3 ms·
I'll have to say with SAP, it's really down to how it's implemented. I've seen AWFUL implementations of it (like the one you're describing) and I've seen amazin
by synicalx 10y ago
I'll have to say with SAP, it's really down to how it's implemented. I've seen AWFUL implementations of it (like the one you're describing) and I've seen amazing ones, generally the ones either done by SAP themselves or by their recommended partners are the best.
Having said that, it's a gigantic beast so it's not surprising that there's a lot of broken implementations out there. Good SAP 'guys' aren't very common unfortunately.
- lfowles 10y agoMaybe you can clear up some confusion I have about SAP. All I know is that it is generally customized to the business. How extensive is that customization? Slapping on business logos? Checking boxes to match the logic to current business procedures? Writing custom code? Edit: Geeze, it has its own wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAP_implementation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAP_implementation
- synicalx 10y agoOh it goes way deeper than that. I used to work at a mid-sized business, maybe 220 staff at peak and they wanted SAP as a straight up CRM - cost for the building was about $120k + licencing (I don't know how much that was). But there is a huge amount of customising you can do, the biggest part I've found is normally the integration with existing systems/data sets/data sources. As far as I'm aware, it will integrate with just about anything - I've seen it pull data from Access 2002 databases, proprietary analytics tools, in-house software that was completely undocumented etc etc. It costs many many $$'s though, good example of how throwing money at a problem can eventually fix it.