ERP Implementations

ERP Implementations

Podcast: ERP Organizational Change Success

Dr. Jack G. Nestell and I discuss some key influences on ERP organizational change success including the definition of success, ERP success rates, critical keys to project management, ERP expectations, the role of corporate culture, common challenges and pitfalls, Learning and Development (L&D), ERP organizational change conflict, Leadership styles, critical success factors and more!

https://nestellassociates.com/podcast/episode-67-erp-success-practitioner-insights/

Episode Key Questions Asked

Suppose you are leading a kickoff meeting for an organization that is just starting an ERP implementation. How would you describe for them “success” in terms of an ERP organizational change?

Why do you think many ERP projects fail to deliver on expectations? There have obviously been countless papers written highlighting all sorts of reasons for ERP failure.

What about training and learning & development (L&D) in the organization? To what extent do you suggest and encourage opportunities for training and learning? Before implementation? During? Post?

What leadership styles, or attributes, would you say were most prevalent during the best of your ERP implementation experiences?

You stated in a LinkedIn post that “An ERP project manager is a necessary evil. An ERP project leader is an influencer and success generator.”. Tell our listeners more.

“I have a go-live coming up soon and the customer executive asked me how I felt about our readiness for go-live. I said “Technically, I am not concerned. Functionally, I’m a little concerned and emotionally I am “$%#****!””. 7 functions (modules) across 13 countries. God help me for being an empathic project manager.”

If you were going to give advice to an organization preparing for an ERP implementation what little golden nugget would you like to leave our listeners?

Advertisement
Increasing User Involement

JIT is Just Plain Wrong for Cloud ERP

Given that we are well in the third decade of ERP implementations, I still observe ERP implementations following outdated/misguided concepts that do not utilize limited resources to the fullest.  One of these misapplied concepts is Just-In-Time (JIT) training.  End user enablement continues to be an implementation challenge primarily due to the limited investment made for the most important component of an ERP business solution.  This limitation must be addressed in order to realize the value of ERP in the Cloud.

Evolving Traditional ERP Testing for Cloud ERP

Consider the following illustration that highlights the tradition user involvement model:

Limited User Involvement

Traditional User Involvement

Traditional ERP implementation approaches view end users as an audience versus an active participant to leverage during the entire implementation.  End users by far make up the largest stakeholder group in an ERP implementation however; they have the least amount of involvement and responsibility.  Let’s further contrast and identify opportunities where end-user involvement can have a positive influence on ERP implementations.

Rethinking the Waterfall Testing Paradigm

If we take a stroll down memory lane we can recall the standard testing approach we learned from the Waterfall Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC):

Limited ERP Testing

Traditional Testing Approach

Consider the following:

  • The majority of testing and hands-on experience occurs with a limited group of users leaving a small window for direct users to gain confidence and experience with the ERP system.
  • The limitation with direct user involvement is based on the premise that a working system is not available until the end of the implementation.       This is not the case with a Cloud ERP system that can be provisioned early during the implementation life cycle.
  • JIT End User training is a big bang approach – one time shot to get end-user training right. It also gives end users limited time to internalize the change. This approach naturally requires additional support and creates a greater potential for user errors.

Waterfall is based upon software being developed from scratch – i.e. you could not actively involved end users until the software existed.  When ERP came to the market many approach/processes designed for software development were incorrectly applied to ERP implementations.  The next section we will discuss how to involve the target audience sooner during a Cloud ERP implementation.

Increasing End User Involvement

There are two key value propositions for increasing end-user involvement:

  1. Additional validation of the solution via testing.
  2. Greater user adoption and enablement.

For robust testing business users should first be trained on the ERP Cloud service.  Remember that testing can be “hands-on” learning for business users.  Consider the following illustration:

Increasing User Involement

Incremental User Involvement with ERP Implementations

Let’s expand on some key themes.  First, education/learning is an iterative process where new information needs to be assimilated by users before knowledge is created.  Second, an educated user is a better contributor to the project.  Third, it is easier to manage and support educated end users.  A forward-thinking end-user enablement process drives greater participation and ownership.

Consequences of Not Evolving your User Enablement Approach

As ERP Cloud adoption continues we will see an increase in the following implementation drivers:

Market Drivers for Cloud ERP

Market Drivers for ERP Cloud Implementations

Consider that traditional ERP implementation approaches do not effectively leverage the largest resource pool available.  I can appreciate that with additional resources comes greater coordination and communication channels (N * (N-1) / 2) yet I have witnessed that the business value outweighs the associated project risk.  With the above said I do not recommend we start involving end users without some level of enablement and guidance.  Just as an individual user learns a new system over time the end-user training approach should incrementally prepare the user for greater involvement during the ERP Cloud implementation.

