The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1361-2026.htm

From PLM 1.0 to PLM 2.0: Product

lifecycle
the evolving role of product management

lifecycle management (PLM) in

the textile and apparel industries 533
Jo Conlon Received 14 February 2018
Revised 17 June 2018
Department of Materials, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK 23 July 2019
10 October 2019
Accepted 4 November 2019
Abstract
Purpose – Product lifecycle management (PLM) is an enterprise-wide strategy gaining prominence across
manufacturing. The fashion industry is a late adopter of PLM, yet within global fashion and textile
organisations PLM is now becoming a mainstream approach to optimize core processes. This literature review
analyses the latest academic research to establish a broad basis of understanding of PLM in the sector and
identify potential future research directions.
Design/methodology/approach – A systematic literature review was conducted to investigate the current
state and main perspectives of research on PLM in the textiles and apparel sector. The paper adopts the three
features (managerial, technological and collaborative) of the definition of PLM by Corallo et al. (2013) as the
analytic framework for the 27 papers to illustrate how PLM is framed and conceptualised in the RFA sector.
Findings – PLM is at an interesting phase as it evolves from classical PLM 1.0 to connected PLM 2.0. The
evolution of PLM from its PDM origins as an IT tool to a critical component of the strategy for digital
transformation is reported. The strategic role of suppliers is noted as a critical success factor. Key inhibitors
relating to PLM adoption and optimization in the sector are identified as limited holistic and theoretical
perspective of PLM coupled with a deficiency in relevant industry skills. It is argued that the transformational
potential of PLM 2.0 may not be fully realised without a more coordinated development effort through
industrial and academic collaboration.
Research limitations/implications – The limitations of this study are that it is a literature review of
academic papers in the RFA sector papers within the timescale 2000–2018. PLM 1.0 has dominated in this time
period however the potential trajectory of connected PLM 2.0 is beginning to emerge.
Practical implications – The results from this paper indicate that there is a lack of research on PLM in the
sector and concludes by suggesting promising future research possibilities: further empirical and case studies
on organisations implementing a PLM strategy; studies reporting on the contribution of PLM to address the
challenges of sustainability, traceability and transparency in the industry and inter-industry collaborations;
studies with knowledge management theories specifically applied to the textile and apparel sector; and the
opportunity for academic and industry collaboration on the development of PLM to meet these needs.
Originality/value – To the best of the author’s knowledge, no systematic literature review on this topic has
previously been published in academic journals. Given levels of investment in PLM platforms in the sector,
both practitioners in companies and the academic community might find the review and agenda for future
research useful.
Keywords Fashion industry, Literature review, Digital transformation, Retail management, Product lifecycle
management, Apparel manufacturing
Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction
Across manufacturing, today’s success is determined by the ability to be flexible and
responsive (Christopher et al., 2004). Retail brands and manufacturers in the fashion and
textiles sector are investing in product lifecycle management (PLM) to guide their strategic
efforts in addressing the challenges and opportunities inherent in the modern industry (Just Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: An International
Journal
Vol. 24 No. 4, 2020
pp. 533-553
I would like to acknowledge the support and expertise received from Mark Harrop and WhichPLM, PTC © Emerald Publishing Limited
1361-2026
and ITC Infotech. DOI 10.1108/JFMM-12-2017-0143
JFMM Style, n.d.). The discipline of PLM can drive operational excellence and support planned
24,4 future business transformation (Suleski and Toncheva, 2016). In comparison to the
traditional PLM investors in automotive, aerospace and electronic manufacturing, the
fashion and textiles sector has been described as a late adopter (AMR Research Inc, 2007,
2008) but there is an increasing sense of urgency towards PLM adoption, driving growth in
the retail and apparel PLM market (Transparency Market Research, 2015). The adoption and
integration of core functions of PLM can provide organisations with access to best practices
534 for process standardisation, reduction in time to market, quality improvement and cost
reduction (Ameri and Dutta, 2005; Cantamessa et al., 2012; Stark, 2011). The reported benefits
and improvements are shown in Figure 1 (Suleski and Toncheva, 2016). These core functions
of PLM have been termed classical PLM or PLM 1.0 (Saaksvuori, 2011).

1.1 Origins of PLM

The PLM concept can trace its origins back to the development of computer aided design
(CAD) tools that emerged in manufacturing industries in the 1980s. As global sourcing of
production became established, the predecessor to PLM, product data management (PDM)
emerged from the need to share product data (via electronic versions of design concepts)
through globally distributed teams, including supply chain partners. PDM allowed for the
establishment of procedures to manage product development processes and associated
collaborative workflows which could then be automated. Simultaneously other new
technological tools to streamline and support operations were being introduced alongside
the computer-aided design and manufacturing systems of CAD/CAM and PDM systems such
as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Customer Relationship Management (Ameri and
Dutta, 2005). ERP was first to become established within the industry for planning and
transactions. PLM emerged in the 1990s as a strategic business model representing “an
integrated approach for the creation, organisation, and management of product related
knowledge across an enterprise, its network of suppliers, and its partners. . .” (Cantamessa
et al., 2012). Whereas ERP systems remain dominant within the fashion industry given its
focus on delivery (Terzi et al., 2010), in design-centric engineering industries such as
automotive and aeronautic manufacture PLM has reached a greater level of adoption and
maturity and is supporting innovation in products and services. Both systems share the bill-
of-materials (BOM) and product data held within a PLM system can be transferred into an
ERP system for sourcing and execution. There is now a growing recognition of the need to
integrate and consolidate enterprise systems such as PLM and ERP systems to provide

Greater standardizaon of PLM processes 66%

Reduced product development me 38%

Faster me to market 38%

Improved product margins 38%

Reduced product costs 23%

Improved product margins 21%

Figure 1.
Improvements related Improved product quality/fewer defects 13%
to PLM adoption
(Suleski and Improved adopon rate of proposed designs 13%
Toncheva, 2016) Other 23%
accurate data to support agile decision processes (Shilovitsky, 2017). Unlike other software Product
applications, PLM is grounded in the philosophy of connectivity of knowledge (Terzi et al., lifecycle
2010) with PLM systems evolving to provide the foundation on which other applications
operate through integration or interfaces. Further, low-code development platforms support
management
the shift to more open, sustainable and resilient PLM solutions. Accordingly, by improving
interoperability, other modern technologies in the design and production areas (e.g. 3-D
simulation, 3-D printing and body scanning) can be supported within PLM. Therefore,
although the fashion industry is termed a late adopter of PLM technologies, such cloud-PLM 535
solutions now provide organisations with the opportunity to digitally reconfigure business
processes in order to streamline data flow and enhance communication, collaboration and
decision making throughout the extended enterprise. Service as a software (SaaS) PLM
systems and cloud-based service models have the potential to speed up PLM adoption with
modular license options also making it more viable for small and medium enterprises (SME)
(Silventoinen et al., 2011).

1.2 PLM implementation

Implementation of PLM is frequently linked to aspirations for organizational change. In
practice, some companies struggle with implementing PLM (Batenburg et al., 2006;
Silventoinen et al., 2011) due to inadequately defined business processes and the magnitude of
the desired transformation. The holistic mapping and review of an organisation’s processes
means PLM has a long adoption cycle (Schuh et al., 2008). However, PLM implementation also
requires a fundamental rethink of business processes, beyond defining roles and
computerising existing processes, to leverage the power of technology to meet the
challenges and opportunities in the sector (Schuh et al., 2008). The true benefits of PLM
systems rely on both users and system developers having a clear understanding of PLM in
terms of definition, components, functionalities, scope and its relative positioning within the
organisation (Ameri and Dutta, 2005) in order to resource the implementation appropriately.
The IDC Retail Insights’ whitepaper assessed the sector to be mid maturity (Hand, 2014)
indicating that PLM is increasingly important for organisations irrespective of the limited
industry practitioner understanding of PLM (Easters, 2012b), with the low-level
understanding having potential consequences for implementation if the scale and
complexity is not well understood within the business. Consequently, there is an increased
urgency to expand the understanding of PLM as a strategic concept, rather than a system,
with a pivotal role in the digital transformation of the industry.
The implementation of the PLM vision can be made more approachable through the use of
capability maturity models (Silventoinen et al., 2011) to help establish a common vision and
set priorities for process improvement initiatives within organisations (Swarr, 2011).
Maturity modelling can be used to overhaul practices and establish new methods and tools
(Kiritsis, 2011) that align with an organisation’s existing process maturity and
transformational ambitions. In this way, the means by which PLM can help to build
capabilities, drive operational excellence and innovation can be appreciated (Batenburg et al.,
2006). “Roadmaps” for gradual implementation of PLM by maturity level can be determined
(Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017) to address long term business needs and ambitions.

1.3 PLM’s future role

PLM is at an interesting phase with the PLM acronym playing a “holistic” role (Stark, 2011),
acting as a hub connecting intangible asset information (i.e. virtual products of design and
analysis activities) to physical assets information managed across enterprise systems such as
ERP and CRM (Swink, 2006). The increased scope and trajectory of PLM is indicated in the
collaboratively derived, comprehensive definition of PLM by Corallo et al. (2013, p. 6):
JFMM . . .a strategic business approach that supports all the phases of product lifecycle, from concept to
disposal, providing a unique and timed product data source. Integrating people, processes, and
24,4 technologies and assuring information consistency, traceability, and long-term archiving, PLM
enables organizations to collaborate within and across the extended enterprise.
PLM is currently in the process of evolution, away from a monolithic on-premise installation
to hosted (cloud) systems with an open additive approach to system architecture enabling
increased connectivity with technologies from multiple providers. Key enabling Web 2.0
536 technologies are increasingly provided in PLM solutions affording real-time collaboration for
globally distributed teams. The use of Web 2.0 tools within companies is termed Enterprise
2.0 (McAfee, 2006) and therefore the moniker “PLM 2.0” has emerged to differentiate
connected PLM from traditional PLM 1.0. Potentially, connected PLM provides a holistic
approach for the digital transformation of the organization (CIMdata, 2015) where new
processes and practices will yield a more collaborative effort between design, manufacturing,
the supply chain and the customer as illustrated in Figure 2.
The following research questions guide this study:
RQ1. How does contemporary academic research in the fashion and textiles sector
conceptualize and conceive PLM and what are the key themes that have emerged
within academic studies of PLM in the fashion and textiles sector?
RQ2. What are the implications of this research for practitioners?
RQ3. What are the future areas of research required to assist the sector when
implementing PLM to achieve its transformational potential?
This paper consists of five further sections: - section 2 explains and justifies the research
method adopted in the study, section 3 presents the descriptive analysis, section 4 reports on
the findings of the thematic analysis, the subsequent discussion in section 5 presents three
emerging themes in respect to the sector’s ability to realise the full potential of PLM and to
indicate where further research is needed and section 6 concludes the study.

ROLE OF PLM IN DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION INVEST TO ENHANCE

ALIGNMENT OF
IT & BUSINESS
DIGITAL
FUNCTIONS
CAPABILITIES

ROLE DIGITAL
BASED ASSET
APPS MARKETING PRIORITISE
ONGOING
1) Enablement: DIGITALISATION
PLAN FOR
A strong PLM core is an enabling platform PRODUCT APPLICATION
INTEGRATION OF
WITH PLM VALUE
for change END OF LIFE SUPPORT ERP ANALYTICS CHAIN
PERSONALISED
DASHBOARD

PEOPLE PRODUCT
2) Differentiation: DATA SYSTEM
Application of emerging digital technologies MOBILE UPGRADE
WORKING 3D
improves decision making and enables E-LEARNING VISUAL ADVANCED
OPTIMISE PROCESS DESIGN MANAGEMENT
learning ORGANISATIONAL
Figure 2. FUNCTIONS REPORTING
VENDOR MATERIAL SYSTEM
The PLM 2.0 PORTAL AGGREGATION
landscape: enablement, PRODUCTION
PROCESS
OPTIMISATION
differentiation and 3) Transformation: TRACKING
RETHINK
PLM as central to any digital transformation SUPPLIER
transformation (Conlon APPRAISAL
FACTORY
COMPLIANCE
PRODUCT
initiative through a seamless flow of data DEVELOPMENT
and PRACTICES
Narayanaswamy,
SUSTAINABILITY
2017)
2. Methodology Product
A systematic literature review of product lifecycle management (PLM) in the fashion and lifecycle
textiles sector (2000–2016) was undertaken to address these research questions and applies
the three sets of features of the Corallo et al. (2013) definition of PLM as an analytical
management
framework (Table 1). Mindful of the ongoing evolution of PLM, Corallo et al. (2013) make it
clear that they do not perceive this definition to be static and this pre-empts the discussion on
the future research direction discussion in section five.
In the review process, the principles of the systematic review as recommended by Jesson 537
et al. (2011) have been adopted, namely:

Set of features Key dimensions Description

Managerial Integrated Approach It means the act of dealing with PLM considering its
different related aspects (e.g., information, technology, and
strategic points of view)
Business strategy It is how an organisation takes decisions and manages
resources to gain and maintain a competitive advantage
over a period of time
Creating value It is the primary goal of every business; it means
performing activities that increase the value of an
organisation’s goods or services, generating wealth for its
shareholders, and satisfying customers’ expectations
Design, production, and They refer to the different stages of the entire product
maintenance phases lifecycle from its conception, through design and
manufacture, to service and disposal
Technological Product information It means a central hub storing different data distributed
backbone among heterogeneous systems; it creates a single view of
product information can be leveraged across the whole
organisation and its network
IT tools (CAX, PDM, etc.) They encompass a broad range of software and IT
systems used in all the aspects of product lifecycle (design,
analysis, manufacturing, product planning, product
testing, collaboration, etc.)
Secondary information It is all the information indirectly connected to the specific
product knowledge (e.g., vendor application notes,
catalogues, customer feedbacks, marketing plans,
archived project schedules, etc.)
Traceability It means the ability to chronologically interrelate product
lifecycle information and to track all accesses and changes
to data
Long-term archiving It refers to the organisational need for long-term retention
of older data; it helps an enterprise to maintain information
integrity and demonstrate regulatory compliance and
transparency
Collaborative Integrating people and It means combining a unique approach different aspects
features process, data related to PLM (business processes, human resources,
data, etc.) so they work together to better product lifecycle
management Table 1.
Sharing It means using or enjoying data and information jointly The set of features,
with others in order to enable knowledge integration dimensions and
during collaborations in the product lifecycle descriptions for the
Within and across the It means a borderless organisation whose processes are proposed definition of
extended enterprise transformed and integrated with the ones of its partners, PLM (From Corallo
based on cooperative collaborative relations et al., 2013)
JFMM Search string combinations Databases
24,4
“Product life-cycle management (PLM)” AND “fashion industry” ESBSO, Emerald, ProQuest, Science direct,
“Product life-cycle management (PLM)” AND apparel OR Springer
garment OR clothing
“Product life-cycle management (PLM)” AND “textile industry”
“Product life-cycle management (PLM)” AND retail
538 “Product lifecycle management (PLM)” AND “fashion industry”
“Product lifecycle management (PLM)” AND apparel OR
garment OR clothing
Table 2. “Product lifecycle management (PLM)” AND “textile industry”
Search strings “Product lifecycle management (PLM)” AND retail

(1) Mapping the field through a scoping review using Google Scholar.
(2) Comprehensive search using search strings and bibliographic databases (Table 2).
(3) Quality assessment.
(4) Synthesis.
(5) Write up.
The paper’s aim was to determine the current status of research in product lifecycle
management in the fashion and textiles sector. The inclusion criteria were: publications in the
period 2000–2018 in peer-reviewed scholarly journals written in English. This resulted in an
initial list of 66 publications. Conference proceedings were then excluded. Papers were also
excluded where there was no explicit reference to PLM in the main body, i.e. only being in the
reference list. The abstracts and main bodies were reviewed. Where research findings are
disseminated in more than one journal, i.e. through journals that target different
manufacturing sectors such as fashion and engineering, the journal paper that related to
the industry was selected. This procedure yielded a final selection of 27 articles where only 11
of the papers have the term PLM in the title. The resulting descriptive analysis is reported in
section three. The thematic analysis phase used Nvivo qualitative data analysis software.
The first stage involved a word frequency query to establish the most frequently used words
in the research material. These were consistent with the features of the definition and
proposed framework of Corallo et al. (2013) which was then used to develop nodes (bins)
allowing a thematic review of results, sub-patterns and subcategories. An author comparison
matrix coding query was used to generate a sense of where authors were gravitating and also
to identify highs and lows in emphasis. Papers are categorized by their primary
understanding of PLM with the resulting thematic analysis reported in Tables 3–5 in
section four. These categories are not distinct and comments from authors are included in the
analysis where appropriate. The tables in section four collectively provide a classification list
for the papers in the fashion and textiles sector, clarifying what is known about PLM in the
sector and to which areas the body of knowledge is limited for industry practioners and
researchers to access. References for this paper are given in two parts in order to distinguish
between the papers contained in the literature review from those references not contained in
the review. In order to make the classification of papers transparent, the categorisation
according to research methodology and dimension is provided at the end of the references
given. As an example, [case, managerial] summarises that the paper takes a predominantly
managerial perspective of PLM and offers a case study or case example.
First
Product
author Paper name Year Employed methodology Field lifecycle
management
Bandinelli New product development in the 2013 Multiple case studies NPD
fashion industry: An empirical
investigation of Italian firms
d’Amico Product Lifecycle Management as a 2013 Causal diagram System dynamics
Tool to Create Value in the Fashion generated from 539
System comparison of two
firms
David What does PLMS (product life-cycle 2016 Comparative case study Ontological
management systems) manage: Data or systems
documents? Complementarity and
contingency for SMEs
d’Avolio Improving new product development in 2015 Literature review and NPD
the fashion industry through product survey
lifecycle management: a descriptive
analysis
Fielding Product lifecycle management in 2014 Hosted research PLM in Higher
design and engineering education: symposium Education
International perspectives
Gandhi Product Lifecycle Management 2012 n/a General
Importance and Approach
Gmelin Determinants of a sustainable new 2014 Framework Sustainable NPD
product development development
Kiritsis Closed-loop PLM for intelligent 2011 Development of Closed-loop PLM
products in the era of the internet of ontology model and
things case study
Schuh et Process-oriented framework to support 2008 Framework PLM
al., PLM implementation development implementation
Vezzetti New product development (NPD) of 2017 QFD methodology PLM
“family business” dealing in the luxury implementation
industry: evaluating maturity stage for Table 3.
implementing a PLM solution Papers classified as
Wixom Maximizing Value from Business 2013 Single case study Business regarding PLM from a
Analytics analytics managerial perspective

3. Findings: descriptive analysis

3.1 General overview of publications
The analysis results of the review show that the 27 research articles come from twelve
countries based on the country affiliation of the author of an article. The method of calculation
is consistent with the Scopus database calculation. As shown in Figure 3, countries in Europe
contributed the most research papers, followed by Canada and the United States.
Figure 4 shows the distribution of the research articles across the study period between
2000 and 2018. It becomes evident that research focusing on PLM in the fashion industry
accelerated after 2007 suggesting that this is a young field of research.
The analysis shows that the research articles come from 18 journals. The largest sources
are: International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education (4 articles)
International Journal of Engineering Business Management (2 articles) and Computers in
industry (2 articles).
JFMM First Employed
24,4 author Paper name Year methodology Field

Dwivedi Role of Computer and Automation in 2013 Review Textile

Design and Manufacturing for manufacture
Mechanical and Textile Industries:
CAD/CAM
540 Easters Global communication Part 1: The use 2012 Focus group, semi- Use of CAD
of apparel CAD technology structured interview
Easters Global communication Part 2: The use 2012 Focus group, semi- Use of PDM
of apparel product data management structured interview
technology
Istook Rapid prototyping in the textile and 2000 Review New technology
apparel industry: a pilot project implementation
Kaur Computer-aided product life 2011 Review PLM in Fashion
management (PLM): An and Textiles
indispensable tool for fashion and
apparel industry
Lemieux A new analysis framework for agility 2012 Literature review and Agility in
in the fashion industry proposal of analysis manufacturing
framework
McCormick Fashion retailing – past, present and 2014 Review Fashion retailing
future technologies
Mourtzis Challenges and future perspectives 2016 Model generation Manufacturing
for the life-cycle of manufacturing systems
networks in the mass customisation
era
Pinquie An illustrated glossary of ambiguous 2015 Glossary development PLM in discrete
PLM terms used in discrete manufacturing
manufacturing
Romeo Creative and technical design skills: 2013 Survey Apparel design
are college apparel curriculums skills
Table 4. meeting industry needs?
Papers classified as Wamba Exploring the impact of RFID 2008 Case Study Fashion retailing
regarding PLM from a technology and the EPC network on technologies
technological mobile B2B eCommerce: A case study
perspective in the retail industry

Employed
First author Paper name Year methodology Field

Campaniaris The development of an apparel industry 2015 Case studies and Business model
business model for Canada surveys development
Moch The dimension of innovation in SME 2011 Case Study SMAC in SME
networks–a case study on Cloud
Computing and Web 2.0 technologies in a
textile manufacturing network
Segonds Early stages of power design: how to 2015 Case Study PLM
define collaborative needs for PLM and implementation
Table 5. fashion
Papers classified as Sen The US fashion industry: A supply chain 2007 Review plus Fashion supply
regarding PLM from a review interviews chain operations
collaborative Kuo Data sharing: a collaborative model for a 2017 Modelling Fashion supply
perspective green / clothing supply chain chain operations
 6 Product
5
5 5 lifecycle
4 4 4 4
management
4

3
2 541
2
1 1 1 1 1 1
1

0 Figure 3.
Overview of the
ce UK nd nd an
y
da

ce
ly

ey
il
an

research articles by
an di
US

az
Ita

la rla iw

ee
na

rk
In
Fr
rm

Ire Ta
Br
e

Tu
Gr
Ca

itz country
Ge

Sw

5
Number of papers

0
04 06 07 08 09 10 12 14 15 17
11
00

02
03

18
13

16
01

05

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
20

20
20

20
20
20

20

20
20

Figure 4.
Date of publication Total number of papers
by date of publication
Collaborative Managerial Technological

3.2 Research approach

Six approaches to research were differentiated: (1) theoretical and conceptual papers; (2) case
study; (3) qualitative survey; (4) modelling paper; (5) qualitative interview (including expert
discussion) and (6) reviews. The papers are qualitative, with the three survey method papers
eliciting qualitative responses. Two methodologies were dominant in the 27 papers: case
study and review (eight each); a framework or model was used or developed in only three of
these case studies. The five conceptual papers develop or make use of a theoretical framework
or model. The remaining three papers make use of interviews or expert discussion. Relevant
literature frames the majority of the studies rather than using related theories such as
knowledge management theories, system theory, communities of practice, activity theory
and resource-based theory to develop or test theory. Although it could be argued that the
research field is immature, theory development is critical for the development of a discipline
by generating explanation associated to organisational performance.

3.3 General overview of research field

The first paper (Istook, 2000) describes the sector as keen to shift to quick response strategies
through emerging technologies and conducts an ambitious project to describe and then
explore available technologies and concludes with the need for systems to work together
seamlessly, highlighting the significance of seamless system integration now termed
JFMM interoperability. It is conceivable that it is these difficulties that explain the gap between this
24,4 optimistic initial paper and the next publications. The second paper is seven years later,
where Şen (2007) documents operational practices in the supply chain of US apparel retail
indicating that PLM adoption is more advanced in the retail sector of this geographical
region. Within this review, PLM is described as an emerging application enabling supply
chain collaboration within new product development. Supply chains are highlighted as a
critical success factor (Bandinelli et al., 2013) with PLM described as an indispensable tool in
542 fashion supply chains (Kaur and Sharma, 2011). Dwivedi and Dwivedi (2013) call for Indian
manufacturing to place PLM and ERP systems at their core in order to optimise processes
and be more competitive in the global market. Gandhi (2012) illustrates the point that PLM
approaches are not restricted to engineering through reference to the emerging applications
of PLM in the retail sector. Many authors (d’Avolio et al., 2015; Campaniaris et al., 2015;
Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017) describe the fashion and textiles sector as a late
adopter of PLM in comparison to other manufacturing industries where PLM is well known
and well-established. The need for more widespread information within the apparel sector is
revealed by Easters (2012b) who suggests the extensive terminologies or acronyms are
becoming “lost in translation” with PDM being poorly understood and PLM simply viewed as
the renaming of PDM. The low level of adoption is rationalized as a cautious approach
(Easters, 2012b) stating that many organisations are waiting to see the results of adoption
from the early pioneers (d’Avolio et al., 2015). Another explanation may be due to the lack of
formal procedures in new product development as documented by Bandinelli et al. (2013)
which dramatically illustrates the immaturity of operational practice and lack of process
standardisation in some organisations. Where PLM is implemented it appears that
organisations are now focusing on new product development (d’Avolio et al., 2015;
Bandinelli et al., 2013; Segonds et al., 2015 and Vezzetti et al., 2017). Whereas, a holistic,
ambitious, collaborative strategic vision for the apparel sector in Canada is presented by
Campaniaris et al. (2015). Wixom et al. (2013) show how connecting business silos to users can
support optimal decision making. Kuo et al. (2014) present a model for textile manufacturers
to share environmental information with their global customers to lower the knowledge
transaction cost and thereby develop textile products that are environmentally compliant
more efficiently. Practical assistance to organizations starting the strategic digitalisation
transformation journey in the sector offered by reference models to effectively deploy PLM
(Schuh et al., 2008) and to evaluate PLM-readiness (Vezzetti et al., 2017).

4. Findings: thematic analysis

The articles were first differentiated into the three features of the Corallo et al. (2013)
definition (Table 1): managerial, technological and collaborative. In this study, an equal
number of the articles (11) take a managerial or technological perspective with only five
taking a collaborative perspective, whereas in engineering there is a much greater emphasis
on technical papers with management being less generally represented (David and Rowe,
2015). This can be explained to be consistent with fashion and textiles being a late adopter
and therefore having less involvement in the technical development of PLM systems and
more in their industrial implementation and with the potential for collaborative technologies
only just emerging.

4.1 The managerial perspective

For the 11 papers classified as regarding PLM from a managerial perspective (Table 3), the
findings of the papers are:
4.1.1 Integrated approach. The integrated approach means “the act of dealing with PLM
considering its differential aspects (e.g. information, technology, and strategic point of view”
(Corolla et al., 2013). The managerial perspective acknowledges the extended role and Product
strategic contribution of PLM as an enabling technology rather than an IT tool (Bandinelli lifecycle
et al., 2013; D’Amico et al., 2013; d’Avolio et al., 2015; Fielding et al., 2014; Schuh et al., 2008;
Vezzetti et al., 2017; Wixom et al., 2013) and that it provides a methodology for organizational
management
wide change (Bandinelli et al., 2013; d’Avolio et al., 2015; Fielding et al., 2014; Schuh et al., 2008;
Vezzetti et al., 2017).
4.1.2 Business strategy. A successful PLM implementation must start with the
organizational capability that is intended coupled with an evaluation of how the proposed 543
PLM investment can support the company’s strategy and resolve business problems whilst
acknowledging the specific conditions and constraints of the organisation (Schuh et al., 2008;
Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017). The adopted solution in smaller medium-size
enterprises (SMEs) may represent a compromise given limited resources (David et al., 2016). A
framework of business process reference models to support the effective deployment of PLM
is presented by Schuh et al., (2008). An illustrated overview of the application of a maturity
model to assess PLM readiness and demonstrating how companies can attain competitive
advantage by use of a roadmap in a PLM implementation is provided by Vezzetti et al. (2017).
The following section illustrates how the PLM strategy can be operationalised.
4.1.3 Creating value. For businesses working in increasingly global and competitive
environments, PLM can enable retailers to meet market demands in increasingly consumer
focused markets (McCormick et al., 2014). PLM is able to deliver organizational benefits
relating to cost reduction, quality improvement, and time-to-market (Schuh et al., 2008;
d’Avolio et al., 2015 and Vezzetti et al., 2017). d’Avolio et al. (2015) identify three macro
processes that are supported by PLM as: new product development, manufacturing and
retailing as well as workflow and business process management. They provide a
classification of the benefits achievable through PLM implementation summarized into
four main headings of benefits in new product development, benefits in document
management, benefits in manufacturing and cross functional benefits. These benefits are
achieved through formalising standard procedures (Bandinelli et al., 2013; Wixom et al., 2013;
Schuh et al., 2008); accurate and consistent communication both internally (Segonds et al.,
2015; McCormick et al., 2014) and externally (D’Amico et al., 2013; Bandinelli et al., 2013;
Lemieux et al., 2012; Campaniaris et al., 2015) which helps to reduce duplication and errors
and improve quality (Bandinelli et al., 2013; McCormick et al., 2014); provide accurate analysis
for decision-making (Wixom et al., 2013) and increase an organisation’s ability for
customising (Schuh et al., 2008).
4.1.4 Design, production, and maintenance phases. With increasing product complexity,
product data needs to be shared across the entire lifecycle (Gmelin and Seuring, 2014)
resulting in the extension of the concept of product lifecycle beyond a marketing-focussed
understanding restricted to product development, market introduction, maturity and decline
(Kaur et al., 2011). The expanded concept of the entire product lifecycle has three defined
phases (Kiritsis et al., 2008; Pinquie et al., 2015): conception, design and manufacture
(beginning of life: BOL), through distribution and use (middle of life: MOL), to retirement for
recycling or disposal (end of life: EOL). PLM’s direction of travel is to a fuller capability
covering the entire lifecycle (Schuh et al., 2008) with the aim of establishing a seamless flow of
information to manage product related information more efficiently (Kirirtis et al., 2008).
However, in the fashion and textiles sector, research has very much focused in the BOL-stage
and particularly in new product development (Bandinelli et al., 2013; d’Avolio et al., 2015;
Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017) with further support in this area called for (d’Avolio
et al., 2015) with further potential benefits achievable if the conception stage was formally
defined (Bandinelli et al., 2013) and standardised. The strategic role of suppliers and their
integration is highlighted (Bandinelli et al., 2013; Dwivedi and Dwivedi, 2013; Kaur and
Sharma, 2011, McCormick et al., 2014; Segonds et al., 2015; Şen, 2008). Additionally, more
JFMM attention to sustainability in new product development is needed with PLM able to provide
24,4 support (Gmelin and Seuring, 2014) however it is important to note that further software
developments are needed to support such initiatives (Harrop in McCormick et al., 2014;
Gmelin and Seuring, 2014). Although the launch of a new product does not mark the end of the
product’s lifecycle, sales information is the last formal feedback of data (Kiritsis, 2011),
highlighting that the flow of data currently breaks down after delivery to the customer at the
commencement of the MOL-stage. The emerging desire of businesses to close the information
544 loop and trace the product through its entire lifecycle introduces the concept of closed-loop
PLM (Kiritsis, 2011) that could be facilitated and implemented via the deployment of enabling
Web 2.0 technologies (Moch et al., 2011) including radio frequency identification (RFID)
technology (Wamba et al., 2008) and the internet of things (IoT) (Kiritsis, 2011).

4.2 The technological perspective

Eleven of the 25 papers were classified as viewing PLM from a technological perspective (see
Table 4)
4.2.1 Product information backbone. The central hub of universally accessible product
data is a key benefit of PLM that is frequently described as the “single version of the truth”
(McCormick et al., 2014, p. 261) although PLM is not necessarily a physically centralised
repository of knowledge, but “an interconnected network of dispersed knowledge
repositories” (d’Avolio et al., 2015, p. 111). This central hub is realised through the journey
of ongoing integration of PLM and other enterprise technologies (David and Rowe, 2016;
Istook, 2000; Moch et al., 2011; Mourtzis, 2016) recognising that no system does everything
well. This shared repository for data across the design, merchandising and sampling stages
realises benefits that can minimize errors arising from working with out of date information
due to time-lags (Lemieux et al., 2012; Mourtzis, 2016; Romeo and Lee, 2013). Pinquie et al.
(2015) identify that integration relies on the harmonisation of domain-specific glossaries
through the standardisation of PLM vocabulary and they contribute an illustrated glossary
of ambiguous terms used in manufacturing. Human IT performance and organisational
culture can limit an organisation’s ability to fully leverage the technological potential due to
misunderstanding and misinterpretation of technology capability and resistance in adoption
(Easters, 2012a, b), discussed further in section 4.3.3.
4.2.2 IT tools. PLM has been described as the “connective tissue” (d’Avolio et al., 2015,
p. 111) that allows the connection of design software to production and supply chain
management software (Romeo and Lee, 2013; Dwivedi and Dwivedi, 2013), illustrating the
dispersed and collaborative nature of apparel supply chains (D’Amico et al., 2013; Kaur and
Sharma, 2011). A comprehensive list of the software tools under the PLM umbrella
supporting the value chain of product development is provided by d’Avolio et al. (2015), with
the use of digital technologies improving fashion-retail processes (McCormick et al., 2014). An
overview of current PLM solutions applicable to the industry is contributed by Segonds et al.
(2015) to highlight that not all design tools, for example those of textile design, are available in
generic systems. an increasingly inclusive vision for digital asset management from concept
to consumer is portrayed by Romeo and Lee (2013). Further, the potential for radio-frequency
identification (RFID) technologies to capture data through the supply chain is illustrated by
Wamba et al. (2008) who also stipulate that this would require integration in a wider strategy.
Moch et al. (2011) also report positively on unfolding opportunities for cloud computing and
Web 2.0 technology implementations for the SME network. Evidently, further openness
across multiple disciplines to connect the right technologies and processes is a priority for
future improvements.
4.2.3 Secondary information. Segonds et al., (2015) and Vezzetti et al. (2017) highlight that
the secondary information used and retained will be individual to the business and its
forward strategy and warn against assumptions of seeing PLM as a turnkey solution and
recommend a thorough user need analysis as part of PLM implementation. Further, Product
Bandinelli et al. (2013) explain the importance of capturing and codifying lessons learnt from lifecycle
archived projects.
4.2.4 Traceability. The traceability dimension is defined by Corallo et al. (2013) as “relating
management
to workflow, describing the capability to track access of, and changes to, product data”.
However, in supply chain management, the common term “tracking and tracing” shows the
close association of these two elements with track generally relating to the information of the
present status of a product and trace to retaining a product’s lifecycle history (Shamsuzzoha 545
and Helo, 2011). Regardless of naming protocols, the cross-functional benefits of PLM’s
workflow and business process management capability are reported by d’Avolio et al. (2015)
to include improved coordination and management capability, improved cross-functional
collaboration and autonomy. The track and trace capabilities of RFID technologies support
this capability further (Kiritsis, 2008; Wamba et al., 2008; Campaniaris et al., 2015). With each
design collection having thousands of interrelated references, Segonds et al. (2015) illustrate
the need within organizations to maintain a clear vision of the configuration state of products
and tracking of their evolution over time. Configuration management is therefore particularly
crucial in the apparel industry.
4.2.5 Long-term archiving. The dimension of long-term archiving definition provided by
Corallo et al. (2013) is “the need for long-term retention of older data to demonstrate regulatory
compliance and transparency” which more closely aligns with the industry use of the term
traceability. Emerging technologies are enabling end-to-end visibility (Wamba et al., 2008)
with Kiritsis (2008) introducing the concept of “duration of time” for improving today’s PLM
systems in the domains of data visibility, data integration and system interoperability. With
product data on sustainability attributes gaining higher importance as regulations tighten
(Gmelin and Seuring, 2014), it seems likely that one of the future elaborations of the definition
will be in this area of product traceability, detailing how the capability to trace the provenance
data of individual products is being used positively in the era of “radical transparency”
(Laszlo and Zhexembayeva, 2011).

4.3 The collaborative perspective

Although only five of the papers frame PLM from a collaborative perspective, as stated
previously, these categories are not exclusive and many papers also have relevant
contributions in this section.
4.3.1 Integrating. Authors (Fielding et al., 2014; Gmelin and Seuring, 2014; McCormick
et al., 2014) describe the triumvirate of people, process and product data often shortened to
“the 3Ps”. This 3Ps perspective seeks to eliminate silos between functions and for people to
increasingly work cross-functionally. It is the collaborative features of PLM that characterise
the conceptual shift in the role of PLM from its PDM origins. Where employees understand
PLM only as a rebadging of PDM (Easters, 2012a), there is a failure to understand the
essential contribution of collaboration to the success of PLM. Equally issues in PLM
implementation may correspond with a failure to sufficiently incorporate the user perspective
(Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017).
4.3.2 Sharing. When PLM is considered as a strategic approach, the social and cultural
aspects are regarded as important as the technological aspects which enables a “culture
generating solution” (d’Avolio et al., 2015, p. 111) which can give the company unique
competitive advantage through its institutionalisation (Ameri and Dutta, 2005) . The PLM
approach can be used by managers to overhaul legacy practices and establish new methods
and tools (Kiritsis, 2011), including collaborative efforts across departments and companies
to yield more solutions in sustainable new product development (Gmelin and Seuring, 2014).
New processes can evolve when practices are reviewed, negotiated, codified and standardised
(Fielding et al., 2014) as illustrated by Bandinelli et al. (2013) where design processes are
JFMM strongly collaborative but not formally defined and where PLM acts as a collaborative tool to
24,4 aiding communication. Maturity modelling can be used to negotiate and configure new
processes (Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017) to ensure data can flow and provide
feedback throughout the lifecycle of the extended enterprise.
4.3.3 Extended enterprise. How PLM applications could enable users to operate across the
extended enterprise, enabling supply chain partners to collaborate on product design was first
to described by Şen (2007). The potential of PLM to enable suppliers to service their retail buyers
546 more effectively is reiterated by McCormick et al. (2014) and Kuo et al. (2014). This
interdependence of businesses in the sector, described through the notion of the extended
enterprise, is evident in the model “apparel 2.0” of the Canadian apparel industry (Campaniaris
et al., 2015) who refer to the concept of “the Version 2.0 era” (Nayar, 2009) in order to emphasise
the growing need for companies to use Enterprise 2.0 tools (McAffee, 2006) to share long-term
vision, risk and rewards. Within this model PLM is identified as an important technology,
particularly at the beginning of the value chain. However, the ongoing expansion of the role of
PLM in digital asset management (Romeo and Lee, 2013), indicates that PLM could perform an
even wider supporting role through developing understandings of the potential of these
emerging technologies (Fielding et al., 2014). In light of the fact that much organisational
knowledge is tacit (Alavi and Leider, 2001), a greater transparency in processes to facilitate
knowledge visibility is required. Through the review of business processes and workflow, PLM
can help make tacit processes more apparent, opening up the black box of existing practices to
critique and improvement particularly by the next generation if equipped with skills in
computer-aided design, 3D garment design, 3D body scanning, and product lifecycle
management systems (Romeo and Lee, 2013). Easters (2012a) recognises that a younger
generation tends to have a far more intuitive understanding of IT capabilities and operating
constraints. Higher education has an opportunity to support change and development in the
sector (Campaniaris et al., 2015; Fielding et al., 2014; Romeo and Lee, 2013) by developing a
strategic understanding and vision of PLM from an organisational perspective, by emphasising
the importance of collaboration and the role of design in the extended product lifecycle and not
focussing solely on teaching the technology (Fielding et al., 2014) thereby contributing to the
realisation the transformational potential of PLM.

5. Discussion
The major contribution of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the 27
peer-reviewed journal publications on PLM in the fashion and textiles sector. The review
revealed that in the sector, PLM is at the junction of PLM 1.0 becoming more main-stream and
the transformational potential of connected PLM 2.0 becoming more apparent. Concurrently,
within organisations there has been a shift to a more market-oriented approach where
customer needs dominate (Goworek et al., 2016). In this new, increasingly digital era,
businesses must develop their own “next practices” where SMAC (social, mobile, big data/
analytics, and the cloud) technologies provide opportunities for doing business differently.
Achieving this vision of PLM requires businesses to introduce a strategic initiative for
business transformation that coordinates the structural, cross-functional and long-term
cooperation between actors in and outside the firm. Three themes need to be emphasised in
respect to the sector’s ability to realise the full potential of PLM and to indicate where further
research is needed.

5.1 Lack of holistic knowledge

PLM seems to offer a mechanism to drive cultural change and organisational excellence if
understood as a management approach to address the challenges of the industry. PLM has
the potential to enable companies to become more innovative in their approach to challenges, Product
such as product customisation, traceability, growing competition, short product development lifecycle
and delivery times, localisation, tight regulations, and legislation (Saaksvuori and Immonen,
2008; Stark, 2011). The findings of this paper are consistent with Saaksvuori’s account (2011)
management
of limited level of understanding of PLM at both user level and C-level asserting that “few
companies have a holistic understanding of PLM as a way to operate in new product
development and product portfolio management”. This lack of vision means that PLM
remains very much IT driven with significant consequences for the scope of planned 547
investments and their implementation and integration into organisations.

5.2 The potential of PLM 2.0 to overhaul out-dated processes

The case studies (Bandenelli et al., 2013; Segonds et al., 2015; Vezzetti et al., 2017) illustrate the
largely intuitive and inadequate processes in many organisations as well as the complexities
of product development and supply chain management in an industry that is characterised
by short life cycles, high volatility, low predictability and the high impulse behaviour of
customers (Lemieux et al., 2012). Concurrently, the shift in the role of the consumer from
passive consumer to networked creators (Hagel and Brown, 2005) is bringing about a radical
overhaul of processes from push models of supply (product centric) to pull models of
consumption (customer centric). New types of suppliers in digital manufacture including
additive manufacturing, rapid prototyping and 3D printing, have the potential to
revolutionize the way in which products are produced providing highly customized and
personalized products to the customer (Arribas and Alfara, 2018; Bogers et al., 2016).
Products have changed their meaning composition with the product definition extended from
the traditional definitions of product quality and cost to be considered as “a complex system,
composed of tangible core (the physical product), and a series of intangible assets like
services provided to customers” (Terzi et al., 2010). Processes must now evolve rapidly to
support organizations as they shift into this era of product as a service (Shilovitsky, 2016).
These opportunities challenge companies to reinvent their business models. Crowd sourced
models of apparel product development (Wu et al., 2017) and collaborative consumption (Iran
and Schrader, 2017; Becker-Leifhold and Iran, 2018) are examples of alternative fashion
business models. Creating innovative products relies on improving the processes a company
uses to realise and support new products in the full product lifecycle (CIMdata, 2002) and
PLM is providing the enabling strategic platform to meet these industry challenges. Through
the integration of Web 2.0 technologies, RFID tags and IoT, PLM is currently evolving
towards PLM 2.0 with many further opportunities to be discovered in reaching the next level
of PLM discipline and technology excellence.
As concern for more information on the social and environmental impacts of clothing
increases among consumers (Kang and Kim, 2017; Vehmas et al., 2018) PLM has the potential to
become pivotal in providing consumers with the information on the products they purchase. A
more integrated approach to sustainable design (Bras, 2009) could be supported by PLM
although the integration of sustainability in new product development is at an early stage
(Gmelin et al., 2014). The concept of closed-loop product lifecycle management represents a
mechanism to gather data on a product throughout its life thereby helping to improve the design
of future products and extended product lifecycles though facilitating more effective reuse and
recycling value chains. PLM provides transparency throughout the entire product lifecycle
(Kirirtis et al., 2008) enabling the extension of lifecycle assessment to include social impacts.

5.3 The role of the next generation

The new processes that are evolving in the shift towards the product-service paradigm
influence the industry’s human resource requirements and test its ability to attract and retain
JFMM skilled talent (OC&C Insight, 2016; Suleski and Draper 2014). The weak understanding of
24,4 human and managerial dimensions of PLM systems is a barrier to companies leveraging the
transformational potential of PLM (David and Rowe, 2015). People at the user and
management level within organisations need to help develop software tools that meet
industry-specific needs. The perspective of the next generation from the periphery of practice,
has much to contribute to the development of an industry in transition. Higher education
institutes could help to foster a transformative mind-set harnessing the energy of the younger
548 generation who have a “digital first” attitude to design for the consumer more holistically and
develop new practices accordingly that address end-to-end lifecycle sustainability issues.
The development of a highly qualified workforce acquainted with new technologies and
business models is a key success factor in improving competitiveness and innovation
performance of the textile and clothing sector (Walter, 2016) but currently educational
practice lags contemporary industry practice (Romeo and Lee, 2013; Fielding et al., 2014).
Therefore, a more collaborative and open interface between higher education, industry and
industry bodies is needed to meet the demands of the future industry.

5.4 Proposed future research directions

Despite the significant contribution of PLM to current and future organisational
competitiveness, PLM is an under researched topic in the sector. The themes above
illustrate a number of opportunities for academic and industry collaboration that relate to the
development of PLM within the sector. Given the level of investment and complexity of
integration with legacy practices and systems, there is a continued need for further research
in the area of PLM system implementation ideally including the pre- and post-implementation
phases such that PLM implementation successes and failures are better understood. Further
empirical or case studies to understand the actual practice of PLM within the fashion and
textiles sector is encouraged to provide visibility and insight into the limitations of PLM
alongside reported benefits. Studies reporting on the contribution of PLM to address the
challenges of sustainability, traceability and transparency in the industry and inter-industry
collaborations towards a circular economy are required to share best practice and transform
the industry. As PLM becomes more accessible to small and medium size organisations,
future studies exploring how PLM has supported innovation and new business models in
organisations of all sizes are also needed. In time, additional empirical or case studies
exploring strategies to drive change in the unfolding digital environment would be valuable.
Research supported by knowledge management theories specifically applied to the fashion
and textile sector could yield important insights into the ways PLM aids the integration of
knowledge with work activities and the strategic development of organisational
competencies and processes. Additionally, educational case studies reconceptualising the
fashion business curriculum and approaches to learning with greater collaboration between
industry and academia would be beneficial to the sector.

6. Conclusion
Product lifecycle management is providing fashion and textile organisations with the ability
to achieve operational excellence through the creation of new work practices and business
processes and additionally provides a strategic platform for future change enabling a more
sustainable and consumer centric offer to be created. The shift towards the product service
paradigm provides the additional opportunity to integrate consumers’ views and
transparently share product information thereby shaping retail policy and practice
relating to social and environmental sustainability. However, current knowledge of PLM is
limited with the sector characterised as a late adopter of this strategic tool of digital
transformation. This review provides a classification of what is known about PLM in the
sector and illustrates some of the opportunities that exist in this new era. It is argued there is Product
much potential for organizations of all sizes to consider PLM methodologies to realise benefits lifecycle
and achieve greater flexibility and responsiveness. A more coordinated effort of industry and
academia is required to deliver the transformational potential of PLM.
management
There are a number of limitations to this research. This study employed the databases in
the field of business management for the literature review and includes only peer-reviewed
scholarly journals written in English in the period 2000–2018 using exact terminology;
conference papers, theses, book chapters and grey literature were not included in this review 549
and therefore some pertinent material may have been missed. There is an element of
subjectivity in the classification of the papers; transparency in reporting the process attempts
to mitigate any impact. This paper proposes some research directions, which are not
exhaustive but represent further opportunities for the academic community to work in
collaboration with industry and contribute to the body of scholarly knowledge and address
real-world practices.

