Thirty years after the ERP universe was created, we can still ask the right questions about its expansion in the company. Today, the continuation or creation of deployment remains

a real challenge. And at the very least, the question of "how" is first and foremost. Must one change everything at once for everybody, or should we proceed in waves, step by step?

ERP came about at a time when companies were organized in vertical structures and in a very hierarchical fashion gained access to telecommunications.

At the same time, it was noticed that the limits of those structures had been reached. ERP has established itself as the most powerful tool for creating cross-functionality and making departments communicate with each other. However, at first glance, the situation is a paradox: opting for tools with the aim of making the services communicate with each other, while on a daily basis, they are asked to work first for themselves and to defend their interests. In fact, everyone is responsible for their processes and watches over their department.

Big bang* and tunnel effect

In a quite binary manner, when one studies the deployment of an ERP, there are two options for change: one global, all at once, the other in waves. In a radical Big Bang scenario, everybody will change tools overnight, with new methods as the result. This approach has the advantage of putting all the teams on the bridge, focused on a unifying, common and clear objective.

Everyone becomes an actor of change and feels mobilized in a new dynamic of development. Nevertheless, beyond the incompressible reluctance of some and brakes in the face of novelty, a recurring drawback appears. The famous "tunnel effect". Integrating a new tool requires alignment between business processes and the solution. Every time there is a gap, answers must be found. Therefore, it is up to the business itself or the IT to adapt. There is no gospel, issues are resolved on a case-by-case basis, with long discussions. We are looking for the perfect model, because in this approach, few changes are expected after the start of the new ERP. However, failures can create strong inconsistencies, including in the long term.

The modularity of the step by step

The other option is to deploy in waves or in batches. It is a question of finding by all means how to divide your project into independent sections and deploy each segment as you go. When the Microsoft Dynamics For Finance & Supply Chain Management ERP is deployed, around thirty modules are to be considered. It is quite possible to deploy only some of them. Take finance for example. The operational tools that are already running are kept with interfaces and one choose to deploy as they go. The principle: to achieve after a certain period of time the objective of a single ERP. However, at the level of an international group, it is almost impossible to achieve this goal. Through acquisitions, mergers and other adaptations of the company to its market, we are constantly inheriting new tools that fuel business and IT service projects.

Pragmatism and DevOps

By breaking down the project like this, by module, but also by country, or by business division, it is possible to avoid the "tunnel effect" and allow the businesses to move forward step by step. We therefore seek to implement, not the perfect solution, but a flexible, adaptable solution that can change over time. We saw it recently with the health crisis, processes need to quickly adapt. Teams should be aware that we are not setting up a flow for fifteen years when within three years it could be completely reviewed on request and within a reasonable period of time. Thanks to an approach seeking more pragmatism, it becomes possible to grant more independence to the teams within the logic of the "DevOps" model. The teams who, out of need for the production of a solution, are autonomous and can very quickly surprising by their responsiveness. Of course, in this case we depend much more on human resources. Indeed, as the organization is not above them to guarantee the quality of the processes, it is necessary to accept the delegation of responsibilities. On the other hand, with simpler, more direct communication, the harmful effects of organizational bureaucracy are receding and the social bond is strengthened, bringing less turnover and significant knowledge sharing. Which means, a less burdensome management of attrition within teams. One therefore comes to the conclusion here that the quality of a project would be assured, not by stacks of project management in PMO mode but by more independence. We will have the opportunity to talk about this in a future topic.

Expert advice

Finally, if the Big Bang allows to do everything at once, "the tunnel effect" remains a big risk. Within the framework of the change  by wave option, one can count on a more continuous flow with better control, coupled with a stronger capacity of adaptation. At any rate, it is in function of the structure of your company, your projects and the maturity of your teams that you will be able to study these different deployment solutions. And to comprehend even better all the twists and turns and obstacles of such a determining project, do not hesitate to ask for feedback from ERP experts.°

By J.Lascaux, FiveForty° founding partner

*Big Bang with tunnel effect vs change by steps towards a single ERP