Following are key consequences if we continue with a JIT user involvement strategy:

JIT User Enablement

Potential issues/risks from take a JIT user enablement approach

The JIT approach is being used to squeeze pennies out of an ERP Cloud implementation when the potential risk that results is far greater and eventually must be solved through additional dollars or lost opportunities.

Challenge to Cloud ERP Service Providers and Implementation Partners

Cloud ERP Service Providers and Implementation Partners should take the lead in promoting and supporting end-user involvement earlier during the implementation.  Unfortunately, Cloud ERP Service Providers are not providing a robust set of tools and services for incremental user enablement.  Test cases should be business process focused and not just business function oriented.

Implementation Partners must also adapt to this new paradigm.   It is unfortunate that many implementation partners choose to address ERP Cloud Implementation drivers (mostly cost) by reducing project leadership and transferring user enablement to the customer – regardless if the customer have the required tools/competencies for incremental user involvement.  This short-sighted approach ultimately leads to an unfavorable customer experience with Cloud ERP.

Summary

Just in Time (JIT) is an operations management approach for improving ROI by minimizing inventory and related carrying cost for a production process.   JIT is a viable strategy given that the process is production quality and all input variables are within controlled tolerances.   Implementing a Cloud ERP solution is not a production quality process nor are all input variables can be controlled.  This concept has been applied to ERP end-user training with the intent of maximizing training investment.  JIT training reduces the need for refresher training due to ERP knowledge loss experienced if training precedes the go-live event over a long period of time.  JIT training may be a valid approach for end users after the ERP Cloud service is in Production but it is a limited strategy to employ during an ERP implementation.   Make the end-user an active partner not a passive customer.

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

ERP Project 101: Deployment vs Requirements Gathering

Customers, System implementers and ERP vendors are always looking for ways to accelerate ERP implementations.  One popular approach is to take a phased deployment approach based upon criteria such as location, ERP module or feature set.   Requirements are gathered, validated, and tested based upon a limited scope.  Unfortunately, many ERP projects utilizing this approach result in failure given requirements conflict and misaligned expectations.  In the following blog posting we will discuss how to minimize challenges associated with phased ERP deployments.

Reality Check!  There will be ERP requirements conflicts

A reality with any cross-functional or multi-site deployment is that there will be requirement conflicts as part of an ERP implementation.  In our focus for rapid results and simplifying ERP deployments we forget the fundamental result – an ERP implementation is the implementation of a business solution.  Consider the following illustration:

ERP REquirements Conflict

Example of Requirements Conflict for ERP

Let’s assume that we want to accelerate an ERP HR implementation by deploying ERP solution by region.   To further streamline our efforts the project only gather requirements from the North America HR stakeholders (Phase I). The above approach appears to work for the initial ERP deployment; however; these short-sighted decisions can have a negative impact to future deployments.   Remember that correcting problems and limitations are more costly once an ERP system is deployed in a production environment. 

With the above said, I appreciate that ERP vendors are evolving their ERP software to provide additional flexibility in configurations to allow variances based upon industry, line of business, country and even user preferences.  However, we should understand that all ERP solutions leverage a common data model with specific data dependencies.  We can address this constraint in one of two methods.  Either we take a risky approach of gathering requirements in silos hoping that we clearly define all ERP configuration dependencies or take the practical approach of gathering requirements across all HR operational areas. In the next section we discuss several practical steps to ensure requirements conflicts are minimize.

Practical Steps to Minimize ERP Requirements Conflict

Let’s brief speak to some common-sense approaches to deal with the reality of ERP requirements conflicts.

How to address ERP requirements conflicts

Practical approaches to address requirements conflicts

The first step of requirements management is to perform a stakeholder analysis to identify the appropriate business owners and subject matter experts in include in requirements gathering.  It is important to note that we always implement to a business process not simply to the software (ex. module, feature). Utilize solution modeling to analyze business requirements from multiple perspectives.  Too often I observe ERP projects spend more time on defining exceptions to standard business scenarios versus defining a common requirements set that can be leverage to isolate and manage unique requirement criteria.  Consider the following illustration:

 

Logical Business Requirements Model

Logical progression of gathering ERP requirements

There should be a logical progression of business requirements from the global level to the specific user level.  Isolate requirement exceptions to effectively quantify frequency, impact, and cost.  Utilizing this approach will provide the customer with greater insight for an informed decision.   Finally, let’s not forget the Lean principle that states process efficiency is gained when variability (exceptions) is minimized.

Summary & Conclusion

The ERP industry is hyper-competitive where every ERP vendor and System Implementer is looking for an edge to accelerate and reduce the costs associated with ERP implementations.  This desire is intensified by the entrance of ERP SaaS offerings with lower entry costs for a growing target market.  The challenge is to identify competent options for accelerating ERP implementations without putting long-term customer success at significant risk.  Requirements management (gathering, validating, and testing) is the critical discipline that impacts all downstream implementation activities.  Taking a technology-oriented approach results in (a) unclear requirements, (b) requirements conflicts, and (c) additional rework to support future deployments.  Making the right investments in requirements management will be the best chance to accelerate downstream activities including deployments.                    

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

BPR, BPM and ERP

I had a customer ask me about the relationship between BPM and ERP.  Does ERP implement BPM or do you need to have BPM before ERP?  Is an ERP implementation a BPR project?  Who’s on first?  As the ERP industry evolves it has become evident that additional disciplines like Business Process Management (BPM) and Business Process Reengineering (BPR) must be employed for a successful ERP experience.  In the following blog posting I plan to define and demonstrate the roles that BPM/BPR play in the ERP lifecycle.

BPR, BPM, and ERP Revisited

Allow me to establish some basic definitions for our discussion:

  • Business Process Management (BPM) consists of methods, techniques and tools to design, deploy, control, and analyze operational business processes involving humans, organizations, applications, documents and other sources of information.
  • Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is the redesign of business processes – and the systems, policies, and organizational structures that support them – to optimize the work flows and productivity in an organization.
  • Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is integrated business software that supports multiple business functions across an enterprise.  ERP implies the use of Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) packaged software rather than proprietary software written by or for one customer.

There are a couple of key concepts we should review to compare/contrast BPR and BPM.

Compare BPM and BPR

Compare & Contrast BPM & BPR

BPM focuses on the business process model to monitor, identify, and implement incremental improvements.  These improvements or eliminations fall within the fundamental rules, parameters, and culture established by the existing business model.  However, there comes a point in time where the law of diminishing returns applies and a transformation to the underlying business model is required.  A more aggressive approach like BPR must be utilized to evolve to the next level of business process maturity.  Consider the following illustration to demonstrate how BPM and BPR interact along the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI):

 

BPR, BPM within CMMI

BPR, BPM within CMMI

Allow me to provide an example.  Company A performed a CMMI assessment of their purchasing process.  Results from the assessment showed that the purchasing process was defined for certain business sales (revenue stream) but not for all purchasing events (direct & indirect).  Another key finding was that there was no formal integration between demand planning, supply planning and purchasing which resulted in reactive purchasing. From the above CMMI reference, it was determined that Company A’s purchasing process is at the Managed level.  Company A implemented several incremental initiatives (BPM) to improve process execution including documenting purchasing tasks for all purchasing events and conducting periodic purchasing planning meetings with operations. 

Company A realized process improvement yet the value was limited by following model constraints: (1) each revenue stream (business line) had its own unique purchasing process & rules and (2) Purchasing had limited visibility across the entire supply chain.  Two fundamental mindsets have to change:

  1. Move from unique purchasing processes to a common enterprise purchasing model that is flexible enough to address the competitive requirements for each business line
  2. Enable Purchasing to have visibility across the entire supply chain to support a process-oriented management model versus a function-oriented management model.

Implementing these changes will require a formal, projectized (BPM) effort that will redefine existing business rules, culture, and business process activities.   As Company A continues to evolve their purchasing process they will conduct both BPM within the CMMI maturity level and BPR as they move to the next CMMI maturity level. 

How Do BPR, BPM, and ERP Relate?

ERP provides the automation of business activities.   There are two fundamental value propositions that ERP provide to customers looking to move up the CMMI maturity model

  1. ERP reduces the effort required to perform tactical business activities so customers can focus on strategic activities. Expanding on our purchasing example, this would include basic functionality like automating the creation of purchase orders, approving purchase orders, and matching purchase orders with receipts & supplier invoices.
  2. ERP provides the opportunity for visibility across business functions to support business process management.  That said, there are several factors that determine the level of visibility. 
ERP Business Process Visibility

Factors Impacting ERP Business Process Visibility

A competent ERP solution should provide robust, closed-loop integration between the functional modules provided out-of-the-box.  As a practical note, there is always a need to integrate ERP to legacy systems and this requirement should be not overlooked.  A business solution is only as good as its weakest integration.  Process consistency will enable a relevant comparison of results and management of business processes.

A mature ERP solution should provide automation and integration support for both tactical and strategic business activities across the CMMI model.   

ERP Evolution within CMMI

Interaction of BPR, BPM, and ERP within CMMI

I am a firm believer that business should lead and technology supports.  Therefore, as the business model evolves it is important to identify the corresponding ERP functionality to support the business activities.   This model also communicates that the best approach to implement ERP is to follow a logical maturity path for business processes.

Common ERP Misconception and Mistakes Related to BPR & BPM

Allow me to address some common misconceptions and mistakes made during ERP implementations related to BPR and BPM.

BPR is part of the ERP implementation.

While I agree that the initial ERP implementation will result in major changes with existing business functions, BPR will not happen unless there is a concerted effort to redefine the holistic business model and organizational structure to be successful with the ERP software.

Implementing ERP will give us BPM.

The direct answer is no.  ERP does provide an information foundation that can support BPM.  BPM is more about a discipline for managing processes and less about software. 

Do I need ERP to mature my business processes?

Technically speaking, ERP is not a hard requirement for BPM.   However, manual routine tasks and limited visibility hinder strategic activities.  ERP can play a key support role in automating business tasks and provide visibility through integration.

Should I implement ERP features that support business activities at different maturity levels?

Business realities will necessitate that customers implement ERP features supporting different CMMI maturity levels.    The problem lies in two areas:

  1. Customer expectations are not appropriate set regarding the limited value realized from mature ERP functionality due to less mature business activities supporting strategic activities.  Example:  A procurement process scorecard measuring standard Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will have limited value if there is not a standard, enterprise procurement process.
  2. Implementation partners and business solution advisors should provide a short-term strategy and roadmap to evolve the supporting business activities to same level of maturity.   This approach provides a “quick-win” opportunity for customers to drive additional value from the existing ERP investment.

Summary

Understanding how BPR, BPM, and ERP should relate to one another can be a challenge.  Some believe that it is an “either or” proposition.  I do not subscribe to this school of thought but rather believe that BPR and BPM are disciplines that should be interweaved as part of your ERP application strategy.  Knowing and appreciating these interdependencies will put you in a better position for ERP success. 

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

ERP Project 101: What + Why = How

One of the reasons why I am a consultant is that I enjoy solving business problems with technology. ERP provides a technical foundation that I can utilize to solve problems.  However, during my career I came to the realization that simply throwing technology at a business need is not in the best interest of the customer.  This is especially true when you do not completely understand the requirement.   There is a difference between an evolving requirement and an evolving understanding of the requirement.  In the next sections we will briefly review a practical approach for ERP requirements management.

 

Gathering Business Requirements is Just the Beginning

I think we all can agree that gathering business requirements is a key activity that will have a significant impact on ERP implementation success.  However, it is as equally important to focus on requirements validation before proceeding to implementing a solution for addressing requirements. Too often we jump from gather to design before we have a full appreciation of the business need.  When it comes to formal requirements management, I keep the following simple equation in mind:

Requirements Mgmt 101

Basic ERP Requirements Management

  

Defining What

Sounds simple enough but how you gather requirements sends a message.  Also, it is important to understand if the requirement is the result of a new opportunity or addressing an existing business pain.  The source should play a factor in your approach to gathering information.  Consider the following commonly accepted approaches utilized for gathering ERP business requirements:

 

Defining Requirements

Generally Accepted Requirements Gathering Methods

 

Please allow me to state that the above methods are valid and have their inherent advantages and disadvantages.  The challenge I find is not gathering the requirement but rather the limited effort spent on understanding how the requirement supports business process results. 

 

Determining Why

It is hard to provide a solution when you do not understand the business.  Asking why is less about challenging business requirements and more about gaining a better perspective of the requirement.  What are the desired result(s)?  How do the result(s) add value to the overall business process?   Odds are that you will have only a superficial understanding of the requirement if you do not understand the context (environment) of the business need.  Also note that asking why is the first step to validating your understanding of the business need.  Following is a list of the common validation activities for business requirements:

Confirming Requirements

Requirements validation techniques

 

I firmly believe that all four validation methods should be employed as part of defining business requirements.  Unfortunately, not all of these validation steps occur during the deployment.  The advantage with ERP is that you have working software that you can easily demonstrate and confirm how business requirements would be handled.  Do not guess – prove what is possible!

 

Constructing How

This process is typically an area that is not executed well when it comes to ERP.  In the rush for faster results many assume that the solution must be implemented via technology.   Technology is good for many activities (repeatable, logical) but it can also be a costly option for conflicting requirements across a business process.  As a rule of thumb, I typically consider 4 options for addressing business needs:

 

Addressing requirements

Options to address ERP requirements

 

  1. Automation: Developing a technical solution to address need.
  2. Business Process: Creating business process to address need.
  3. Acceptance:  Do nothing and handle as the need arises.
  4. Avoidance: Eliminating the source of the business need.

 

Understanding both the What and Why will provide you the right insight to select the most viable approach for implementation of the requirement.  It provides you with the perspective and context for effective decision-making.

 

Summary

An enterprise technology platform like ERP is an empowering toolset for addressing business needs across an organization.  Yet, soft skills like requirements management have a greater impact on business solution success.  It seems like every couple of years there is a “new” ERP methodology that will address the challenge of gathering ERP requirements.   Often I observed too much focus on the methodology and not enough effort focused on the end result.  I’m sure that I may receive some criticism from my peers in regards to my attempt to “dumb down” requirements management.  However, I have found that the best approach is a simple approach that every stakeholder can understand and recall instantly versus having to go to a methodology book.  