References
Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001), “Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:
conceptual foundations and research issues”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 99 No. 34, pp. 107-136.
Ameri, F. and Dutta, D. (2005), “Product lifecycle management: closing the knowledge loops”,
Computer-Aided Design and Applications, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 577-590.
AMR Research Inc (2007), “PLM technology adoption in apparel: turbo-charging investments for fast
fashion”, available at: https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/zh_cn/Images/AMR-%20PLM%
20Technology%20Adoption%20in%20Apparel_tcm78-67676.pdf (accessed 11 December 2017).
AMR Research Inc (2008), “The product lifecycle management market sizing report 2000-2012”,
available at: http://pdfsr.com/pdf/the-product-lifecycle-management-market-sizing-report-2007-
2012 (accessed 11 December 2017).
Arribas, V. and Alfaro, J.A. (2018), “3D technology in fashion: from concept to consumer”, Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 240-251.
Bandinelli, R., Rinaldi, R., Rossi, M. and Terzi, S. (2013), “New product development in the fashion
industry: an empirical investigation of Italian firms”, International Journal of Engineering
Business Management, Vol. 5 No. 31, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.5772/56841.
Batenburg, R., Helms, R.W. and Versendaal, J. (2006), “PLM roadmap: stepwise PLM implementation
based on the concepts of maturity and alignment”, International Journal of Product Lifecycle
Management, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 333-351, doi: 10.1504/ijplm.2006.011053.
Becker-Leifhold, C. and Iran, S. (2018), “Collaborative fashion consumption–drivers, barriers and
future pathways”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal,
Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 189-208.
Bogers, M., Hadar, R. and Bilberg, A. (2016), “Additive manufacturing for consumer-centric business
models: implications for supply chains in consumer goods manufacturing”, Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 102, pp. 225-239, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.024.
Bras, B. (2009), “Sustainability and product life cycle management issues and challenges”,
International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, Vol. 4 Nos 1-2, pp. 23-48.
Campaniaris, C., Murray, R., Hayes, S. and Jeffrey, M. (2015), “The development of an apparel industry
business model for Canada”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 328-342, doi: 10.1108/jfmm-07-2014-0050.
Cantamessa, M., Montagna, F. and Neirotti, P. (2012), “Understanding the organizational impact of
PLM systems: evidence from an aerospace company”, International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 191-215, doi: 10.1108/01443571211208623.
JFMM Christopher, M., Lowson, R. and Peck, H. (2004), “Creating agile supply chains in the fashion
industry”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 8,
24,4 pp. 367-376.
CIMdata (2002), “Product lifecycle management empowering the future of business”, A CIMdata
Report.
CIMdata (2015), “A CIMdata dossier: PLM platformization”, available at: https://www.cimdata.com/en/
resources/a-cimdata-dossier-plm-platformization (accessed 11 December 2017).
550
Conlon, J. and Narayanaswamy, S. (2017), “A vision for the future using Product Lifecycle Management
(PLM) as a platform for operational excellence and business transformation”, in The Circular
Economy from a Fashion and Textiles Perspective, 15th June 2017, University of Huddersfield,
available at: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/32272/ (accessed 11 December 2017).
Corallo, A., Latino, M.E., Lazoi, M., Lettera, S., Marra, M. and Verardi, S. (2013), “Defining product
lifecycle management: a journey across features, definitions, and concepts”, ISRN Industrial
Engineering, No. 170812, pp. 1-10.
D’Amico, S., Giustiniano, L., Nenni, M.E. and Pirolo, L. (2013), “Product lifecycle management as a tool
to create value in the fashion system”, International Journal of Engineering Business
Management, Vol. 5 No. 33, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.5772/56856.
David, M. and Rowe, F. (2015), “Le management des systemes PLM (product lifecycle management):
un agenda de recherche”, Journal of Decision Systems, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 273-297.
David, M. and Rowe, F. (2016), “What does PLMS (product lifecycle management systems) manage:
data or documents? Complementarity and contingency for SMEs”, Computers in Industry,
Vol. 75, pp. 140-150, doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2015.05.005.
d’Avolio, E., Bandinelli, R. and Rinaldi, R. (2015), “Improving new product development in the fashion
industry through product lifecycle management: a descriptive analysis”, International Journal
of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 108-121, doi: 10.1080/17543266.
2015.1005697.
Dwivedi, A. and Dwivedi, A. (2013), “Role of computer and automation in design and manufacturing
for mechanical and textile industries: CAD/CAM”, International Journal of Innovative
Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE), Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 174-181.
Easters, D.J. (2012a), “Global communication Part 1: the use of apparel CAD technology”, International
Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 45-54, doi: 10.1080/
17543266.2011.607851.
Easters, D.J. (2012b), “Global communication Part 2: the use of apparel product data management
technology”, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 135-143, doi: 10.1080/17543266.2011.654131.
Fielding, E.A.S., McCardle, J.R., Eynard, B., Hartman, N. and Fraser, A. (2014), “Product lifecycle
management in design and engineering education: International perspectives”, Concurrent
Engineering, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 123-134, doi: 10.1177/1063293x13520316.
Gandhi, P. (2012), “Product lifecycle management importance and approach”, International Journal of
Applied Information Systems, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 28-30.
Gmelin, H. and Seuring, S. (2014), “Determinants of a sustainable new product development”, Journal
of Cleaner Production, Vol. 69, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.053.
Goworek, H., Perry, P. and Kent, A. (2016), “The relationship between design and marketing in the
fashion industry”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, doi: 10.1108/
JFMM-04-2016-0041.
Hagel, J. and Brown, J.S. (2005), “From push to pull emerging models for mobilizing resources”, available
at: http://www.johnseelybrown.com/pushmepullyou4.72.pdf (accessed 11 December 2017).
Hand, L. (2014), “IDC retail insights whitepaper “fashion product innovation maturity framework: from
inspiration to presentation”, available at: https://www.3ds.com/industries/consumer-goods-retail/
resource-center/white-papers/fashion-plm-pip-is-the-next-big-thing/(accessed 11 December 2017).
Iran, S. and Schrader, U. (2017), “Collaborative fashion consumption and its environmental effects”, Product
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4,
pp. 468-482. lifecycle
Istook, C.L. (2000), “Rapid prototyping in the textile and apparel industry: a pilot project”, Journal of
management
Textile and Apparel, Technology and Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Jesson, J., Matheson, L. and Lacey, F.M. (2011), Doing Your Literature Review: Traditional and
Systematic Techniques, Sage, London.
551
Just Style (n.d), “PLM buyers’ guide”, available at: https://www.just-style.com/plm/ (accessed 11
December 2017).
Kang, J.Y.M. and Kim, J. (2017), “Online customer relationship marketing tactics through social media
and perceived customer retention orientation of the green retailer”, Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 298-316.
Kaur, A. and Sharma, M. (2011), “Computer-aided product life management (PLM): an indispensable tool
for fashion and apparel industry”, Journal of the Textile Association, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 109-112.
Kiritsis, D., Nguyen, V.K. and Stark, J. (2008), “How closed-loop PLM improves Knowledge
Management over the complete product lifecycle and enables the factory of the future”,
International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 54-77.
Kiritsis, D. (2011), “Closed-loop PLM for intelligent products in the era of the Internet of things”,
Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 479-501, doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2010.03.002.
Kuo, T.C., Hsu, C.W., Huang, S.H. and Gong, D.C. (2014), “Data sharing: a collaborative model for a
green textile/clothing supply chain”, International Journal of Computer Integrated
Manufacturing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 266-280.
Laszlo, C. and Zhexembayeva, N. (2011), Embedded Sustainability: The Next Big Competitive
Advantage, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield.
Lemieux, A.A., Pellerin, R., Lamouri, S. and Carbone, V. (2012), “A new analysis framework for agility
in the fashion industry”, International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 175-197, doi: 10.1504/ijasm.2012.046904.
McAfee, A.P. (2006), “Enterprise 2.0: the dawn of emergent collaboration”, MIT Sloan Management
Review, Vol. 47 No. 3, p. 21.
McCormick, H., Cartwright, J., Perry, P., Barnes, L., Lynch, S. and Ball, G. (2014), “Fashion retailing –
past, present and future”, Textile Progress, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 227-321, doi: 10.1080/00405167.
2014.973247.
Moch, R., Merkel, A., Gunther, L. and Muller, E. (2011), “The dimension of innovation in SME
networks? a case study on Cloud Computing and Web 2.0 technologies in a textile
manufacturing network”, International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development,
Vol. 5 Nos 2-3, pp. 185-198.
Mourtzis, D. (2016), “Challenges and future perspectives for the life cycle of manufacturing networks
in the mass customisation era”, Logistics Research, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.1007/s12159-
015-0129-0.
Nayar, V. (2009), “The collaboration imperative”, available at: http://blogs.hbr.org/hbr/nayar/2009/09/
the-collaborationimperative.html.
C and C Insight (2016), “Fast forwarding fashion”, available at: https://www.fashionretailacademy.ac.
uk/media/320353/26994_fast-forwarding-fashion_fra.pdf.
Pinquie, R., Rivest, L., Segonds, F. and Veron, P. (2015), “An illustrated glossary of ambiguous PLM
terms used in discrete manufacturing”, International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management,
Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 142-171.
Romeo, L.D. and Lee, Y.-A. (2013), “Creative and technical design skills: are college apparel
curriculums meeting industry needs?”, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology
and Education, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 132-140, doi: 10.1080/17543266.2013.783629.
JFMM Saaksvuori, A. and Immonen, A. (2008), Product Lifecycle Management, Springer Science and
Business Media.
24,4
Saaksvuori, A. (2011), PLM Vision (2016) and Beyond, Springer, Sirrus Capital, Helsinki, doi: 10.1007/
978-3-540-78172-1.
Schuh, G., Rozenfeld, H., Assmus, D. and Zancul, E. (2008), “Process oriented framework to support
PLM implementation”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 59 Nos 2-3, pp. 210-218, doi: 10.1016/j.
compind.2007.06.015.
552
Segonds, F., Mantelet, F., Nelson, J. and Gaillard, S. (2015), “Proposition of a PLM tool to support
textile design: a case study applied to the definition of the early stages of design requirements”,
Computers in Industry, Vol. 66, pp. 21-30.
Şen, A. (2008), “The US fashion industry: a supply chain review”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 114 No. 2, pp. 571-593, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.05.022.
Shamsuzzoha, A. and Helo, P.T. (2011), “Real-time tracking and tracing system: potentials for the
logistics network”, in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Industrial
Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM 2011), January 22-24, 2011, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, pp. 22-24.
Shilovitsky, O. (2016), “Future digital transformation will reshape boundaries between PLM,
ERP AND MES. But how. . .?”, available at: http://beyondplm.com/2016/07/06/future-
digitaltransformation- will-reshape-boundaries-plm-erp-mes/ (accessed 11 December 2017).
Shilovitsky, O. (2017), “The future of consolidated PLM and ERP?”, available at: http://beyondplm.
com/2017/06/19/future-consolidated-plm-erp/ (accessed 11 December 2017).
Silventoinen, A., Pels, H.J., K€arkk€ainen, H. and Lampela, H. (2011), “Towards future PLM maturity
assessment dimensions”, in PLM11-8th International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management
proceedings, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, The Netherlands, IFIP Working Group.
Stark, J. (2011), Product Lifecycle Management: 21st Century Paradigm for Product Realisation,
2nd ed., Springer, London.
Suleski, J. and Toncheva, A. (2016), “11th annual PLM report. A fresh look at PLM technology, role
and realism is underway”, available at: https://apparelmag.com/secure-file/421 (accessed 11
December 2017).
Swarr, T. (2011), “A capability framework for managing social and environmental concerns”,
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 593-595.
Swink, M. (2006), “Building collaborative innovation capability”, Research-Technology Management
(RTM) Journal, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 37-47.
Terzi, S., Bouras, A., Dutta, D., Garetti, M. and Kiritsis, D. (2010), “Product lifecycle management–from
its history to its new role”, International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, Vol. 4 No. 4,
pp. 360-389.
Transparency Market Research (2015), “Consumer products and retail market - global industry
analysis, size, share, growth, trends and forecast 2015 – 2022”, available at: https://www.
transparencymarketresearch.com/pressrelease/consumer-products-retail-market.htm (accessed
11 December 2017).
Vehmas, K., Raudaskoski, A., Heikkil€a, P., Harlin, A. and Mensonen, A. (2018), “Consumer attitudes
and communication in circular fashion”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management:
International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 286-300.
Vezzetti, E., Alemanni, M. and Morelli, B. (2017), “New product development (NPD) of ‘family business’
dealing in the luxury industry: evaluating maturity stage for implementing a PLM solution”,
International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1080/
17543266.2016.1250286.
Walter, L. (2016), “Towards a 4th industrial revolution of textiles and clothing, a strategic innovation
and research agenda for the european textile and clothing industry”, available at: http://www.
textile-platform.eu/ (accessed 11 December 2017).
  (2008), “Exploring the impact of RFID
Wamba, S.F., Lefebvre, L.A., Bendavid, Y. and Lefebvre, E. Product
technology and the EPC network on mobile B2B eCommerce: a case study in the retail
industry”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 112 No. 2, pp. 614-629. lifecycle
Wixom, B.H., Yen, B. and Relich, M. (2013), “Maximizing value from business analytics”, MIS
management
Quarterly Executive, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 111-123, [case, managerial].
Wu, J., Kim, A.J., Chen, L. and Johnson, K.K. (2017), “Attitudes toward crowdsourced, community-
involved new product development”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management:
International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 453-467. 553

Further reading
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2016), “Delivering the circular economy: a toolkit for policy makers”,
available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/
EllenMacArthurFoundation_PolicymakerToolkit.pdf (accessed 8 January 2018).
Goto, S., Yoshie, O. and Fujimura, S. (2016), “Internet of things value for mechanical engineers and
evolving commercial product lifecycle management system”, in Industrial Engineering and
Engineering Management (IEEM), 2016 IEEE International Conference Proceedings IEEE,
December 4-7 2016, Bali, Indonesia, pp. 1021-1024, doi: 10.1109/IEEM.2016.7798032.
Shilovitsky, O. (2016), “Future digital transformation will reshape boundaries between PLM, ERP
AND MES. But how. . .?”, available at: http://beyondplm.com/2016/07/06/future-digital-
transformation-will-reshape-boundaries-plm-erp-mes/ (accessed 11 December 2017).

Corresponding author
Jo Conlon can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]