Advertisement

Product Lifecycle Management Maturity Models in Industry 4.0

  • Kássio Cabral Pereira dos Santos
  • Eduardo de Freitas Rocha Loures
  • Osíris Canciglieri Junior
  • Eduardo Alves Portela Santos
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 540)

Abstract

Today’s manufacturers face ever-increasing demands of variability, greater customization of the products, smaller lot sizes, sudden supply-chain changes, and disruptions. With intelligent factories and products, changes will happen in the way the products will be manufactured, impacting on various market sectors. PLM holds the promise of seamlessly integrating and making available all of the information produced throughout all phases of a product’s life cycle to everyone in an organization, along with the key suppliers. Industry 4.0 will make it possible to gather and analyze data across machines, enabling faster, more flexible, and more efficient processes to produce higher-quality goods at reduced costs. A research question then arises: What are the opportunities found between the Product Lifecycle Management Maturity Models and the Industry 4.0? Thus, this research proposes a literature review to identify the main researches related to Product Lifecycle Management Maturity Models, adopting the Knowledge Development Process Construtivist (ProKnow-C) method. For that, the AHP method was conducted to verify the adherence of the PLM maturity models having as reference the Industry 4.0 criterias (RAMI 4.0 and perspectives), allowing a diagnostic view about the existing maturity models. As a result, future research opportunities concerning PLM maturity models through Industry 4.0 perspectives are highlighted.

Keywords

Industry 4.0 Product Lifecycle Management Maturity models Multicriteria decision making/analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J.: Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0. Industrie 4.0 Working Group of Acatech, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kagermann, H., et al.: Industrie 4.0 Mit dem Internet der Dinge auf dem Industrially Revolution (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stark, J.: Opportunities and PLM. In: Stark, J. (ed.) Product Lifecycle Management: Paradigm for 21st Century Product Realization, pp. 81–92. Springer, London (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-546-0_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Silva da Rosa, F., Rolim Ensslin, S., Ensslin, L.: Environmental disclosure management a constructivist case. Manag. Dec. 50(2), 47–62 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-37862015000300004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saaksvuori, A., Immonen, A.: Integration of the PLM system with other applications. In: Saaksvuori, A., Immonen, A. (eds.) Product Lifecycle Management, pp. 53–65. Springer, Berlin (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78172-1_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mettler, T.: A design science research perspective on maturity models in information systems. Technical Report, Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kärkkäinen, H., Silventoinen, A.: Different approaches of the PLM maturity concept and their use domains – analysis of the state of the art. In: Bouras, A., Eynard, B., Foufou, S., Thoben, K.-D. (eds.) PLM 2015. IAICT, vol. 467, pp. 89–102. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33111-9_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Batenburg, R., Versendaal, J.: Maturity matters: performance determinants of the procurement business function. Paper presented at the Proceeding at the 16th European Conference on Information Systems, Galway, Ireland (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Terzi, S.: Elements of Product Lifecycle Management: Definitions, Open Issues and Reference Models. domain_stic.inge. Université Henri Poincaré - Nancy I (2005). EnglishGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Platform Industrie 4.0. Referencial Architectural Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0) (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vezzetti, E., Violante, M.G., Marcolin, F.: A benchmarking framework for product lifecycle management (PLM) maturity models. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 71, 899–918 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5529-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Al-Harbi, K.M.A.S.: Application of the AHP in project management. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 19, 19–27 (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0263-7863(99)00038-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kássio Cabral Pereira dos Santos
    • 1
    • 2
  • Eduardo de Freitas Rocha Loures
    • 1
  • Osíris Canciglieri Junior
    • 1
  • Eduardo Alves Portela Santos
    • 1
  1. 1.Pontifical Catholic University of ParanáCuritibaBrazil
  2. 2.Positivo UniversityCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations