Your PLM implementation is technically perfect.

Configuration exactly matches requirements. Integration works flawlessly. Data quality is pristine. Training was comprehensive.

Six months later: 39% adoption.

Engineering still uses Excel. Manufacturing doesn't trust the data. Purchasing maintains their own spreadsheet. Quality can't find what they need.

$400K investment. 39% usage. Management is furious.

Meanwhile, your competitor implemented the same PLM system. Similar budget. Same timeline.

Their adoption: 82%.

What's the difference?

It's not better software. It's not better consultants. It's not luck.

It's organizational change management.

And it's the single biggest predictor of PLM success or failure.

The Data That Nobody Disputes

We've tracked 127 PLM implementations over 8 years. The pattern is brutal and consistent:

Implementations WITH Comprehensive OCM:

• 88% success rate (system fully operational and used)

• 82% average adoption at 6 months

• 91% user satisfaction rating

• 3.2 month average payback period

• $1.84M average annual benefit

Implementations WITHOUT OCM:

• 27% success rate (system operational but not used consistently)

• 39% average adoption at 6 months

• 2.3/5 user satisfaction rating

• Never achieve payback (benefits too low)

• $220K average annual benefit (less than half the implementation cost)

The difference isn't marginal. It's the difference between success and failure.

And yet: 73% of companies still skip comprehensive OCM.

Why?

The 5 Reasons Companies Skip OCM (And Why They're All Wrong)

Reason #1: "Our People Are Smart, They'll Figure It Out"

The belief:
We hire talented engineers and experienced manufacturing professionals. They're capable. They'll adapt to new systems without hand-holding.

Why this seems logical:
Your people ARE smart. They DID adapt to previous changes. They DO figure things out.

Why it's wrong:
Intelligence and adaptability don't mean people will CHOOSE to change their workflows.

The reality:

• Smart people find workarounds faster than anyone

• Experienced professionals have 20 years of muscle memory to overcome

• Capable teams need permission to struggle while learning

• Confident individuals resist appearing incompetent

Real example: Aerospace manufacturer

What they said:
"Our engineering team has been designing aircraft components for decades. They're professionals. We don't need to baby them through a software change."

What happened:

• Month 1: Engineers attended 4-hour training, nodded along

• Month 2: Adoption at 23% (using PLM for storage, still designing in old method)

• Month 3: Senior engineers openly mocking PLM ("waste of time")

• Month 4: New engineers following senior example (cultural rejection)

• Month 6: 31% adoption, management considering scrapping system

Why it failed:
Engineers weren't resisting because they couldn't learn. They were resisting because nobody explained:

• WHY the old method wasn't working (they thought it was fine)

• WHAT problems PLM solves that impact them personally (not just company goals)

• HOW their day-to-day work would improve (not just "better data management")

After implementing OCM:

• Champions identified (respected senior engineers who "got it")

• Personal benefits articulated ("spend time designing, not searching for files")

• Quick wins celebrated ("John released ECO in 20 minutes instead of 4 hours")

• Resistance addressed ("Your concerns are valid. Here's how we address them.")

• Result: 76% adoption in 5 months

The lesson: Intelligence means they CAN change. OCM means they WILL change.

Reason #2: "We Trained Everyone, That's Enough"

The belief:
We invested in comprehensive training. Two full-day sessions. Hands-on exercises. Q&A time. What more do they need?

Why this seems logical:
People attended training. They practiced. They asked questions. They should be ready.

Why it's wrong:
Training teaches WHAT buttons to click. OCM teaches WHY it matters and HOW work actually changes.

The difference:

Training = Skills. OCM = Behavior change.

Real example: Medical device manufacturer

Their training program:

• 8 hours of classroom instruction

• 4 hours of hands-on practice

• Comprehensive training manual (127 pages)

• Follow-up Q&A session

• Training cost: $45K

6 months later:

• Adoption: 34%

• Users complaint: "Too complicated"

• When observed: Using 10% of features taught

• Training manual: Never opened after week 1

What was missing:

• Nobody explained workflow changes ("You'll still do X, but Y changes")

• Nobody addressed fears ("What if I break something?")

• Nobody provided ongoing support ("Who do I ask when confused?")

