See how long it takes to implement the system

According to a 2013 study by Panorama Consulting Solutions, it takes an average of 18 months to implement an ERP system. Moreover, according to the same study, 61 percent of projects are delayed. Such delays tend to be very inconvenient, especially if the launch of a new system is planned for a specific date, such as the beginning of the fiscal year or the end of the existing system's license.

In addition to high costs, long implementation often has a negative psychological effect. The key players, especially on the customer side, gradually lose their drive and motivation because it is not "their job" after all. A vicious circle begins. So what can be done to make the implementation as fast as possible without compromising quality? Let's look at the main key factors for a successful and fast implementation.

Correct system selection

Above all, the current and future needs of the company must be taken into account. A precise definition of the system requirements based on the recognition of real weaknesses is essential. The worst thing is to implement a system that is not needed. The vision of the company must also be clear, i.e. where it is heading and what needs it will have in the future. The system must be able to support growth, not become its limit.

Requests are categorised according to priorities that reflect the importance of the process from which the request originated.

When defining requirements, it is important to move from key processes and agendas to less critical ones. Requirements are categorised according to priorities that reflect the importance of the process from which the requirement originated. A good solution provider can help define requirements or at least review them, and can bring an unbiased view of the company's operations. The implementation is then guided by these necessary requirements and no time is wasted doing something that is not needed.

It pays to choose an experienced supplier who is an all-round partner to the company in setting up the system. The solution provider must not only be proficient in the system itself, but must also be well versed in the business. The implementation team then does not waste time learning the customer's business, on the contrary, it can bring interesting ideas and suggestions for optimizing processes because it can look at things from a distance.

Project Management

Following the definition of the system requirements, clear project objectives need to be set. From the point of view of speed of implementation, it is important to deal only with activities that lead to the set objectives. This will be ensured by a well-designed project plan, which must include clearly measurable checkpoints so that it is clear at any point in time at what stage the project is at and whether it may be running late.

However, a good project plan is not enough, it is also necessary to have a strong project management on both sides (at the supplier and the customer), which both monitors the development of the implementation, but above all creates the best possible working conditions for the other team members. In practice, it is often the project management that is spared. For many companies, the project manager is a hard-to-grasp item in the project budget and pushes the contractor to minimize it.

Unfortunately, project management on the customer side is often underestimated. Usually, this role is filled by someone who knows the company well, but has no experience in managing similar projects. If there is no one in the company with appropriate experience, it is a good idea to hire an experienced "project manager" from outside. Experience shows that good project management often makes the difference between successful and unsuccessful projects.

A good project manager can constantly monitor the project goals and direct individual team members. It happens that in good faith and in the heat of the battle, the team embarks on things that may be useful but are not among the project priorities. This is often caused by ordinary (future) users of the system who, in an attempt to help, make more and more demands on the system. Failure to maintain the scope of the project is one of the most common causes of problems.

Methodology

Most implementation projects are guided by some kind of implementation methodology. Good suppliers ERP solutions have their established methodologies proven in practice. Whether the agile approach or the good old "waterfall" approach is used, it is important that the chosen methodology fits the nature of the project and, most importantly, that it is close to the people on the implementation team. It is definitely not worth experimenting here or forcing the supplier into "modern" practices if his team is not familiar with them.

Various forms of prototyping are proving very successful. A frequent problem, especially with waterfall, is that at the beginning of the project in the analysis phase they work in the abstract and it takes a long time for the customer to see something - they do not know the system and can hardly imagine an abstract solution. A prototype, on the other hand, will quickly materialize the project and allow for better involvement of key users. They can then give very quick and accurate feedback to the developers, eliminating the risk of the final solution deviating from the original intent.

Implementation team

It is clear that in an ERP implementation, the quality of the implementation team on both sides is critical to the success or failure of the project. It is important that the team works together as much as possible. Remote implementations, where the delivery team comes up with something on their own and only occasionally validates with the customer, rarely lead to success. On the contrary, it is ideal to have one joint team that sees the implementation as a joint project.

But if some team members don't get along humanly, it's not good to ignore it. Team chemistry is really important.

Top management support

Even if we have a well-developed project plan, strong project management and a quality project team, the success of the implementation is not yet guaranteed. This is because an implementation project requires clearly stated support from top management. If the ERP implementation is not perceived as a strategic project on the customer side, it is a problem. Then it is not even a priority for the client's solution team, and key users often have more important things to do than some ERP.

With a good project plan, project management and a quality team, success is not guaranteed without the declared support of top management.

Above all, however, the lack of support from the customer's management often manifests itself in the definition of the project's objectives, as the implementation does not cover important and strategic areas of the company's business. The implementation will then never be perceived as successful from the client's point of view, even though it may fit within the budget and schedule and formally meet all project objectives. It will just be an expensive system for operations, but it will not bring any strong competitive advantage.