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

Building a Better ERP Estimate

There are several documented examples of ERP implementations that went over budget or did not hit the original go-live date.  There are also many explanations out there to explain why these ERP implementations did not meet budget or timeline.  Instead of repeating common information out in the ERP blogosphere, I would like to speak to a root cause that is typically overlooked by our industry – inaccurate ERP implementation estimations.   In the next sections we will take a closer look at building a better ERP estimate.

Rule #1 – Have the right type of information to calculate an ERP Estimate

Developing a competent estimate for an ERP implementation or major customization can be a challenge for both seasoned consulting partners and a new ERP customer.   In a previous life I developed ERP implementation estimators for one of Tier-1 ERP software vendors.  I also developed both Time & Materials as well as Fixed-Price ERP implementation estimates – some good, some not so good.

Simply stated – an ERP implementation estimate is based upon your current understanding of the following areas:

Information Drivers for ERP Implementation Estimates

Information Drivers for ERP Implementation Estimates

 Let’s focus on some specific areas that are typically overlooked or under appreciated. 

Area Description
Customer Participation Implementation partners are generally good about estimating their level of effort to support ERP implementations but fall far short in estimating the effort for the customer.    In the majority of ERP implementations, customer must make available their best and brightest resources to support the implementation.  Odds are that these resources play a major role in current operations.  The ERP estimate should include any need to backfill existing business resources.
Project Scope Project scope refers to the implementation activities that need to be performed and who is responsible for performing the task(s).  Unfortunately, customers see this as an area to reduce implementation costs by taking on activities that they do not have the skills/resource availability to complete (ex. Organization Change Management).  People make ERP successful.
Product Scope Too often business processes and product scope is defined only at the product level (example: we are implementing the ERP’s Purchasing module).  How can I tell what business activities and features are out of scope?  Developing focus is much harder to develop and maintain. 
Implementation Partner Constraints  Every implementation partner has constraints!  It is a just a reality that should be factored into any ERP estimate.  For example, how much lead time should be given for an Implementation partner to replace a consultant?

You can never hope to create a realistic estimate without having valid information on the drivers that influence scope, schedule, and resources.  The next step is to understand your level of comprehension of the information that drives the ERP estimate. 

 Rule #2 – Understand the type of ERP Estimate you are calculating

Per the Project Management Institute’s Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) there are three types of estimates for a project.  These estimates are based upon your level of understanding for project scope, constraints, and assumptions.

Levels of ERP Estimate Accuracies

How Understanding Drives Estimate Accuracy

Simply stated – the more you know about the task(s) at hand the greater the probability of calculating a realistic estimate!  The trouble is that too many ERP implementations do not generate a definitive estimate.   A majority of implementation partners generate estimates during the sales cycle where estimates may approach a budgetary accuracy – at best.  To compensate for the estimation accuracy (-10% to 25%)  many implementation partners incorrectly utilize contingency reserves and management reserves to plug the potential estimate gap.   This is just a bad estimating practice which will most likely result in budget challenges further down in the implementation.  Fortunately, there are steps we can take to develop better ERP estimates.

Rule #3 – Drive to validate and refine your ERP estimate

Estimates can and should change as you learn more about the project.  However, there is an expectation out there that estimates should be defined once and they should be completely accurate.  Here is where I see the process break down.  Once an Implementation partner communicates an estimate too often the customer will latch and consider it an iron-clad promise.  The key driver for this phenomenon has more to do with the Implementation partner setting the wrong expectation when an estimate is communicated.   Customers encourage this behavior by focusing on cost as the key competitive differentiator.  Also, there is a perception in the market that if an implementation partner cannot provide a single estimate then the Implementation partner does not have the experience.  Customers, this may be the case but do not blindly jump to that conclusion.

Best Practices for obtaining ERP Estimates from your Implementation partner

Over the years I have been asked by customers what is the best approach to get a reliable, cost-effective estimate from Implementation Partners.  When should a customer request a fixed price estimate versus a time & materials estimate?  Following are some general guidelines I would like to communicate based upon my experience:

  • Fixed Price versus Time & Materials: Have the Implementation partner provide a Time & Materials estimate for project planning, requirements gathering, and fit/gap.  Once the Fit/Gap is performed you should know exactly what you are up against and then ask for a competitive bid/fixed price estimate to complete the remaining work.
  • Complete Information:  Always ask the Implementation Partner to provide an estimate with the following information
    • Product Scope
    • Project Scope
    • Assumptions
    • Constraints
    • FTE Hour Requirements for both the Implementation Partner and customer resources
    • Estimate accuracy – let customers know up-front that the estimate will change
  • Quantify Reserves: Ask the implementation partner if the estimate contains either a contingency or management reserve.  If so then ask what % of the total estimate is for reserves.  If this % is greater than 10% then this is a sign that the Implementation partner did not gather enough information to generate a realistic estimate.  If the implementation partner does not calculate a reserve then consider this estimate suspect (red flag).
  • Knowledge Transfer:  Just as important it is for an Implementation partner to perform knowledge transfer to enable customer resources to support ERP, it’s as important for the customer to educate the Implementation partner on the unique aspects of their business model.  The better the understanding the better the estimate.