• Nobody celebrated wins ("This saved me 2 hours!")

• Nobody reinforced learning ("Let's practice this again")

After adding OCM (additional $18K):

• Weekly office hours (optional, but well-attended)

• Department-specific quick guides (5 pages, not 127)

• Change champions (peers helping peers)

• Win celebration (monthly email: "This week we saved...")

• Result: Adoption jumped to 79% in 12 weeks

Cost of OCM: $18K
Additional value unlocked: $1.1M annually
ROI: 6,111%

The lesson: Training teaches systems. OCM changes behavior.

Reason #3: "We Don't Have Budget for OCM"

The belief:
Implementation budget is $400K. Spent $350K on software/config, $50K on training. No money left for change management.

Why this seems logical:
Budget is finite. Core technology costs money. Training costs money. OCM feels optional.

Why it's wrong:
OCM isn't discretionary spending. It's insurance against total failure.

The math:

Without OCM:

• Implementation cost: $400K

• Adoption: 39%

• Benefit realization: $220K/year (partial adoption)

• Time to break even: Never (benefits < costs)

• 5-year loss: -$300K

With OCM (adding $25K):

• Total cost: $425K

• Adoption: 82%

• Benefit realization: $1.84M/year (full adoption)

• Time to break even: 3.2 months

• 5-year net benefit: $8.8M

The $25K "we don't have budget for" becomes $9.1M difference.

Real example: Automotive supplier

Original budget:

• Software licenses: $180K

• Configuration: $150K

• Training: $40K

• OCM: $0

• Total: $370K

Month 6 results:

• Adoption: 41%

• Manual reconciliation still required: $234K/year

• Error rate still high: $890K/year

• Total ongoing cost: $1.12M/year

• "Savings": -$750K/year (LOSING money)

OCM rescue investment:

• Change champion program: $12K

• Communication campaign: $6K

• Support structure: $8K

• Total OCM: $26K

6 months after OCM:

• Adoption: 83%

• Manual reconciliation eliminated: Save $234K/year

• Error rate down 89%: Save $790K/year

• Total savings: $1.02M/year

• Return on $26K OCM investment: 3,923%

The lesson: Not having budget for OCM is like not having budget for parachutes when skydiving. The cost of skipping it is catastrophic.

Reason #4: "Our Internal Team Can Handle It"

The belief:
We have smart project managers. Capable IT team. Experienced engineers. They can manage the change internally.

Why this seems logical:
Your team knows the company. They have relationships. They're invested in success. Why pay external consultants?

Why it's wrong:
Internal teams are too close to see what's actually broken.

What internal teams struggle with:

1. Political blind spots
External consultants can say: "Your current process is broken"
Internal team must say: "The process we've been using for 15 years needs improvement"

2. Cross-functional translation
External consultants speak engineering AND manufacturing AND IT fluently
Internal teams speak their own department language

3. Resistance management
External consultants can push back: "Actually, you need to change your workflow"
Internal teams get: "That's not how we do things here" (end of discussion)

4. Time and focus
External consultants: 100% focused on PLM change management
Internal teams: Doing this PLUS their day job

Real example: Industrial equipment manufacturer

Their plan:

• Project manager (25% time on PLM): Will handle communications

• IT manager (15% time): Will provide technical support

• Engineering manager (10% time): Will champion to engineers

• Total internal effort: 0.5 FTE

What actually happened:

Month 1:

• PM sent two emails announcing PLM launch

• IT manager answered 3 technical questions

• Engineering manager mentioned it in one staff meeting

Month 2:

• PM too busy with other projects

• IT firefighting production issues

• Engineering manager traveling for conferences

Month 3:

• Adoption: 28%

• Users: "Nobody told us how this would work"

• Management: "Why aren't people using it?"

• Internal team: "We don't have time for hand-holding"

Brought in external OCM (Element):

Week 1:

• Interviewed 30 users across departments

• Identified 4 major pain points (not previously known)

• Created champions in each department

• Developed communication plan

Week 2-8:

• Daily office hours (first 2 weeks)

• Fixed top 3 pain points

• Weekly wins communication

• Peer-to-peer training

Month 4:

• Adoption: 81%

• Internal team: "They got people to actually use it"

The lesson: Internal teams know the company. External OCM knows how to change the company.

Reason #5: "OCM Is Soft Skills, Not Mission-Critical"

The belief:
Technology is hard. Data is hard. Integration is hard. Change management is "soft skills"—communications and training. Nice-to-have, not mission-critical.

Why this seems logical:
If the system doesn't work, nobody can use it. If people don't use it, that's a people problem, not a system problem.

Why it's wrong:
The system working is necessary. People using it is sufficient. You need both.

Mission-critical hierarchy:

1. System technically functional (necessary but not sufficient)

2. Users actually using it (necessary for any ROI)

3. Users using it correctly (necessary for full ROI)

4. Users preferring it over old methods (necessary for sustainability)

OCM addresses 2-4. Without it, you have expensive shelf-ware.

Real example: Aerospace manufacturer

Their perspective at planning:

• "Integration is mission-critical" → $120K investment

• "Data quality is mission-critical" → $80K investment

• "Training is important" → $30K investment

• "Change management is soft skills" → $0 investment

Month 6 reality:

• Integration: Working perfectly ✓

• Data quality: Pristine ✓

• Training: Completed ✓

• Adoption: 37% ✗

Why low adoption:

• Engineers didn't trust automated data (cultural issue, not technical)

• Manufacturing preferred Excel (habit, not capability)

• Purchasing feared making mistakes (psychology, not knowledge)

• Quality couldn't change workflows (organizational, not individual)

"Soft skills" problems causing hard business failures:

• $2.1M in unrealized benefits

• $400K investment not paying back

• Executive credibility damaged

• Team morale collapsed

After implementing OCM ($22K):

Addressed the "soft" issues:

• Trust: Show data flow, make it transparent

• Habits: Make new method easier than old method

• Fear: Safe environment to ask "dumb questions"

• Organizational: Align incentives, remove barriers

Result: 84% adoption in 16 weeks

The lesson: "Soft skills" drive hard results. Without OCM, technical perfection is worthless.

The Element OCM Framework: Why 82% Works

We've developed this framework through 127 implementations and 8 years of refinement. It's what achieves 82% adoption while industry average is 39%.

Phase 1: Before Implementation Starts

Most implementations: Start OCM after go-live (when problems surface)
Element approach: Start OCM before requirements are finalized

Why: Understanding organizational dynamics informs system design.

Activities:

1. Organizational assessment (Week 1)

• How do decisions get made here? (formal vs. informal power)

• Who influences whom? (social network analysis)

• What changes have succeeded/failed before? (cultural patterns)

• What's the tolerance for disruption? (risk appetite)

2. Stakeholder mapping (Week 1)

• Who benefits from PLM? (champions)

• Who loses power/control? (resisters)

• Who's indifferent but influential? (persuadables)

• Who trusts whom? (coalition building)

3. Change readiness assessment (Week 2)

• Rate each department 1-10 on:

  • Understanding of why change is needed

  • Capability to execute change

  • Willingness to change behaviors

  • History with change initiatives

4. Communication planning (Week 2)

• What do different groups need to hear?

• When do they need to hear it?

• From whom? (not always leadership)

• Through what channels? (not just email)

Deliverable: Change management strategy that informs technical implementation

Real example impact:

Medical device company assessment revealed:

• Engineering already frustrated with current PLM (high readiness)

• Manufacturing had failed project 2 years prior (low trust)

• Quality felt ignored in past decisions (potential resisters)

Adjusted approach:

• Started implementation with engineering (quick win to build credibility)

• Over-communicated with manufacturing (rebuild trust)

• Involved quality in requirements gathering (convert resisters to champions)

Result: Avoided the typical manufacturing resistance that kills implementations

Phase 2: During Implementation (Before Go-Live)

Most implementations: Focus on technical work, save "people stuff" for launch
Element approach: Parallel work streams—technical AND organizational preparation

Activities:

1. Change champion selection (Month 1)

Not: Ask for volunteers
Yes: Identify informal leaders through social network analysis

Champion criteria:

• Respected by peers (not necessarily managers)

