Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: When Is It Better To Modify the ERP vs. Interfacing It?

New submitter yeshuawatso writes I work for one of the largest HVAC manufacturers in the world. We've currently spent millions of dollars investing in an ERP system from Oracle (via a third-party implementor and distributor) that handles most of our global operations, but it's been a great ordeal getting the thing to work for us across SBUs and even departments without having to constantly go back to the third-party, whom have their hands out asking for more money. What we've also discovered is that the ERP system is being used for inputting and retrieving data but not for managing the data. Managing the data is being handled by systems of spreadsheets and access databases wrought with macros to turn them into functional applications. I'm asking you wise and experienced readers on your take if it's a better idea to continue to hire our third-party to convert these applications into the ERP system or hire internal developers to convert these applications to more scalable and practical applications that interface with the ERP (via API of choice)? We have a ton of spare capacity in data centers that formerly housed mainframes and local servers that now mostly run local Exchange and domain servers. We've consolidated these data centers into our co-location in Atlanta but the old data centers are still running, just empty. We definitely have the space to run commodity servers for an OpenStack, Eucalyptus, or some other private/hybrid cloud solution, but would this be counter productive to the goal of standardizing processes. Our CIO wants to dump everything into the ERP (creating a single point of failure to me) but our accountants are having a tough time chewing the additional costs of re-doing every departmental application. What are your experiences with such implementations?

16 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. Hire More Devs by jerpyro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would hire devs to interface with the ERP. Because when you go to upgrade to the next version [of the ERP], you have a modular thing that you can change pieces of rather than having to pay someone to rewrite the entire thing. If you continue to customize the ERP you're using, you'll be locked in to that specific version and all of its security/stability/functionality problems.

    1. Re:Hire More Devs by ranton · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree. If you are spending millions of dollars on your ERP, you should probably have in house developers capable of customizing your system (unless you just mean a couple million over a decade or so). You will probably always need some help from consultants, but a good deal of the work could be done by your own staff. This would likely save quite a bit of money. I work as a consultant on various ERP and CRM systems, and all of our long term clients eventually start to bring the work in house because of costs. Our load goes down as they hire more people, but we usually stay available with support contracts for years.

      And the first thing your in house devs should control is the integrations between your ERP and home ground applications. Companies that rely on consultants to handle their integrations become very dependent on those consultants.

      There is nothing wrong with having a large number of integrations. If you have a large system, the belief that you can get all business processes into one ERP system is probably just a dream. But getting a firm handle on all of your integrations is an attainable goal. Then you can make more informed decisions on when and how to move functionality into your ERP software. And you can be more comfortable that you are re-implementing that functionality properly.

      Disclaimer: My day job is re-engineering the integrations for ERP/CRM systems, so take the importance I give to the integrations with a grain of salt.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    2. Re:Hire More Devs by pkinetics · · Score: 4, Insightful

      EXACTLY THIS!

      For the love of all that is sane, make external interfaces.

      This has the added benefit of providing an easy to find definition of your non ERP standardized business practices.

      If the data belongs in the ERP, it should be managed in the ERP. If it is not, that means your ERP configuration is missing important business workflows and practices. The more the ERP breaks, the less people trust it, and the more they try to do outside of it. Your ERP should not have several feeders of business rules data.

      It is one thing for the external interfaces to have good data, and send good data. It is another to bury all the source data in separate apps. I'm just imaging 100 little spreadsheets and Access databases propagating bad information across each other. This value means this is Billy Bob's spreadsheet but in Peggy Sue it should be this value.

      AHHHHHHH

  2. No matter how common you think it is... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Always fucking expand the first instance of your acronym in your summary. Always.

    Many of have absolutely nothing to do with Enterprise resource planning in our day-to-day lives. A lot of us don't care about a strategic business unit. Most slashdotters are in the field of making software, not babbling almost-but-not-quite-meaningless business jargon about software.

    1. Re:No matter how common you think it is... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because articles aren't just for those who can answer them. The rest of us are curious and want to learn new things, but when one keeps the subject shrouded in esoteric jargon (to this crowd mostly) that makes it hard to do.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:No matter how common you think it is... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because, and this is important, jargon familiarity isn't always equivalent to available insight. It's what popular culture uses as fictional markers for insight, but the reality is that not only is expertise a continuum, but it often involves ideas from multiple realms of knowledge.

    3. Re:No matter how common you think it is... by msauve · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a simple matter of getting all hands on deck and thinking outside of the box, so they can add value to a 6 sigma paradigm, architecting it to meet mission critical business needs while driving a best of breed reprocessing, in order to improve the EBITDA and get the boss a big bonus. If we can globally revolutionize synergistic e-commerce while doing so, win-win!

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  3. Major application vendor headaches... by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Informative

    My experience is that by using large vendor systems like Oracle and SAP is just a good way to waste money without getting any benefits. Those systems are in general not very well designed, and the money paid is used for marketing, not application development.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  4. Vendor vs In House by James-NSC · · Score: 5, Insightful
    One of the key problems I've run into, not only in regards to ERP, but in general, is that when you outsource all of your development your future is in the hands of someone who doesn't have your companies best interests as their primary concern. Their primary goal is to get paid and to keep their company in the green, the only way they can do that is to, as you noted, keep putting their hands out. It is not in their best interest to produce a system that is self sufficient, it is in their best interest to keep you on the line.

