question is not how they will come to cloud. I think it's a different question is that how long will take them to start adopting new services that come complimentary to what they do. I think that's that's a slightly different perspective, like leave them alone with what they do now. It's you know, replacement of those systems will not have an over will not happen overnight, and probably will not bring a lot of value in immediate value. I think the value will come from understanding of the data and the establishment of establishing of intelligence about what they can do with data. So I get recently discussed the topic of what is the system of intelligence and how and how it will come and that can take some directions in the companies that can solve them painful problems like you know, just just just think about impact analysis, painful problem when you do change orders. For example, I think in your keynote you brought this, I forget what was the unit on the Tesla tree that you said that takes a lot of a lot of time to talk about. But you know, when you want to change something, so it takes people together information to understand the impact. Again, as information, it's hard to get. So before you will get your change order resigned, you will need to get this information...

...corrected. You need to get this information analyzed by people. So getting this information by itself, it's goes much beyond the tree d models and PDFs and everything that it's just about the business and because it can because the products are interconnected and dependent and they sold as a service. So you have some you have some equipment in the field, and when you want to change the design, then you impacted. So I think getting into these data services, that's my take. That's that's will go beyond existing ple of implementation and that will be value delivered on top of this. And then eventually we will come to the point where you know, fundamental stakes of data management stakes will start transforming. But that's would be the that's would be the second stage because they can co exist east they can be hidden. Again if everyone will play well from the interoperability standpoint and business models will adapt, and then you will one day you will find this piece of software that called old VLM, and people will say what if I will disconnect it, what will happen? And then they disconnected one day and they say, huh, nothing happened because like they all other services already operating and giving us at what is need. But this is the I T transformation that takes people stop asking the question how to put all the data in a single data bits because it's probably already not needed and will not be needed. But just to take this, just to take this service approach and bring more and more and more. And I think low code is more or less goes in the same in this direction, just by starting to bring those services handmade and then someone will introduce them out of the box. Yeah, but it's like I would not I would not sign playing a number of years. Yeah, well, I mean I think that's fair though, because what you just said makes a lot of sense. Right, I think there's a diminishing return on some of the things you can change with your system of record today. Right, you've already invested thirty forty years in it. There's ways you can make the upgrade process better in the rest. But it's like what you just selling a system intelligence or system engagement or like how do you get more of an effective display with your team? Is like where I think teams are moving and that's where the cloud is easier. Right, there's not such a big switching cost to actually make that change. Like we we saw when we started collab a massive pushback on the cloud, Like I mean massive. Nobody wanted to do it, nobody wanted to talk about it. It was like always this big red alarm in the room. And then COVID happened, and I think everyone kind of started changing their mind about being open to it. But what you said probably ten minutes ago is that they weren't really sure how to leverage it, Like they're making their first switch into the cloud now. So I think giving easy ways to do that and bolting on tools to have an immediate value is super important because then people start behaving differently,...

...which then has like what you call like the second phase. The second phase starts to happen organically because if you just switch your PLM, forget about the cloud altogether. Switching r PLM in a big company is a gigantic undertaking. I spoke to UH probably had a fortunate company. They had a two million dollar budget, just to switch their PLM two million dollars and I think they said it was a four or five year time window to do it. There's a team of eight people working on it. It was wow. They were they were in year two off this program and they just got word that they were getting parked. Like hold on, now, economy is tanking. We can't do this right, But like that's like the magnitude of investment needed for some of these things. And I think what you're saying is right. I mean, you've seen a ton of this success. So like with open bomb, like you've got I remember the little map on your website that showed all the people using open bomb all around the world. But it's really cool, right, Like, I think that's a it's a transformational difference of how people behave. And there's so many more technologies coming out now. And what you said about, you know, building the services approach, everything is opening and connect and putting it in there is a really impactful thing long term for the end user and for the business. I'm curious on the front of the system intelligence. You know we talk as systems engagements as a whole bunch of those like systems of record, how do you see like each of those pieces fitting together? Is it really what you said? It's a layer on top of the system of record that's there, and we focus on making those engagement layers intelligence layers better, Like how do you see that being successful? And how should companies think about leveraging technologies that are not PLM let and see it as a layer. Because each time someone will come with the names, and again those are fancy names. That's just agree about this. So there is no real like system of engagement, a system of INTELLIGI I remember it was who was one of the CRM systems. I think, what good? Ay? So when work day was started, they presented the new type of system in CRM and they said, now it's a new type of system. It's called system of Engagement. By the way, I think it was fifty years ago. And then this is when people are coming with these new names. It usually means that we did something different from what was done before. But because the marketing needs an urgent needed to somehow to differentiate it, so we find a name. Because if you cannot if you cannot find a name, it's very hard to sell. So people just yeah, it's just very very hard to like we're doing something better. It's how you call, but I think it's more characteristics of what is going on. And so when I'm saying a system of intelligence, I am saying that there is something that can give a better intelligence to people in the company with regards to the data. So for example, I'm going to buy something and pulling just my phone with Amazon application, and I really know that if I need to buy it in the...