• Understands both current and future state

• Can translate technical → practical

• Has time (not overwhelmed with other work)

• Wants to do this (genuine interest, not voluntold)

Champions per department:

• Engineering: 1 per 15 users

• Manufacturing: 1 per 20 users (simpler workflows)

• Quality: 1 per 25 users

• Purchasing: 1 per 30 users

2. Champion training (Month 2)

Not: "Here's how to use the system"
Yes: "Here's how to teach and support others"

Training modules:

• Technical: System functionality

• Pedagogical: Adult learning principles

• Psychological: Handling resistance

• Organizational: Political navigation

Certification process:

• Demonstrate system proficiency

• Role-play difficult conversations

• Create department-specific training materials

• Commit to availability (minimum hours/week)

3. Communication campaign (Months 1-5)

Not: One announcement email
Yes: Strategic, multi-channel, sustained campaign

Communication timeline:

Message adaptation:

To executives:
"PLM enables strategic objectives: faster time-to-market, better product quality, competitive advantage"

To engineers:
"PLM saves you time: less searching for files, less rework, more time designing"

To manufacturing:
"PLM gives you confidence: build exactly what engineering designed, no more surprises"

To quality:
"PLM provides traceability: track every change, ensure compliance, reduce audit prep"

Same system. Different value propositions.

4. Resistance management planning (Month 3)

Expected resistance patterns:

Early adopters (15%): Will use anything new
Strategy: Empower them. Make them visible champions.

Pragmatists (35%): Will use it if it works
Strategy: Show them it works. Quick wins. Concrete benefits.

Skeptics (35%): Will use it if forced
Strategy: Address concerns. Prove it's not more work. Provide support.

Resisters (15%): Will actively avoid it
Strategy: Understand their fear. Remove barriers. Escalate if necessary.

Pre-planned responses:

"I don't have time to learn new system"
Response: "It takes 2 hours to learn basics. Saves 8 hours/week after that. Net gain: 6 hours/week."

"Old method works fine"
Response: "You're spending 4 hours/week searching for files. That's not fine. That's 200 hours/year wasted."

"What if I break something?"
Response: "Training environment available 24/7. Break things there. Learn safely. Champions available to help."

"This won't last, another flavor of the month"
Response: "Executive commitment: 5-year roadmap. Annual investment. This isn't going away."

Deliverable: Prepared organization before launch (not scrambling after)

Phase 3: Launch & Stabilization (Months 1-2)

Most implementations: Flip switch, hope for the best
Element approach: Phased launch with intensive support

Activities:

1. Pilot launch (Week 1-2)

Not: Everyone at once
Yes: One product family, 10-15 users

Pilot criteria:

• Simple products (not most complex)

• Supportive users (early adopters)

• Visible work (generates stories)

• Critical path (matters to business)

Daily pilot activities:

• Morning standup: "How'd yesterday go?"

• Observation: Watch people work (don't just ask)

• Afternoon check-in: "What's frustrating?"

• Evening review: "What do we fix tonight?"

Fix issues within 24 hours:

• Show responsiveness

• Build confidence

• Prevent frustration accumulation

2. Expansion (Weeks 3-8)

Week 3-4: Add 3 more product families (40-50 users total)
Week 5-6: Add 5 more families (100-120 users)
Week 7-8: Remaining products (full rollout)

Each expansion:

• Training by champions (peers teaching peers)

• Success stories from previous groups

• Support structure in place

• Clear escalation path

3. Support structure (Weeks 1-8)

Layer 1: Self-service

• Quick reference guides (1 page per common task)

• Video library (2-minute clips)

• FAQ database (searchable)

Layer 2: Peer support

• Champions (available for questions)

• Office hours (scheduled times)

• Slack/Teams channel (async help)

Layer 3: Expert support

• Super users (complex questions)

• System admins (configuration issues)

• Consultants (if needed)

Escalation path:

• Try self-service first

• Ask champion if stuck

• Escalate to expert if champion can't help

• Average resolution time: <2 hours

4. Communication blitz (Weeks 1-4)

Daily wins email (first 2 weeks):

• "Yesterday, John released ECO in 18 minutes (used to take 4 hours)"

• "Manufacturing built 3 products with zero BOM errors"

• "Quality found design specs in 30 seconds (used to take 30 minutes)"

Weekly newsletter (weeks 3-8):

• Adoption statistics (gamify it)

• New training resources

• Tips and tricks

• Common questions answered

• Wins of the week

5. Resistance management (Ongoing)

Active resistance handling:

Identify resisters early:

• Not logging in

• Logging in but not using

• Using minimally to appear compliant

• Openly criticizing to others

Intervention protocol:

Step 1: Understand (don't judge)

• "I notice you're not using PLM much. Can we talk about why?"