    That said, it's not always practical to in-house everything, so a balance needs to be struck - keep the design and some worker bees in-house and then leverage vendors/contractors to spin up extra bodies for build cycles.

    Regarding your single point of failure concern - while valid, a properly designed ERP system with redundancies and load balancing should alleviate the core of that problem. Again, balance needs to be struck, while you want a single place to do all of your ERP functions, it doesn't always make sense to have them in one application that has to be customized to within an inch of it's life in order to do everything it needs to do. This needs to be addressed in the design phase to create logical business units that can sit on separate applications that, ex, communicate with the proverbial mothership via an API

  5. ERP system from *Oracle* by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    there is your answer. ditch it. quick..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  6. Bite the bullet / replace the apps by dave562 · · Score: 5, Informative

    We are still going through this where I work. Previously IT was run on a bunch of Lotus Notes / Domino databases. Those have since been replaced by PeopleSoft and ServiceNow.

    You have to see the opportunity for what it is. You can have real conversations with the departments about what their real needs are. It is going to take a while, but you will have to produce documents that detail the core application functionalities for all of the applications. Then you will have to map those functions into the ERP system. Once you have done that, you will have your gap analysis and be able to focus your developmental resources. You have to get buy in from across the organization and get people committed to and willing to do things differently. The ERP equivalents of the current applications will not be apples to apples. If you try to do that, you will never get through it and will end up failing. If you are just going to recreate the apps, you might as well not even bother. The key is to focus on the functionality. Focus on the business needs / business cases for the applications.

    For something that big, you are going to need at least 3+ full time employees. A project manager to keep everything organized and fight back against scope creep, a senior developer / architect to make the technical decisions and provide guidance to the team of developer(s) who will do the actual work. In all honesty, what you are proposing is a significant investment for the organization and a shift in culture. Each one of those employees is easily a six figure salary, so figure over half a million dollar in salary (plus benefits, etc.) Good developers are hard to find and building a successful development team is a challenge. You will obviously need an executive sponsor who can help you figure out where to position this new group / department in the overall organizational hierarchy.

    The long term benefit to your organization is that you free yourself from the vendor. The risk that you run is that you might end up with incompetent developers or management on the new team and find yourself worse off than before.

    Have you considered bringing in another vendor? At the very least, you can use that as leverage to negotiate more favorable conditions with the current vendor.

    You should have enough experience with the current vendor to determine how accurate their project quotes are. Use that knowledge when you ask them for quotes on replacing / reproducing the current application functionality. Then compare that to what it will cost your organization to do it in house. It should be clear very early on in the process if you are going to save enough money to justify such a drastic realignment of the management, operation and development of the systems.

  7. Easy Answer... by Kookus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You didn't start your question with the sentence:
    "I am the CIO for one of the largest HVAC manufacturers in the world."

    So the answer is: I hope you either have a family tie to the company, or some other mechanism of having your voice heard.
    Since you already have shown that the path is chosen and the consultants are already on the ground running with the conversion, then it's already too late.

    See, really your problem is that you hired in people that don't know how to do the job, and that's the problem with the majority of consultants these days. If you have good people (consultants or internal) then good things are possible no matter what choice is made. If you have bad people, it doesn't matter either.. the outcome was based purely on whether you have the knowledgeable people in a decision making role and in positions to actually do the work.

    It's pretty much hit or miss on successful or failure ERP implementations, the common thread is the people and management. Unless that's fixed, get ready for a rough ride.

    There's one thing that I try to keep in mind, though, when traveling down the rough road:
    Change the things that you're able to change and position yourself for the change that you can't. So that way, even though things don't go your way, hopefully you have a backup plan that is still possible in the event of failure.

  8. I'm available by fredrated · · Score: 4, Funny

    15 years solid Access experience!

  9. Re:Keep ERP system customization to a minimum by King_TJ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm inclined to agree!

    I worked for one place that tried to roll out a big ERP system and even though it was done in multiple stages, just the "stage 1" portion was an incredibly costly undertaking that enlightened the in-house I.T. staff as to just what a bloated kludge the software really was.

    I remember we encountered certain system errors trying to run reports which stumped the support people for the software.... What finally got it fixed was my boss devoting an afternoon to looking at it himself. He was pretty savvy with Oracle databases and rewrote some buggy queries in the code, correcting it.

    All of the money charged for maintenance and support and licensing for these systems is NOT necessarily equivalent to receiving a superior level of actual assistance with the software. So IMO, just spend your money more wisely on in-house developers.

  10. Re:who not whom. by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I care. Language cries when you abuse it like that. It makes me sad. Think of the small words!

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  11. Use DRM by rabtech · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, not that DRM, I mean Data Relationship Management. It's designed for taking that manual excel spreadsheet crap and turning it into an actual process. I should know, I integrated the JS engine into it. You can version the data, blend (merge) it, and so on and create workflows.

    I don't feel bad mentioning it since I'm leaving Oracle shortly to join a startup, but that's my full disclosure.

    --
    Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)