A quick starting point

• To start, how did this evaluation begin, an incident, an audit, an acquisition, or ongoing improvement? Options: Incident (wrong revision to production), Customer audit, Post-acquisition integration, Continuous improvement, Other
• Describe the last time a wrong revision reached production, including the approximate cost and which teams were involved.
• Estimate the annual cost impact of escapes, rework, and warranty that you attribute to product data issues. Options: <$50,000, $50,000 - $250,000, $250,000 - $1,000,000, >$1,000,000, We do not track this
• Who is the executive sponsor and which other leaders must sign off on a pilot or rollout for your organization? Options: VP Engineering / CTO, Head of Manufacturing, Head of Quality, Head of Supply Chain, Head of IT, Other
• How quickly does your leadership expect to see pilot results, and what timeline would they call a success? Options: Within 4 weeks, 1 - 3 months, 3 - 6 months, 6 - 12 months, No firm expectation
• Imagine leadership declines to fund a pilot today, what single condition would make them greenlight it immediately?

Where your product data actually lives and moves

• If your CAD files, BOMs, and change records were inaccessible for five business days, which production lines would you have to stop first and why? Options: Immediate full line stoppage, Partial line impact on key SKUs, Service or field support delays, No immediate stoppage but major downstream work
• List the repositories that currently hold your CAD models, BOMs, and release records. Options: Network file shares, Existing PDM or PLM, ERP item master, Spreadsheets, CAD native vaults, Supplier portals, Cloud file storage, Other
• Walk me through the handoffs from engineering to manufacturing for a released part, focusing on two moments where information commonly changes.
• Who owns the master BOM today and who receives notifications when a revision changes? Options: Engineering, Manufacturing, Quality, Supply chain, IT, Product management, No single owner
• How many active part numbers or unique drawings are in the product line you would use for the pilot? Options: <1,000, 1,000 - 10,000, 10,000 - 50,000, >50,000, Unknown
• Point to the single downstream cost or risk that would make you stop the project immediately if current document and BOM flows remain unchanged.

The escapes that keep leaders awake

• Consider the costliest data escape in the past two years, what caused it and who was held accountable?
• Give a concrete example of a wrong revision or BOM error that reached the shop floor and describe the sequence of events that followed.
• How often do you face audits that require reproducing an as-shipped configuration from two years ago? Options: Monthly, Quarterly, Annually, Rarely, Never
• If a repeat of that major escape occurred during the pilot, which role or committee would have the authority to pause the project? Options: Engineering leadership, Operations / Manufacturing leadership, Program management, IT, Executive steering committee, No clear authority

How change actually happens inside your teams

• When engineers bypass the official system and work from local files, what root causes allow that behavior to continue?
• Describe your formal engineering change approval workflow, including typical approval times in days.
• On a typical engineering change, how many systems must be updated manually to keep records in sync? Options: 1 system, 2 systems, 3 - 5 systems, More than 5, Unknown
• Name the change sponsors or champions who can drive adoption across engineering and manufacturing.
• Should adoption fall below 60 percent of active engineers after three months, would you pause, continue with remediation, or push ahead regardless? Options: Pause and fix adoption, Continue with remediation and training, Proceed to rollout regardless, Undecided

Technical and integration obstacles

• Which integration point has caused the most delay or failure in past deployments, and why?
• List the third-party systems the pilot must connect to, including categories like CAD systems, ERP, and supplier portals. Options: Mechanical CAD systems, Electrical CAD systems, ERP, Supplier portals, Manufacturing execution, Quality systems, Test environments, None of the above, Other
• Do your CAD tools expose APIs or connectors that allow automated metadata extraction, or will you require a file-parse approach? Options: Yes, APIs/connectors available, Partial API support, No APIs, will require file parsing, Unknown
• Identify who in your IT organization will own integration endpoints and provide access windows for migration activities.
• What single infrastructure or compliance constraint would stop the pilot from moving forward if unresolved before the start date? Options: Regulatory approval or audit hold, Network or security restrictions, Lack of access to source systems, Insufficient IT resources, None critical at this time