Summary 

There are many of my peers who would consider ERP estimation more of an art than a science.  In my humble opinion, this is a bad philosophy that either results in generating an unrealistic estimate or the customer spending more money than is required.   Customers should also be realistic and understand that estimates created in the early stages of an ERP implementation will change and focus on making the right decisions for mutual success.  Level of effort estimations for ERP implementations are based upon the current understanding of the ERP implementation.  Some ERP estimates are easier to calculate given a predefined implementation scope, however, there will always factors unique to a customer that must be explored, defined, and refined during key milestone implementation activities.

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

ERP Makes for an Expensive Custom Solution

The Allure of Technology

Think of the possibilities!  Rapid delivery of new functionality!  Reduce development cost by quickly deploying prebuilt solutions!  If the software does not meet your needs then use the delivered, user-friendly development tools to customize the ERP software.  We have the technology to make your business more flexible and adaptable.  Most customers do think about the possibilities quickly but have a hard time taking that vision and incorporating it into the realities that are involved with using ERP.

The Challenge: Customer Expectations Not Aligning with ERP Strengths

A key area that causes conflicts during an ERP implementation is the misalignment between the customer’s expectation of business software and key ERP value drivers.  Consider the following illustration.

ERP Advantages and Challenges
ERP Advantages and Challenges

It is important to understand the customer’s business owner/user expectations of enterprise business software. If customers expect ERP to adapt to current business activities then there is an increase risk of developing a custom solution that cannot support the fundamental value drivers for ERP. When an organization makes the decision to implement ERP they are making the decision (consciously or unconsciously) to realign business processes with delivered ERP functionality. This is a significant mind shift for key business owners and end users! It’s not a “light switch” that you can turn on and customers think differently. There must be an evolutionary process to better align customer expectations with ERP strategy and direction. Let me provide a real life example to further elaborate.

The No Win Situation

I was a functional consultant for an ERP implementation to replace a customer’s legacy time reporting system. The customer’s process consisted of Microsoft Excel spreadsheets coupled together with a data load process to a custom staging table for time approval and payroll processing. When I started working with the customer to define their business requirements it was apparent that there was a difference between executive and business stakeholder expectations. The payroll manager insisted on having the exact functionality that they current have in their systems today. I knew that no matter how good our developers were we would not be able to cost-effectively build Microsoft Excel flexibility into the ERP software. It would totally invalidate the justification for going with an ERP software solution in the first place. The payroll manager was used to getting exactly what they wanted from software to the point where software replaced the need for training (ex. dummy-proofing). I did an initial gap analysis and identified over twenty (20) gaps that required changes to the ERP software.  Addressing the gaps via software would require additional resources (costs) to design, develop, test, and implement software changes.  In addition the customer would have to allocate resources to re-analyze their software changes against new ERP software updates.  These activities will reduce the ability of rapid delivery and increase Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).

I came to the realization that if I proceeded with a traditional approach to gathering requirements that (a) I would spend a lot of wasted effort gathering non-value-add business requirements and (b) the fit/gap session would be much longer than planned, (c) and I was in a non-win situation unless I changed the game. If I provided a custom software solution then I would have a happy payroll manager but I would have disappointed executives because the ERP solution increases costs. On the other hand, if I ruled out customizations and only used delivered functionality then I would get happy executives and an upset payroll manager! The only way I could be successful was to move from a traditional requirements and implementation approach to a new approach that addresses the realities of using ERP.

SEI Evolutionary Process Integrating COTS-based Systems
Source: SEI Evolutionary Process for Integrating COTS-based Systems

The approach I took was to reset software expectations. I met with the payroll manager to discuss the reasons for selecting ERP software and the inherent advantages and disadvantages with ERP software. This was not a one-time discussion and required several additional discussions with the entire project team. In the end the payroll manager’s expectations were adapted which enabled us to accelerate our fit/gap session. We still identified a few gaps. Of the three gaps we negotiated to have only one addressed via a software change and the other gap was handled via training. Our negotiations resulted in a significant reduction of effort and were only made possible by establishing the right environment for effective negotiating. If either party has unrealistic expectations then effective negotiations will be extremely difficult.