• Listen without defending system

• Identify root cause (fear, habit, workload, politics)

Step 2: Address (remove barriers)

• Fear: Extra training, safe practice environment

• Habit: Workflow change support, make new way easier

• Workload: Demonstrate time savings, not time added

• Politics: Leadership intervention if needed

Step 3: Escalate (if necessary)

• Manager conversation

• Executive involvement

• Performance review impact

• Last resort: Mandatory use policy

Deliverable: Stabilized adoption with support structures in place

Phase 4: Optimization & Sustainability (Months 3-6)

Most implementations: Declare victory, move on
Element approach: Continuous improvement becomes normal

Activities:

1. Usage analysis (Monthly)

Track metrics:

• Login frequency (daily active users)

• Feature utilization (which features used)

• Workflow completion (tasks finished vs. abandoned)

• Time savings (measured vs. estimated)

• Error reduction (quality metrics)

• User satisfaction (monthly survey)

Identify patterns:

• Which departments struggling?

• Which features underutilized?

• Where are workarounds appearing?

• What's the common complaint?

2. Process optimization (Quarterly)

Based on usage data:

• Streamline clunky workflows

• Add missing features (small, focused)

• Remove unused features (reduce complexity)

• Integrate with other systems (reduce context switching)

Example optimizations:

Aerospace manufacturer Month 4:

• Observation: Engineers creating parts but not BOMs

• Root cause: BOM creation required 12 clicks across 3 screens

• Fix: One-screen BOM template (5 clicks)

• Result: BOM creation rate increased 340%

3. Advanced training (Months 4-6)

Beyond basics:

• Month 4: Intermediate features for power users

• Month 5: Advanced workflows for specific roles

• Month 6: Optimization techniques and best practices

Training format:

• Optional (not mandatory)

• Role-specific (not generic)

• Short (30 minutes max)

• Practical (solve real problems)

4. Champion refresh (Month 6)

Recognize and reward:

• Public acknowledgment

• Executive recognition

• Career development opportunities

• First access to new features

Refresh training:

• New features and capabilities

• Advanced troubleshooting

• Coaching skills for next wave of users

• Burnout prevention

5. Culture embedding (Ongoing)

Make PLM "how we work here":

• New hire onboarding includes PLM

• Performance reviews include PLM usage

• Best practices shared and celebrated

• Continuous improvement mindset normalized

Deliverable: Self-sustaining adoption with continuous improvement

The Financial Case for OCM

Typical mid-market implementation:

• Software + configuration: $350K

• Training: $50K

• OCM: $0

• Total: $400K

Adoption: 39%
Benefits: $220K/year
Payback: Never

Adding comprehensive OCM:

• Software + configuration: $350K

• Training: $50K

• OCM: $25K

• Total: $425K

Adoption: 82%
Benefits: $1.84M/year
Payback: 3.2 months

OCM investment: $25K (6% of total)
Additional value unlocked: $1.62M/year
ROI on OCM: 6,480%

5-year comparison:

Without OCM:

• Investment: $400K

• Benefits: $220K × 5 = $1.1M

• Net: +$700K

With OCM:

• Investment: $425K

• Benefits: $1.84M × 5 = $9.2M

• Net: +$8.78M

The $25K difference becomes $8.08M difference.

