This article, based on an interview with Exio Digital Solutions Co., Ltd., an SIer with extensive experience in supporting manufacturing DX, explains everything from how to choose a low-code development tool to the pitfalls of implementation. For those facing challenges such as "we implemented it but it's not being used on the factory floor" or "we don't know which tool to choose," we provide a practical framework for tool selection and perspectives to avoid mistakes.
Why is low-code development needed in the manufacturing industry now?
The core system alone cannot keep up with change.
When discussing DX in the manufacturing industry, core systems such as ERP, PLM, and MES are often the first things that come to mind. However, in reality, even after implementing these systems, problems such as "they are not used on the factory floor" and "they cannot keep up with changes in business operations" persist.
The fundamental reason for this is that core systems are designed to be "difficult to change." Because ERP and PLM form the backbone of business operations, once the specifications are finalized, the cost of changes becomes high, making it difficult to flexibly respond to market needs and changes in on-site operations.
SIers deeply involved in manufacturing DX, including Exeo Digital Solutions Co., Ltd., commonly discuss the idea of "not frequently changing the core system itself, but rather placing low-code around it to absorb change." Low-code functions as a layer that protects the core system while quickly reflecting changes in business operations and the market.
What will be questioned after crossing the "2025 cliff"?
The "2025 Cliff," proposed by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, is a scenario in which, if companies do not proceed with the modernization of their aging core systems, they could incur annual economic losses of up to 12 trillion yen from 2025 onward. In response to this warning, many manufacturing companies have been working on modernizing their ERP and MES systems.
However, beyond the cliff lies another challenge: how to keep up with subsequent changes in business operations after a system overhaul; and how to design an architecture that allows the system to continuously evolve in line with the speed of the market. Low-code development is attracting attention as a means of answering these questions.
Gartner also points out that the role of low-code is shifting from "a means of building apps quickly" to "a layer that absorbs change while keeping the core system clean (composable architecture)." Furthermore, new developments such as integration with AI agent platforms have recently begun, making the positioning of low-code even more strategic.
Choose your low-code tools based on their origins and upbringing.
Low-code tools are often grouped together, but their strengths and weaknesses vary greatly depending on their origins. Exeo Digital Solutions Co., Ltd., which has handled numerous DX support projects for the manufacturing industry, classifies low-code tools into four types based on their "origins and development." Having this perspective is the first step in selecting the right tool.
Type ① RAD type (high-speed application development tool)
Typical examples: Mendix, OutSystems
This suite of tools follows the "Rapid Application Development" concept, which originated in the 1970s and 80s and experienced a resurgence in popularity in the 2010s. Designed specifically for application development, it excels at handling complex data structures, business logic, and scalability. It is particularly effective in enterprise applications and manufacturing, where complex requirements are paramount.
Type 2: BPM Evolution
Typical examples: intra-mart, Appian
This tool has evolved from business process management (BPM) tools. It excels at workflow design and process management rather than application development. Its primary uses include standardizing and automating approval flows and business processes, and it has also been applied to quality control and procurement flows in the manufacturing industry.
Type 3: Business SaaS derivative
Representative examples: Microsoft Power Platform, Salesforce Lightning, ServiceNow
These tools were created to extend the functionality of specific business SaaS applications. Their strength lies in their integration with Microsoft 365 and Salesforce, but they are less effective when used independently without these underlying infrastructures. They often differ significantly from core manufacturing systems, requiring careful consideration of their alignment with implementation objectives.
Type ④ Citizen-developed type
Representative examples: kintone, Pleasanter
This tool is designed for business users to create simple applications themselves. Its main uses are form creation, basic workflows, and data management, and its strength lies in its ease of use and quick start-up. However, its capabilities are limited, and it may struggle to handle complex business logic or deep integration with existing systems.
Considerations to add when selecting tools in the manufacturing industry
In addition to these four categories, a perspective specific to the manufacturing industry—whether to use it on an SCM (Supply Chain Management) axis, an ECM (Engineering Chain Management) axis, or both—must also be incorporated into the selection process. Furthermore, while tools in the leader position in Gartner and Forrester Research 's Magic Quadrant are strong candidates in terms of track record, functionality, and future potential, high global ratings do not necessarily mean they are the best fit for your company. It is important to make a decision based on your company's challenges, applications, and compatibility with existing systems.
Criteria for selecting low-code that you won't regret
Before selecting tools, solidify your "objective."
The most common mistake when selecting a low-code tool is "starting with the tool itself and proceeding with implementation without considering the tool's features." Before comparing which tool has the most features, it's crucial to first clarify "why you want to implement low-code."
For example, the optimal type of tool will differ completely depending on whether you want to digitize peripheral operations for ERP, enable field staff to create their own applications, or integrate data with PLM / MES.
Selection checklist for the manufacturing industry
- Is it clear which of the following is closer to the purpose of implementation: "improving operational efficiency," "on-site application," or "integration with core systems"?
- Which domain do you envision using this in: SCM or ECM?