Summary

The fundamental design of ERP is to provide a common software solution across a broad customer base. ERP is maturing to enable more custom capabilities via configuration, but the fact remains that ERP can make for an expensive custom solution. The marketplace has realized that ERP requires a different implementation approach (ex. Software Engineering Institute’s EPIC methodology). Consider the drivers for purchasing an ERP software package. What was the business justification for purchasing packaged software? Remember that ERP targets customers across multiple geographic locations and industries. Two key implied statements that executives make when they select an ERP software solution are (1) having a custom software solution is not strategic to the organization, and (2) we expect our organization to adapt to the ERP software – specifically non-competitive, non-strategic areas. Strong words I know, however, I have seen a lot of grief and anxiety created during packaged implementations because this message was not clearly articulated to the project team and the organization.

The software vendor, implementation partner (consultants) and the customer’s IT department have the opportunity to play an important advisory role to the business user community by defining the best approach to leverage technology in creating a business solution. This advisory role can be a challenge given the high technology expectations of ERP software; however it is in the best interest to our customers!

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

Customers – Insist on an ERP Knowledge Transfer Plan

What Gets Tracked and Measured Gets Done

How do you measure knowledge transfer?  Customers – have you ever received a report or completed checklist that demonstrated the Implementation Partner conducted knowledge transfer?   Knowledge transfer is a process, not just a milestone task on a project plan.  Consider the following illustration to identify the importance of knowledge transfer.

ERP Business Solution
Business Solution Defined

In a previous article I referred to this view and also identified people as the component with the largest impact to a successful business solution.  A key enabler for people being successful is Implementation Partners conducting effective knowledge transfer.  For many ERP implementations, knowledge transfer is a process that is loosely managed which results in the Implementation Partner providing support long after the go-live date. For an area so important it demands that we formalize this process to ensure completeness.

Best Practice: Knowledge Transfer Plan

Simply put, if you want to ensure that an objective is reached then you need a plan.  A knowledge transfer plan first defines the knowledge transfer process and the methods that will be used to conduct knowledge transfer.    Second, it defines all the customer’s roles & responsibilities that are required to support the entire business solution – both from a functional and technical perspective.  Third, the knowledge transfer plan should act as a checklist for each individual role validating that effective knowledge transfer has taken place.    Following is an example of a knowledge transfer plan.

Knowledge Transfer Process for Consultants
Knowledge Transfer Plan

Effective knowledge transfer is more than just training or having a user sit next to a consultant.  It requires a holistic approach in using several methods (training, mentoring, knowledge generation, and interactions) to be successful.  The end result of knowledge transfer is enabling the customer to support their new business solution.  

Implications for Implementation Partners

Knowledge is power!  Knowledge can be money and a key source of competitive advantage for an Implementation Partner.  For an Implementation Partner a key concern is balancing knowledge transfer to ensure customer success versus providing too much knowledge resulting in the customer terminating services early.  It’s important for customers to keep in mind that knowledge sharing happens more freely in a trusted environment.

There are two broad categories of service that an Implementation Partner can provide: staff leadership and staff augmentation.

Broad categories for ERP implementation services
ERP Implementation Service Spectrum

To achieve greater customer enablement Implementation Partners should play more of a staff leadership role during the implementation.  Customers, there is a price associated with effective knowledge transfer.  Also keep in mind that there are greater resource requirements (i.e. knowledge, experience, advisory) for staff leadership services.  Price should not be the only consideration when comparing staff leadership versus staff augmentation services.

Summary

True enablement is based upon customers selecting consulting firms that act as a true partner and not just staff augmentation.  If customers only require staff augmentation then I suggest customers get it as cheap as possible, yet don’t expect any reliable knowledge transfer to occur. If this is the first ERP implementation for the customer then I would recommend that the customer selects an Implementation Partner that not only assist your project team but more importantly train and enable your project team to be successful on your own.  That is what a true partner would do.  To maximize knowledge transfer the customer needs to foster a trusted work environment.  Customers – it’s in your best interest to take the lead in creating this environment.

Join the community! 10k followers across 100 countries!

Decisions – Not Documents – Move ERP Implementations Forward

Information Alone Does Not Generate Value 

I grew up in a time when information was hard to obtain.  Generating information was seen as a valuable exercise because information was a scarce resource.  The first software development life cycle (SDLC) I learned was Waterfall.  One of the key focus areas for the Waterfall SDLC was documentation (i.e. information).  However, there is a limit regarding what value information can provide.  In our enthusiasm to create information we sometimes go to an extreme and generate so much information that it becomes a roadblock.  What we often forget is that the key purpose of gathering information is to make decisions!

There is a direct relationship between the speed of customer decisions and the speed of ERP implementations.   The faster a customer can make a decision results in a faster implementation cycle.  Naturally, customers want to make right decisions therefore the project team must gather the right information.  To gather the right information we first need to understand the key decisions that must be made as part of the ERP implementation.