...store, and you know, I can order it to Amazon and it will be delivered to me. So it's an instant decision. So think about the same instant decision when you drive your car and ways is telling you Google, Google Maps telling you I found a new route. You want to take this one and pay one dollar tolling you take you thirty minutes faster. Also not So those are kind of elements of system of intelligence that needs to come to manufacturing the design. I'm designing a part, I'm placing a part in my design, and I'm making decisions early in the process. And everyone loves to bring those charts. Oh, you're making the other decisions, so you know, making mistakes. But what data you can bring at this point that will help to a person to make right decision like instant cost roll up based on the real time its information. So that's what's what open bond does. So if that helps you to make a decision or yeah, so can it make the decision better? Of course? Is it the new type of intelligence that you're getting. Oh you're putting not certified part in this design, so bomb, if you're getting some alerts, so you those are elements of a system of intelligence that everyone is looking how to get to make your work, to make your actual work smarter. Everything that you do that makes people smarter, it's highly appreciate. It doesn't matter if it's a horizontal layer, vertical layer, or some I don't know, building blocks. Okay, that's because people like to be smarter, and if you help them to be smarter, then it still becoming. If that's something that they don't know, that's that's how it will happen. Yeah, I I see a lot of that. I mean there's and there's such a big blue ocean of applications here in the manufacturing world because there's so many problems. What you just said on the bomb side, for example, is a great a great use case. Like if you're looking at teams even cost reduction. For example, imagine how nice it would be if you could go tell them, you know, across other product lines, here's what we found in those products that we pulled costs out of, or looking at supply chain, you know, here are things we're duplicating parts and the rest. There's so many more applications like that goes so beyond it. We actually we worked with the company who wanted to use the data from their designer views to figure out how to train and hire people because they were finding that the same every person they hired is scaling up quickly would make the same mistakes, but they didn't know exactly which ones. There's just too much data. Build a little system to say, okay, here are the top three problems that happened when you bring someone on. And that data in real time was updating and they're like, okay, here's what we need to train people on. It became part of their life academy materials, and now that problem has been like largely raised, right, but just using that data that's already sort of in the way you work, which is sort of the beautiful part of it all. The challenge in this process is the few is though...

...this information together and convince customers to make a switch. That's why, like you said, there are many doubts on open bum like what we work with medium sized companies. You know, you go to larger companies, everything takes That's where the biggest challenge for them because their decisions are craziest law. The adoption level is very very very careful, and the customers are making all this all these decisions very slow, but you know the time will be coming after them. Page. Yeah, I guess I like to kind of conclude this. So like you think about where we are or we're going. If you already give you know, people who are in these companies thinking about their tool stock and their systems advice, you know, what would be your one piece of advice you'd give them about how do you think about p allowments around the ecosystem for the next few years? Yeah, you know, I would. I would leave them with treat things. So first of all, stop thinking about the system and start thinking about information flow. So data and information flow, that's that's it's the first thing. So the second start thinking about critical problems and how you solve them. That sounds obvious, but that can bring a use case. You know, it's it's always like it's and something that don't do. Stop doing stop thinking how you need to take all your data and put it in one system. That's that hurts your brain and it hurts the entire progress because it's such a painful and and undertaken. Stop thinking about systems, to start thinking about data close and value out of this use cases. I think that will turn the conversation from let's how we will get rid of this database and bring another database into conversation how we're getting more value of data that will make our processes more efficient and our products better, and how we better serve customers. So that's something that can help the most rather than just solving another problem with another, like organization of database and which which database is better. That's just not productive. Yeah, I mean one of the things that we've been harping on with our team even is like, let's not build features, let's build solutions right the problems because you can build You looked at all the tools that are in the space. There are millions of features, and some of them are very helpful and some of them not. And if you expand that beyond the product, that's the same way the tooling is built, right. It's a lot of features and technologies and cool things. But you know, if there's other day to day problems that are costing millions of dollars that no one's even talking about because they're hard, right, And I think they're reframing the problem and value focus is like it's probably the main thing we've been trying to help customers with today. I just think that way because it changes the whole conversation. Because if you're trying to think about how does all of your data from PLM get inside of open bomb or colab or another tool, like, you're fundamentally in the wrong spot. You don't want you should not want all your data to come inside of there. You should...

...on to live there and pull the piece you want right, pull the piece you want connected together nicely, like like you said, get the data flow right, not try and just replicate what you're always doing. And I think that's Portlando life. I appreciate it, man, and thank you so much for joining us here today on the podcast. Appreciate it absolutely there talking to you as always, Adam, and thank you. COLLAB is on a mission to accelerate the pace of engineering innovation by giving design teams a better way to work. As an engineering leader, you know it's crucial to empower your team to do their best work. Let Collab help you achieve your goals with our web based tool that makes it easy to share and review CAD files with anyone so you can focus on the work that batters without missing a beat or a bolt. Learn more at Collab software dot com. You've been listening to pure Check, a Colab podcast, keep connected with us by subscribing to the show in your favorite podcast player, and please leave a rating on the show that helps us keep delivering come stations about how the engineering world is changing and how you can challenge Is that as quo Until next time,.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (18)