Comment by FartinMowler

Comment by FartinMowler 2 days ago

Exactly this! I recall a large survey of SAP deployment projects in the late 1990s. By far the most successful consultancy, out of Chicago I think it was, had it written in their contracts "you'll change your business processes to match SAP; not SAP to match your existing business processes" (more or less). By turning away clients who could not accept that, they had happy clients, happy employees (little burn out), and no runaway costly never-ending death march projects.

cbsmith 2 days ago

There's a bit of selection bias going on there though. The reality is that SAP and similar products are designed for a business that works a certain way, and so obviously businesses that fit that profile are most likely to get value from using the tool. However, there's a reason other businesses don't work that way, and often retooling to work the SAP would be a net negative. Sometimes retooling SAP to fit the business is also a net negative, in which case the right choice is just to not use SAP, but I've certainly observed cases where there was a benefit from refactoring the tool to fit the business.

Reply View 6 replies

jll29 2 days ago

On "retooling SAP": SAP deliver their systems with all source code and dev platform included, and that may help convince some customers to go for SAP.
However, those that embark on deviating from the well-trodden path are going to be in trouble soon: after every update, potential changes made need to be re-done or edited or at least tested. So as the parent suggests it's really better to adjust the business process if you can.

Reply View | 1 reply
- cbsmith 2 days ago
  
  > So as the parent suggests it's really better to adjust the business process if you can.
  That's another way of saying that there are serious trade-offs going that way that need to be justified... which may also be true for the path of adjusting the business process.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
FartinMowler 2 days ago

There's a ton of variety out there in the real world such that you'll always find a few businesses that match almost any scenario you can imagine. So, yes, for some business doing a process a certain way is a competitive differentiator or advantage ... or even a necessity for their particular industry. For these businesses banging the SAP square peg into their special BP round hole is worth attempting. Even better might be just building their own custom round peg. I'm suggesting that many (not all) businesses are doing a BP a certain way for no compelling reason whatsoever other than that's the way they (almost randomly) picked to do it decades ago and could easily change to a standard practice without loss of competitiveness (maybe even gain by focusing on what does).

Reply View | 1 reply
- cbsmith 2 days ago
  
  Exactly what I'm trying to say, though written better.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
NearAP 2 days ago

> There's a bit of selection bias going on there though. The reality is that SAP and similar products are designed for a business that works a certain way
ERP products are designed following "standard" or "best" practices/processes. It's common to see companies first contract a consulting company to "re-design" their processes before they then try to implement an ERP system.

Reply View | 1 reply
- cbsmith 2 days ago
  
  s/ERP/any other business software product/
  ...and yet there are all kinds of segments where customized tooling is more the norm than otherwise. It just depends on whether the deviation from the norm is a competitive disadvantage or a competitive advantage. There are a lot businesses where in at least one case, it is an advantage.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

xboxnolifes a day ago

That's just days it's visible to be selective in your customers, not that all businesses have the same processes or would be better off not customizing.

Reply View 0 replies