Decision-Oriented Information Gathering

Before the project team begins gathering information they first should consider what key decisions the project must make.  The ERP implementation scope will determine both the information gathering scope and key decisions to be made.  Consider the following illustration:

Gathering information to support decisions

Decision-Oriented Information Gathering

Simply stated, the scope for an ERP implementation consists of the software features that will be deployed (product scope) and the project activities and audience for the deployment (project scope).  Once the implementation scope has been defined, the project team can better identify the information requirements.   Gathering the required information and presenting that information in the appropriate context will enable the customer to make both software configuration and fit/gap decisions.  

Utilize Best Practices to Drive Decisions

A best practice is a process, method, or approach that is considered the most effective at delivering a desired outcome.   A best practice is repeatable and has proven itself over a period of time.   For ERP implementations there are two areas of best practices that should be considered:

  1. Industry best practices
  2. Configuration best practices

Once the implementation scope has been clearly defined, the project team should leverage industry best practices to assist the customer in making decisions.  Providing these best practices up-front to the customer will streamline the information gathering process.  As the project team moves from gathering information to driving decisions on ERP configurations and Fit/Gap, configuration and gap decision best practices can be referenced to provide proven knowledge to key decision makers.   Having the right Implementation Partner can have a significant impact on effective information gathering and decision support.  An Implementation Partner may not know every single decision that the customer must make as part of their ERP implementation but they should be able to identify up-front the key decisions required based upon the scope. 

Consequences of Not Driving to Decisions

The ability to make informed decisions is fundamental to ERP implementation success.  I would like to encourage the two key players that impact the decision-making process for ERP projects:

Customers

We live in a society where we like to keep our options open.  Many say that keeping your options open will make one flexible to future opportunities.  Many customers have applied this concept to technology and business systems.  I have seen this philosophy trickle down into a customer’s decision-making approach for ERP implementations.  Customers desire to have a business solution that is both adaptable and flexible.  It is an understandable and legitimate requirement.  However, customers need to keep two things in mind:

  • Keeping your options open (i.e. not making decisions) will slow down the implementation project and increase your risk for failure.   
  • People, not technology, is the most flexible and adaptable component of a business solution.

Strengths of Business Solution

Business Solution Strengths

Implementation Partners

Implementation Partners should be able to provide industry and ERP configuration best practices to their customers.  These best practices should be formally documented and provided early in the implementation where they have the greatest benefit.  These documents will provide evidence that the Implementation Partner can provide a repeatable and reliable service.

Summary

As a project manager, I’ve observed where project team members focused more on producing information and focused less on producing decisions.     Producing information (i.e. documents) is far easier than driving decision(s).    There is a false perception that generating more information will result in more knowledge and enable customers to make better decisions.  Nothing is further from the truth.  Only when the right information is communicated in the right context then knowledge is created for making informed decisions.

Get it wrong the first time! The case for ERP iterations.

We have all heard the phrase “Get right the first time” used as part of an effort to reduce costs and accelerate implementations.  Unfortunately, many have interpreted this to mean doing an activity once.  We attempt to run ERP implementations as a production process.   Good production processes deliver the anticipated result (a known result), for a standard cost, within a given time.  In contract, ERP implementations are more of an exploration process given the customer variability.  Consider the following illustration:

Every ERP Implementation is Unique

Unique Factors for ERP Implementations

A recurring problem we have with ERP implementations is that we try to “big bang” activities and do not provide an opportunity to learn, adjust, and correct for success.   Iterating certain implementation activities will give us that opportunity.  Let me provide you with a just a few examples.
 

Project Estimating

 As stated in the Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Project Manager’s Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) there are three types of estimates or what I like to call “levels of understanding”.  Estimating is based upon our level of understanding regarding effort, scope, assumptions, constraints, and objectives.

Estimating for ERP Implementations

ERP Estimates

As you move further into an ERP implementation the better we are able to estimate. Why?  The key reason is that you have more proven information to base your estimation.  I worked on generating ERP implementation estimates for the last 10 years and I can safely say that I could never generate a definitive estimate without first going through a detailed fit/gap.  Yet, we expect to hit an implementation estimate that was created before any implementation work is done.  There should be no surprise to the fact that most ERP implementations do not hit their budget given the level of accuracy associated with the estimate. 

Gathering Requirements

Another area for an iterative approach is in requirements gathering.  Recently, I was asked what the best approach for gathering requirements was and my response was that there is no one good approach.

Gathering ERP requirements

Methods for gathering ERP requirements

 

Do not limit yourself to one method for defining requirements.  The more methods (perspectives) you employ to gather requirements the greater the probability for success because the project will have the opportunity to create a holistic requirements definition.

Summary

I firmly believe that every customer’s ERP implementation is unique.  Because every ERP implementation is unique there are a large number of unknowns that we try to address given the limited information we have.  We should take a risk-adverse, iterative approach to remove implementation uncertainty.  Do you think this cause and effect could apply to other areas of an implementation (example: testing, development)?   I am interested to hear your thoughts.