- Is integration with existing core systems such as ERP, PLM, and MES necessary?
- Are you envisioning a development structure led by business departments (citizen development) or by the IT department/SIer?
- Is global expansion and multi-site support necessary?
- Are you also considering future integration with AI agents and data utilization?
After organizing these points, comparing them to the four types mentioned above will naturally narrow down the selection candidates.
Decision-making flow for selecting a low-code tool
First, check whether you are already extensively using existing business SaaS (such as Microsoft 365 or Salesforce). If so, then business SaaS derivatives that integrate with that SaaS (such as Power Platform or Salesforce Lightning) become potential candidates.
Next, we determine whether the on-site staff want to create the app themselves, or whether the IT department or system integrator should develop it. If the former, we choose a citizen-developed approach (such as kintone); if the latter, the approach branches depending on the complexity of the application.
For complex business logic, core system integration, and scalability, a RAD-type system (Mendix, OutSystems) is suitable. If the main purpose is approval flow and process management, an evolved BPM-type system (intra-mart, Appian) is more appropriate.
For manufacturing companies prioritizing integration with ERP, PLM, and MES systems, Mendix is a strong contender due to its compatibility with Siemens products and proven track record of SAP integration.
Top 10 Low-Code Development Tools
The table below organizes 10 representative low-code tools based on the four categories mentioned above, their main strengths, and their compatibility with the manufacturing industry.
| Classification (4 types) | Tool name | Main strengths | Suitable uses | Compatibility with the manufacturing industry |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RAD type | Mendix | Complex business logic, ALM management, governance design, and Siemens PLM (Teamcenter)/MES (Opcenter) integration. | In-house development of enterprise-grade business applications and core systems. | ◎ (Close collaboration with Siemens products) |
| OutSystems | Rapid development and scalability | Enterprise applications | ○ (Experience in manufacturing) | |
| iPLAss | Open Source and Java Integration | Emphasis on in-house development and customization | △ (Requires engineer assistance) | |
| BPM evolved type | intra-mart | Workflow process management with Japanese language support. | Approval Flow and Business Process Management | ○ (Proven track record of implementation in domestic manufacturing companies) |
| Appian | Process automation and AI integration | Business process improvement and compliance management | ○ (Examples of use exist in the quality control field) | |
| Business SaaS derivative | Microsoft Power Apps | Integration with Microsoft 365 and citizen development | Internal business process optimization and workflow | △ (Limited functions specific to the manufacturing industry) |
| Salesforce Lightning | Integration with Salesforce CRM | Enhancements to sales and customer management functions | △ (Distant from core manufacturing systems) | |
| Service Now | IT operations management/ITSM | IT department business automation and asset management | ○ (Examples of use in facility management and IT-OT integration) | |
| Citizen-developed | kintone | Simple, intuitive operation, and Japanese language support. | Field reports and simple data management | △ (For simple use) |
| Pleasanter | Open source, low cost | Business management app for small and medium-sized businesses | △ (Suitable for simple administrative tasks) |
*The above is merely a comparison of general characteristics. The optimal solution will vary depending on your company's specific uses, existing systems, and organizational structure.
* Criteria for evaluating compatibility with the manufacturing industry: ◎ = Extensive implementation track record in the manufacturing industry and track record of integration with manufacturing tools (ERP, PLM, MES, etc.), ○ = Track record of implementation in the manufacturing industry, △ = Primarily used for non-manufacturing purposes or requires separate design for integration with core manufacturing systems
7 pitfalls that can lead to implementation failure
Low-code development often has an image of being "easy to implement," but proceeding without proper preparation can lead to unexpected problems. Based on an interview with Exeo Digital Solutions Co., Ltd., we have compiled seven pitfalls that you should be particularly aware of.
| Pitfall | Common problems | Direction of countermeasures |
|---|---|---|
| ① The misconception that easy development equals easy operation | Change management and version control tend to become ambiguous. This can lead to a proliferation of unofficial apps whose creators are unknown, and a risk of governance collapsing. | Design the application submission and management flow before development begins. The IT department should prepare common components and guidelines. |
| ② Vendor lock-in | The more deeply you integrate core business processes into a platform, the more the cost of migrating to a different tool later increases. | Design with an awareness of the degree of dependency on the core business processes. Aim for a loosely coupled architecture. |
| ③ The scaling barrier comes early. | Even if a proof-of-concept (PoC) is successful, performance issues are likely to surface as the number of users increases in the production environment. | Designing licenses and conducting load tests that simulate production conditions should be considered from the PoC (Proof of Concept) stage. |
| ④ Lack of understanding of the business and design skills | Simply digitizing existing inefficiencies will not yield results. The quality of the design is what determines the value of the tool. | The business process will be reviewed as part of the process. The IT department and business departments will collaborate in the design process. |
| ⑤ The role of the IT department will change. | The misconception that "if it can be done on-site, then an IT department is unnecessary" can sometimes lead to a weak governance structure. | The IT department will be clearly positioned as the responsibilities for governance design, security controls, and standardization. |
| ⑥ The more in-house production becomes, the higher the training costs will be. | Low-code development goes hand in hand with talent development. Without rules, guidelines, and review systems, quality will vary. | From the initial stages of implementation, incorporate educational programs and a system for promoting in-house development into the plan. |
| ⑦ Security and access control are often overlooked. | The misconception that "easy to create = easy to publish" makes it easy for permission settings to be misconfigured and personal information to be unintentionally exposed. | We will establish rules for designing permissions and implement a review process before publication. |
Many of these pitfalls arise from overestimating the benefits of low-code development, such as its ease of development. Low-code is merely a means of quickly creating systems; investment in business design, governance, and talent development remains necessary as before.
