We await release of part II of this article.
In the meanwhile, may I submit one observation relating to organizational restructuring preceding the implementation of ERP. The article certainly places due wieghtage to this aspect.
The key persons of the implementation team need to create an environment, both with the senior management and with the respective operations management, to ensure that TO-BE process design happens simultaneously with the AS-IS process mapping.
This is THE opportunity to identify areas where the current processes - in terms procedural changes as well as in terms of change in the roles of the participating operational team members - would require change. This should lead to open-minded brainstorming of the scope of TO-BE process, both in terms of compliance to incorporating the technical design of the ERP program as well as organizations's capability and willingness to undertake required qualitative change.

Should the scale of complexity of changes- relating to culture or organization's physical and information structure - call for phasing out the scope, mapping out phased plan should be taken up without any hesitation. It would be necessary to ensure that minimum requirements of ERP program's technical structure - both individually for that process /module or collectively for the requisite integration with other process / module - are not compromised.

Equally important is to document the strategic and execution aspects of phasing of implementation of respective TO=BE process, both in terms of clarity of scope at each phase as well as role and responsibility of each interacting constituent.

This will greatly help in scaling up of the system maturity at later stages, since at this stage the issue has entered more into interpersonal behavioral domain than the technical expertise of the implementing team or degree of commitment of the operating team.

Hi Ashok,

Thanks for your comments.

And, I agree with you. Change needs both starting and concluding destinations. In other words, companies need to know where they are ("as is" maps, existing employee capabilities/resistance, etc.) to map out where they want to get to ("to be" maps, redesigned org structure, etc.).

I also agree that a projected future state needs to be driven by strategic and operational goals. We believe that these tasks are critical parts of the planning phase, and should be defined in the project charter and scope statement.

Cheers,
Jonathan

We are several years into an ERP implementation as we work through our diverse divisions. i.e. Grain Bins, Ethanol Plant, Commercial Buildings, Modular Homes, Jail furniture etc. All of these divisions have been in the midwest USA. We worked with a consulting firm for the first implementation and developed a dedicated implementation team in house for the remaining implementations. One of our next adventures is an implementation in France for a second Grain Bin division. Our plans are to implement as similar as possible to the grain bin division that is already on the ERP application. Do you have any suggestions for planning an implementaion using primarily an in-house implementation team based in the states?

Hi Jay,

We've seen both successes and failures using internal resources - in much the same was as we hear about successes and failures when external consultants are used.

In my view, the general rules of effective ERP project management don't change, subject to the following caveats.

My concern with what you've said is that U.S.-corporate is mandating change on its French division. Buy-in from the French executives as well as employees is absolutely critical to your project's prospects of success. If the users and management don't buy in to the system, the redesigned processes and restructured organization, the project won't work - no matter how strong the mandate is.

In terms of generalities, it's also critically important that your organization manage the cultural differences. At the risk of over-generalization, American and French organizations take very different approaches to work. Typically, the balance of power in U.S. companies lies with management. In Europe, employees have much stronger rights. This difference needs to be well managed to properly effect the required changes - including business process mapping and job redesigns (among other things). Again, your organization needs to get stakeholder buy-in on this one.

A final point worth noting: the relationship between your organization's internal implementation team and the client (in this case, the France-based Grain Bin division) needs to be strong. There is an organizational history and relationship component that simply doesn't exist when outside resources are used. This relationship needs to be managed properly.

I'm happy to discuss this offline. Please feel free to email me at jonathang@pemeco.com.

Cheers,
Jonathan
1-866-282-5899 x 802

Interesting and insightful piece of article. In my experience there are some critical factors to a successfult ERP implementation. Some of them..1. organizational change management. The two important pieces to Org change management..communication and strong training..this is critical to prepare the organization to the big change that an ERP implementation brings. The work force has to be made comfortable working on a new system. If the business process mapping and restructuring can happen with a view of the ERP to be implemented, the work force will be better prepared. No matter, if the system is technically sound and correct, unless it is properly used, the project may not be termed as successful. 2. A dedicated team from within the organization and if possible the implementation team. The team from within the organization has to consist of subject matter experts and technical experts..this really goes a long way in a successful implementation. 3. Testing - within the project..can't stress enough about this phase..typically should include three direct phases, unit, integration and user acceptance along with regression and performance / stress testing..depending upon where you are in the program. The restructuring of business processes address another important aspect of a successful implementation - least customization to the ERP product. Typically, customization to an ERP leads to issues which are not visible upfront but surface later in areas unexpected..very difficult to fix /address. However, since this is almost utopian to expect no customization, a very strong change management process control has to be implemented to address which will members from various parts / departments of the orgnaization and implementation team to assess impact of change and try and minimize any issues..