The alternatives you are weighing

• Assuming you stayed with your current approach, what must be true about it for you to avoid changing vendors?
• Which external solutions or incumbent platforms are you actively evaluating alongside this pilot? Options: Incumbent PLM vendor, CAD-vendor-native PLM, Build an internal solution, ERP-centric approach, Do nothing, Other vendor
• Has anyone inside proposed building an internal solution instead of selecting a vendor, and who would lead that effort? Options: Yes, dedicated internal team, No internal proposal, Under discussion, Unknown
• On a scale from 1 to 5, how likely are you to choose an internal rebuild over an external platform if timelines and costs are comparable? Options: 1 (very unlikely), 2, 3, 4, 5 (very likely)
• Should an internal team commit to delivering a homegrown alternative within your desired timeline, what decision criteria would make you proceed with an external pilot anyway?

Pilot success criteria and decisive triggers

• Name the single pilot outcome, if achieved, that would make your leadership sign for enterprise rollout within two weeks. Options: Validated CAD integrations, BOM accuracy to target, Change approval SLAs met, Adoption thresholds met, Data migration demonstrated, Other
• Provide the measurable acceptance criteria you will use to judge BOM accuracy, CAD integration stability, and change workflow compliance.
• How many product variants and assemblies should the pilot include to be representative of your typical complexity? Options: 1 - 5, 6 - 20, 21 - 100, >100
• Identify who will be the approval authority to confirm the pilot met the acceptance criteria and sign off for rollout.
• Given the pilot meets technical criteria but adoption remains low, would you proceed to rollout, require a second pilot focused on change management, or delay the rollout? Options: Proceed to rollout, Require a second pilot focused on adoption, Delay rollout pending adoption program, Undecided

• Solution Experience Session

• Confirm the current state and cost
• You confirm the demonstrated workflow would have prevented the $200,000 scrap escape.
• Provide a representative set of CAD files, BOM extract, and the failure scenario artifacts for the pilot product line within 5 business days.
• You confirm the platform can ingest your representative CAD files and produce an accurate BOM for the sample product line.
• Walk through the failing scenario end-to-end
• Identify the named change sponsor, manufacturing owner, and IT owner who will be decision points for the pilot within 7 business days.
• Agreement on pilot acceptance criteria and the evidence required to decide on a pilot rollout.
• Prove CAD-agnostic integrations on your sample files
• Seller to deliver a tailored pilot plan that maps migration steps, CAD integration checkpoints, and measurable acceptance criteria based on today's validated scenarios within 4 business days.
• Show the change-management and approval flow mapped to your roles
• Agree on a target pilot timeline and the minimal success criteria that must be met to proceed to rollout, captured and shared after this session.
• Validation checkpoint, confirm alignment

• Solution Experience Session
• Solution Experience Deck
• Solution Brief

• meeting
• slides
• document

Shared commitment and sponsorship

• Who will be the named change sponsors for this initiative? Please list names and roles.
• Who is the single escalation contact for executive decisions if the project stalls?
• How much time per week can each sponsor reasonably commit to steering and decisions during the pilot? Options: Less than 1 hour, 1-3 hours, 4-8 hours, 8-16 hours, More than 16 hours, Unsure
• Do you have an existing cross-functional governance forum for change initiatives that will include this project? Options: Yes, weekly, Yes, biweekly, Yes, monthly, No, Planned
• Who will own final acceptance of pilot readiness and pilot success?

Current data and file practices

• Where do engineers currently store and share CAD files and related BOMs? Options: Shared network drive, Local workstation only, Cloud file share (e.g. generic storage), Existing PLM or PDM, Multiple of the above, Other
• How do you currently control CAD file revisions? Options: Manual file naming, Folder-based revision, Spreadsheet tracking, PDM/PLM system, No consistent control, Other
• Approximately what percentage of engineering work relies on local files rather than a central system? Options: 0-10%, 11-30%, 31-60%, 61-90%, 91-100%, Unsure
• How many distinct CAD systems are in active use across engineering teams? Options: 1, 2, 3, 4 or more, Unsure
• How do suppliers and contract manufacturers typically receive CAD-related information? Options: Native CAD files, Neutral export formats (STEP/IGES), 2D drawings only, A mix depending on supplier, Unsure
• Who currently owns BOM accuracy and reconciliation for released products?

Training and change capacity

• Do you have an internal training team or external learning partner available for this project? Options: Internal training team, External vendor, Both internal and external, None
• How many full-time equivalent people can be dedicated to training and super-user support during the pilot? Options: None, 0.5-1 FTE, 1-2 FTE, 3-5 FTE, More than 5 FTE, Unsure
• Which training formats best suit your teams for adoption? Options: Live instructor-led in person, Live virtual instructor-led, Recorded video modules, Hands-on workshops with sample data, Step-by-step guides and checklists, Other
• What is the typical lead time to schedule cross-functional training that includes manufacturing and quality? Options: Less than 1 week, 1-2 weeks, 2-4 weeks, More than 4 weeks, Unsure
• Do you use a learning management system to assign and track training completion? Options: Yes, No, Planned
• Who will serve as pilot super-users or champions? Please list names and areas of responsibility.

Engineering workflow constraints

• Are there fixed design freeze periods or production release windows that restrict when you can introduce changes? Options: Yes, regular frozen periods, Yes, scheduled release windows, No fixed windows, Unsure
• Which approval roles are mandatory in your engineering change process today? Options: Engineering, Manufacturing/operations, Quality, Supply chain/procurement, IT, No mandatory approvals, Other
• Do mechanical and electrical teams work in parallel tools against the same assemblies? Options: Yes, regularly, Occasionally, No, Unsure
• Are any parts of the release or signoff process performed manually outside engineering tools? Options: Yes, paper or email signoffs, Some manual steps, Fully digital today, Unsure
• How are emergency or expedited engineering changes handled today?
• Do any regulatory or audit requirements constrain how engineering data is stored or migrated? Options: Yes, No, Unsure
• If you answered yes, please describe the relevant data residency, retention, or audit constraints.

Integration and migration readiness

• Which enterprise systems must integrate with the platform during the pilot? Options: ERP, MES, Quality management system, Existing PLM or PDM, Supplier portal or extranets, Other
• Do you have named owners for each integration endpoint such as ERP, PDM, and supplier systems? Options: Named owners for all endpoints, Named owners for some endpoints, No named owners yet, Unsure
• What maintenance or downtime windows are typically available for running migrations or integration validation? Options: Nightly windows, Weekend windows, Planned outage windows, No regular windows, Unsure
• How would you characterize the cleanliness of your master data for parts and BOMs today? Options: Very clean, Mostly clean with some duplicates, Messy with many duplicates, Unknown
• Estimate the number of parts and drawings in scope for a single product line pilot. Options: Less than 100, 100-500, 500-2,000, 2,000-10,000, More than 10,000, Unsure
• Who will validate migrated BOMs and drawings during the pilot?

Adoption risks, quick wins, and next steps

• From your view, what are the top three risks to user adoption for this initiative?
• Which of those risks are already being addressed and how?
• What short-term wins could increase confidence and reduce resistance during the pilot? Options: Automated BOM reconciliation, Proof of CAD connector stability, Role-based hands-on training, Visible executive sponsorship, Supplier onboarding, Other
• What concrete measures would indicate the organization is ready to move from pilot to rollout from a change adoption perspective?
• Who will be accountable for tracking adoption metrics and reporting progress?
• What would make you say the organization is ready to proceed to rollout?
• Are there any other constraints, concerns, or suggestions the team should be aware of?

• Provision PLM tenant and environments
• Configure multi-CAD connectors
• Migrate CAD files and drawing histories
• Import and normalize BOMs
• Migrate part master and metadata
• Deploy engineering change order workflows
• Implement revision and release management
• Integrate PLM with ERP and MRP
• Onboard supplier and manufacturing portals
• Reconcile BOMs and establish as‑shipped traceability
• Enable web CAD viewing and markup
• Validate and remediate migrated data
• Configure role-based permissions and security
• Train teams on PLM workflows and CAD integration

Provision PLM tenant and environments

• Which target environments must you provision for the pilot (Sandbox, Test, Staging, Production) and how many of each? Options: Sandbox, Test, Staging, Production
• What deployment model do you require for the tenant (cloud-hosted, on-premise, hybrid)? Options: Cloud-hosted, On-premise, Hybrid
• Who in your organization will approve tenant provisioning and provide the acceptance for environment readiness (name and role)?
• How many named users and how many concurrent CAD seats do you expect in the production environment for the initial product line? Options: Less than 50, 50-200, 200-500, More than 500
• Are there regulatory compliance regimes your tenant must meet (for example ITAR, ISO 9001, FDA traceability) and which artifacts prove compliance?

Configure multi-CAD connectors

• List the CAD systems and exact versions you use for the pilot product line (for example SolidWorks 2021, NX 12, Altium Designer 20).
• Provide the CAD file formats and export artifacts you need supported (native assemblies, STEP, IGES, DWG, derived PDFs). Options: Native assembly, STEP, IGES, DWG, Derived 2D PDF
• Identify whether you need bi-directional metadata sync between the CAD client and the PLM connector for properties like part number, material, and revision. Options: Yes - bi-directional, No - PLM is authoritative, One-way (CAD to PLM)
• Specify the target coverage for CAD connector adoption across active seats during the pilot (example: 80% of active mechanical CAD seats). Options: 50%, 70%, 80%, 90%, Custom
• Are there existing CAD automation scripts, macros, or PDM hooks that you expect preserved or ported to the new connectors? Options: Yes, No

Migrate CAD files and drawing histories

• How many CAD files and associated drawing documents are in scope for the pilot and what is their combined storage size (GB)?
• Provide the source locations for CAD files and drawing histories (for example file server path, current PDM vault name) that will be migrated.
• Which file types must retain full revision-to-revision history during migration (for example .SLDASM/.SLDPRT, .CATPart, .DWG, native ECAD formats)? Options: Assemblies, Parts, Drawings, ECAD files
• What percentage of CAD files must migrate with complete revision history and link integrity for the migration to be accepted (for example 95%)? Options: 90%, 95%, 99%, Custom
• Who on your engineering or CAD admin team will be responsible for triaging files flagged as corrupt, missing references, or with broken links during migration?

Import and normalize BOMs

• Which BOM sources must you combine for normalization (CAD BOM exports, ERP BOM module, spreadsheets) and cite an example file or ERP table name?
• What BOM depth must be migrated for the pilot (top-level only, top + 1 level, top + 2 levels, full indented BOM)? Options: Top-level only, Top + 1, Top + 2, Full indented
• Which identifier will you declare authoritative for part lineage during normalization (your part number, supplier part number, ERP item ID)? Options: Your part number, Supplier part number, ERP item ID, Custom mapping
• What minimum BOM accuracy rate compared to the ERP reference must your normalized BOM meet to be accepted for pilot validation (for example 98% match on part counts and units)? Options: 95%, 98%, 99%, Custom
• Who will approve the BOM normalization rules and serve as the single point of contact for BOM mapping exceptions?

Migrate part master and metadata

• How many active part master records are in scope for migration for the pilot product line (provide an exact count or a range)? Options: Less than 1,000, 1,000-5,000, 5,000-20,000, More than 20,000
• Which metadata fields are mandatory on part records for production (for example material, weight, manufacturer, lifecycle status, procurement type)?
• Do you require preservation of existing part numbers or adoption of a new numbering scheme during migration? Options: Preserve existing numbers, Apply new scheme, Hybrid / map legacy to new
• Identify the ERP/MRP field that maps to your part master primary key and provide its exact field name if available.
• Are supplier attributes such as supplier part number, lead time, and approved vendor list required on migrated part records at go-live? Options: Yes, No

Deploy engineering change order workflows

• Provide the names or IDs of the change templates you use today (for example ECO template ID or ECN form name).
• Outline the approval routing for a typical engineering change (roles, approval sequence, and escalation after X days).
• Which workflow states must be present in the PLM for change orders (for example Draft, Submitted, Approved, Released, Implemented)? Options: Draft, Submitted, Approved, Released, Implemented
• Do you require automatic notifications to manufacturing and quality when an ECO reaches Approved, and via which channel (email, MES signal)? Options: Yes - email, Yes - MES integration, No
• Who is the process owner that will accept the configured ECO workflow and sign off on test ECOs?

Implement revision and release management

• Describe the revision schema you use on drawings and parts (numeric, alphabetic, combined) and provide an example revision ID.
• Are release packages tied to manufacturing batch numbers, serial numbers, or work order IDs in your process? Options: Batch numbers, Serial numbers, Work order IDs, None
• What event currently triggers a formal release to the factory (approval signature, ECO number, completed validation)?
• Do you require automatic generation and archival of release notes and change logs for each released revision and where should they be stored? Options: Yes - PLM archive, Yes - external document repository, No
• Are there regulatory retention periods for released revision snapshots you must enforce (for example retain for 7 years)? Options: Yes - specify years, No

Integrate PLM with ERP and MRP

• Which ERP or MRP system and specific modules must you integrate with (for example Item Master, BOM, Purchasing, Work Orders)?
• Select the integration surfaces required for the pilot (parts sync, BOM sync, change notices, BOM reconciliation, PO updates). Options: Parts sync, BOM sync, Change notices, PO updates, Work order updates
• What synchronization cadence do you need for each integration surface (real-time, every 15 minutes, hourly, nightly)? Options: Real-time, Every 15 minutes, Hourly, Nightly
• Who will provide the ERP integration access (API credentials, middleware contact) and who owns testing in the ERP sandbox?
• Specify any ERP custom fields or mapping rules the integration must populate (provide field names where available).

Onboard supplier and manufacturing portals

• How many external supplier accounts and internal manufacturing users need portal access for the pilot product line? Options: <10, 10-50, 51-200, 200+
• Which supplier documents must be available in the portal (for example drawings, inspection reports, certificates of conformance)? Options: Drawings, Inspection reports, Certificates of conformance, Work instructions
• Do suppliers require the ability to upload proposed part changes or only to view approved documentation? Options: Upload proposed changes, View/download only, Annotate but not submit
• What identity provider or SSO protocol do you expect for portal access (SAML, OpenID Connect, or email invites)? Options: SAML, OpenID Connect (OIDC), Email invites / local accounts
• Who will own supplier onboarding and supply a roster of supplier contacts and their access windows?

Reconcile BOMs and establish as‑shipped traceability

• Which historical shipment period must you be able to reconstruct for as-shipped traceability (for example last 12 months, 24 months)? Options: Last 12 months, Last 24 months, All available history
• What source systems will you use to reconcile shipped BOMs (ERP shipped orders, MES build records, shipping manifests) and name the key tables or records?
• What acceptance criteria will validate as-shipped traceability for the pilot (for example reproduce BOM for a shipped serial number with >=99% field match)? Options: >=95% match, >=98% match, >=99% match, Custom
• Who will own resolution of conflicts when historical shipment records disagree across ERP, MES, and shipping manifests?
• Do you require serialized lot-level traceability for shipped assemblies or is assembly-level BOM reconstruction sufficient? Options: Serialized lot-level, Assembly-level only, Both

Enable web CAD viewing and markup

• Which CAD models or assembly sizes must be viewable in the web viewer (for example assemblies >1,000 parts or files >200 MB)? Options: Small models (<100 parts), Medium models (100-1,000 parts), Large models (>1,000 parts)
• Provide the markup capabilities you require (measure, sectional view, redline, threaded comments, markup export) and indicate priority. Options: Measure, Section view, Redline, Threaded comments, Export markups
• Do external suppliers need view-only access or the ability to create collaborative markups on CAD models? Options: View-only, Collaborative markup
• What maximum initial load time is acceptable for a representative 500 MB assembly over your typical WAN link (choose target)? Options: <5 seconds, 5-15 seconds, 15-60 seconds
• Who will provide representative large assemblies and network test nodes for viewer performance validation?

Validate and remediate migrated data

• List the validation rules you require post-migration (duplicate part detection, BOM level counts, broken CAD references) and provide current baseline rates where known.
• Indicate which remediation pathways you accept for flagged records (automated mapping, manual review, quarantine) and which requires escalation. Options: Automated mapping, Manual review, Quarantine, Escalate to SME
• Who will perform hands-on remediation for flagged records and what is the expected weekly remediation capacity (hours or records per week)?
• Do you require an audit trail of data remediation actions tied to user IDs and timestamps for compliance reviews? Options: Yes, No
• Are there existing validation scripts or tools (name the script or tool) you want run as part of the migration validation phase?

• current_state
• decision_readiness
• success_criteria
• desired_state
• gaps
• stakeholders
• gaps
• stakeholders
• desired_state
• success_criteria
• decision_readiness
• current_state
• gaps
• current_state
• desired_state
• success_criteria
• stakeholders
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness

• Subscription Agreement
• Order Form
• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW) — Pilot & Phased Rollout
• Pilot Acceptance Certificate
• Rollout Governance Addendum
• Service Level Agreement (SLA)
• Data Processing Agreement (DPA) — conditional
• Change Order Agreement
• Payment & Milestone Schedule

• Go-live Health Check (weeks 1-4)
• First Measurement Review (weeks 4-10)
• Acceptance Gate Decision (around day 90)
• Ongoing Quarterly Success Review

• Confirm the escalation contact path and expected response SLAs for the next quarter.
• Deliver a corrective action tracker listing fixes, expected metric impact, and target completion dates.
• Provide the validated data extracts and reconciliation workbook to be used in the Acceptance Gate meeting.
• Run targeted migration or connector retry jobs required to close identified data gaps and report results.
• Restate acceptance criteria and numeric targets
• Produce a documented pass or fail for each acceptance criterion recorded in Solution Scope.
• Confirm the incumbent system is decommissioned or formally retained-read-only and that fallback usage is closed.
• Capture remediation actions with owners and completion dates for any failed acceptance items.
• Publish the acceptance decision record and the evidentiary reconciliation workbook.
• Initiate the agreed remediation tasks with target dates and track to closure.
• Execute the legacy system decommission or read-only and archive plan and confirm completion in writing.
• Quarterly metric trend review
• Confirm whether monthly wrong-revision escape rate and weekly active engineering users are tracking toward the Solution Scope targets.
• Ensure high-priority escalations are on a burn-down plan and agree next-step dates.
• Agree the prioritized enhancement backlog for the coming quarter and the checkpoints to verify progress.
• Publish the quarterly metric dashboard and the prioritized enhancement backlog with target completion windows.
• Open tracked tickets for all agreed high-priority enhancements and define acceptance criteria for each ticket.
• Re-confirm success criteria and owners
• Confirm the deployment completed against the technical validation checkpoints recorded in Solution Scope.
• Identify and document the top 3 early blockers with remediation actions and target dates.
• Capture an initial adoption snapshot including number of active engineering users and connector sync health.
• Publish the migration validation report with sample reconciliation results within 48 hours.
• Create a tracked remediation list for identified blockers with target completion dates.
• Schedule the data pull for the First Measurement Review to collect the week-4 metrics.
• Present first-data dashboard against Solution Scope targets
• Establish whether BOM accuracy rate and weekly active engineering users are on trajectory to meet the numeric targets recorded in Solution Scope.
• Produce a prioritized corrective action plan with timelines that leads to the Acceptance Gate.
• Agree the authoritative data extracts and reconciliation method for the acceptance measurement.
• Deployment and migration validation
• Open escalations and blocker burn-down
• Present measured outcomes and reconciliation evidence
• Connector and integration health review
• Root-cause diagnosis for gaps
• Early adoption signals and usage patterns
• Document pass or fail per criterion
• Enhancement requests and backlog prioritization
• Integration uptime and reliability summary
• Agree corrective actions and timeline to acceptance gate
• Incumbent system wind-down checkpoint
• Blockers and critical issues
• Agree immediate remediation actions
• Agree next quarter priorities and checkpoints
• Confirm data sources and validation method for acceptance
• Formal acceptance decision and signatory
• Remediation plan for any failed criteria