Actions to ensure successful utilization
What is the difference between successful and unsuccessful companies?
The difference between companies that successfully utilize low-code and those that don't lies not so much in tool selection, but in "clarity of objectives" and "establishment of organizational structure." The following three patterns are common pitfalls:
- If implemented simply as an "IT efficiency tool" without a proper understanding of the on-site challenges, the resulting system will have misdefined requirements and will be left unused by the users.
- There is no organizational structure to support low-code development, leading to isolation of individuals and increasing reliance on individual expertise.
- When goal setting is vague and the objective becomes simply "to make something," business results become invisible.
Conversely, successful companies have three key elements in place: clearly defined implementation objectives, a cycle of small-scale trials and rapid improvements, and a well-structured organizational support system.
Things to do before implementation
Things to do after implementation
In the manufacturing industry in particular, the approach of "perfectly outlining the overall architecture before starting" is often impractical. ERP, PLM, and MES modernization projects can span several years, and requirements frequently change during that time. An agile approach of "starting small and solidifying the overall picture while conducting verification" is a rational choice, especially when leveraging the characteristics of low-code.
The difference between no-code and low-code, and their integration with existing systems.
The difference between no-code and low-code: what you can do and the skill requirements
The perceptions that "everything can be done with no-code" and "low-code is easy for anyone to use" are both misconceptions. Understanding the differences between the two correctly is crucial for selecting the right tool.
| No-code | Low-code | |
|---|---|---|
| What you can do | The focus is on forms, simple workflows, and data management. | We can handle everything from business logic and API integration to complex data structures. |
| required skills | Understanding conditional branching, business workflows, and becoming familiar with UI operation. | Variables, functions, data structures, API fundamentals, error handling, logic design |
| Suitable uses | Creating a simple app for on-site personnel to share information. | Integration of business applications and systems surrounding core systems |
| Main points to note | In many cases, it is not possible to handle complex requirements. | Design skills greatly influence the outcome. The idea that "anyone can do it quickly" is a misconception. |
Integration with existing systems is "possible, but not easy."
Technically, integrating low-code with existing ERP, MES, and PLM systems is possible. Main integration methods include REST APIs, SOAP communication, database integration, file integration, and iPaaS utilization. However, this involves challenges that are difficult for non-engineers, such as authentication design, ensuring data integrity, error handling, and understanding vendor constraints.
Furthermore, the biggest obstacle to integrating existing systems in the manufacturing industry is the network boundary between "cloud (SaaS)" and "on-premises" systems. MES and older ERP systems are often isolated from the internet, making simple API integration from SaaS-type low-code tools difficult. This necessitates either building a secure data gateway or selecting a tool with an architecture that allows direct deployment to the company's on-premises environment or private cloud, such as Mendix, and designing a system to integrate within the same closed network.
A practical architectural approach is to avoid trying to complete everything with low-code alone, and instead clearly define the roles of each component.
| Layer | role |
|---|---|
| No-code | Business departments create simple apps and share information. |
| Low-code | UI, business logic, and front-end surrounding core systems |
| Existing core systems (ERP, MES, etc.) | Maintaining core data and executing basic business processes |
| iPaaS (Integration Hub) | Data integration, conversion, and routing between systems. |
Frequently Asked Questions about Low-Code Tools
Summary: Using low-code as a "strategy"
Let's summarize the key points of this article.
- Low-code tools can be divided into four types based on their origins and development, each with its own strengths. Before selecting a tool, it's essential to first clarify your company's objectives and uses.
- In manufacturing, an architecture that protects core systems such as ERP, PLM, and MES while deploying low-code around them to absorb change is effective.
- All seven pitfalls in implementation can be avoided with proper preparation and system setup. Overconfidence in the ease of development is the biggest risk.
- The keys to success are three things: clarifying the objective, establishing an organizational structure, and a small-scale start followed by a proof-of-concept cycle.
- The role of low-code is evolving from an application development tool to a change-absorbing layer that includes AI agent integration, making architecture design from a medium- to long-term perspective crucial.
Macnica provides support for the use of low-code in manufacturing DX. We offer consultations tailored to your needs, from tool selection, including Mendix, to implementation and successful adoption.