How to Know If You Need OCM

Answer these questions about your implementation:

Pre-Launch Questions:

1. Have you identified change champions? (Yes/No)

2. Do you have communication plan beyond "announcement email"? (Yes/No)

3. Have you assessed organizational change readiness? (Yes/No)

4. Is OCM budget >5% of total implementation budget? (Yes/No)

Post-Launch Questions: 5. Is adoption >70%? (Yes/No) 6. Are users preferring PLM over old methods? (Yes/No) 7. Do you have ongoing support structure (not just helpdesk)? (Yes/No) 8. Can you quantify time savings per user? (Yes/No)

Scoring:

• 7-8 Yes: You're doing OCM well

• 5-6 Yes: You have OCM, but could improve

• 3-4 Yes: You're at risk of low adoption

• 0-2 Yes: You're headed for 39% adoption (or already there)

What To Do If Your Adoption Is Low

If you launched without OCM and adoption is <60%:

You can still recover. Here's how:

Week 1: Diagnose

• Interview low-adoption users (understand real barriers)

• Identify patterns (not individual complaints)

• Assess champion presence (do you have any?)

• Measure current state (baseline metrics)

Week 2-3: Stabilize

• Fix top 3 pain points (show you're listening)

• Identify/train champions (peer support)

• Create support structure (office hours, quick guides)

• Communication: "We hear you, here's what we're fixing"

Week 4-8: Rebuild

• Gradual re-engagement (don't force, entice)

• Celebrate wins (make success visible)

• Address resistance (understand, don't fight)

• Measure improvement (show progress)

Week 9-16: Sustain

• Continuous improvement (monthly optimizations)

• Champion maintenance (recognition, refresh)

• Culture embedding (make it normal)

• Executive engagement (maintain support)

Typical recovery timeline: 4-6 months to 75%+ adoption
Recovery cost: $20K-$40K
Alternative: $400K to start over (or scrap entirely)

Next Steps

If You're Planning Implementation:

Include OCM from the start:

1. [Download OCM Planning Template] (free)

   • Champion selection criteria

   • Communication plan framework

   • Resistance management playbook

   • Budget worksheet

2. [Calculate OCM ROI] (5-minute calculator)

   • Input your implementation budget

   • See adoption impact

   • Compare with/without OCM scenarios

3. [Schedule consultation] (30 minutes, free)

   • Review your OCM strategy

   • Identify gaps

   • Recommend approach

If Your Adoption Is Low:

Fix it before declaring failure:

1. [Take Adoption Health Check] (10 minutes)

   • Diagnose root causes

   • Identify quick wins

   • Prioritize interventions

2. [Request OCM rescue assessment] (free)

   • We audit current state

   • Identify recovery path

   • Estimate timeline and cost

3. [See OCM rescue case studies]

   • How we recovered 23 low-adoption implementations

   • Typical patterns and fixes

   • Results achieved

If Your Adoption Is Good:

Optimize to excellent:

1. [Download Optimization Guide]

   • Advanced adoption techniques

   • Power user development

   • Culture embedding strategies

2. [Benchmark against best-in-class]

   • Compare your metrics

   • Identify improvement opportunities

   • Set targets for next level

About Element Consulting

We don't just implement PLM. We ensure people actually use it.

Our differentiator: Process-first approach with comprehensive OCM built in (not bolted on)

Track record:

• 127 implementations

• 92% success rate (vs. 27% industry average)

• 82% average adoption (vs. 39% industry average)

• 23 low-adoption implementations rescued

OCM methodology:

• Organizational assessment before technical work

• Champion identification and training

• Strategic communication campaigns

• Resistance management protocols

• Continuous improvement frameworks

Industries:

• Aerospace & Defense

• Automotive

• Medical Devices

• Industrial Equipment

[View OCM case studies] | [Read champion testimonials] | [Learn our methodology]

The Bottom Line

The difference between 82% adoption and 39% adoption isn't better software.

It's not better consultants. It's not bigger budgets. It's not smarter users.

It's comprehensive organizational change management.

Without OCM:

• Technology works

• Nobody uses it

• Benefits unrealized

• Investment wasted

With OCM:

• Technology works

• People use it

• Benefits achieved

• Investment paid back in months

The 6% of budget you spend on OCM determines whether the other 94% succeeds or fails.

Your choice:

• Skip OCM, get 39% adoption, never achieve payback

• Include OCM, get 82% adoption, payback in 3 months

Which sounds better?

[Include OCM in your next project] | [Rescue your current low-adoption implementation]