8 ms·

> Each of the old IT staff in the old system you can replace with 3-5 SAP consultants. Is this facetious, or unintentionally so? Do you mean you need to replac

> Each of the old IT staff in the old system you can replace with 3-5 SAP consultants. Is this facetious, or unintentionally so? Do you mean you need to replace one in-house staff with between 3 and 5 and presumably very expensive consultants?

hef19898 4y ago
For the duration of the ERP project, SAP is not different to any other vendor in that regard, from preparation through hyoer care after go live, yes. Yes, you have 3-5 expensive SAP, or other ERP system, consultants sitting next one internal IT guy and another 3-5 internal business people with a very deep understanding of the business processes in question and solid basic knowledge about ERP systems. Otherwise you set yourself up for failure.
- PeterStuer 4y ago
  "'sitting next one internal IT guy and another 3-5 internal business people with a very deep understanding of the business processes in question and solid basic knowledge about ERP systems"' Where do you think the customer is going to find that army of hyper competent experienced staff ideling around their premisess waiting for the day an SAP project drops?
  - hef19898 4y ago
    The externals arw hired as needed, expensive of course. The latter because having good people helps in any scenario.
    - PeterStuer 4y ago
      Yes. I have been one of those. Where do you think the externals get the expertise needed that is particular to the business? We can be professional about it and try to point out the real exceses or answer generic questions, redress and inform on specific knowledge traps or consequences of answering choices placed in front of the customer, but in the end it is still a business that is running 'right-sized' being required to drop everything for a few years to assist an IT transitioning project? Overloading the customer is one of the simplest ways to make sure ít is not your fault when things most often go south.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- j-bos 4y ago
  Then why would any one choose to use SAP with that additional tax?
  - hef19898 4y ago
    Becasue the alternative might even be more expensive, business wise. Also, ERP projects are not be taken lightly.
  - psytrx 4y ago
    Because SAP is what most other companies in the sector use and because there are few alternatives. And because everyone else is m uses it, it must be good. Right? Right?! Also, because leading employees usually have no idea about the intricacies of the "old" system and think it's easily replaceable with a solution from the shelf.
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    I think key part is "for duration of project". Savings, if successful, then come for the lifetime of erp. One thing I've seen frequently is treating erp implementation as IT project. I'm a technical team member doing erp implementations for last 25 years (not sap) but I'll freely admit erp implementation is not about me or technology. It's primarily a business transformation project. You need those erp business process experts to guide and customize, AND you need thorough willingness to change your internal processes to fit the industry best practices you're buying. "successful erp project" empathically does not mean "installed it and it runs". It means thorough and detailed understanding of requirements, mapping to new processes, customization where absolutely positively necessary, substantial and organized and embraced business transformation, extensive training, and thorough testing including user acceptance testing. If you think is erp as something you just install and life will be the same but magically better, you're gonna fail hard. Missed requirements and edge cases, and or significant internal resistance to change, are frequent challenges.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  Yeah, I can't see any better argument against contracting an ERP package. This is exactly true, and those 3-5 way more expensive new developers you are hiring through a 3rd party won't create anything better than the original one that knew your company. (They are not temporary either, because the duration of the ERP project is forever.)
  - hef19898 4y ago
    And the alternative to an ERP in an manufacturing environment is what exactly, in your opinion?
    - marcosdumay 4y ago
      The alternative to an ERP package is creating software that manages it.
spaniard89277 4y ago
I work for a large telco in the tech support side. We had a bunch of internally-developed tools that were clumsy but worked and fitted our workflow. We've been fed an off-the-shelf solution with modern tech like Angular and the like. And even without the SAP burden the company is basically destroying our departament. I guess they don't care to lose us poor peasants but they're basically losing al know-how and one of the only two edges they have against competition. I can't say I care too much at this point, but it's amazing how easy can companies destroy themselves for not caring about their employees.
moffkalast 4y ago
This is intentional and part of the business model of most companies selling ERP solutions. They deliberately (or incompetently) make their product so overcomplicated that noone outside of their consultant team can make heads or tails of it. Then they can charge big bucks or consulting fees.

hef19898 4y ago

For the duration of the ERP project, SAP is not different to any other vendor in that regard, from preparation through hyoer care after go live, yes. Yes, you have 3-5 expensive SAP, or other ERP system, consultants sitting next one internal IT guy and another 3-5 internal business people with a very deep understanding of the business processes in question and solid basic knowledge about ERP systems. Otherwise you set yourself up for failure.

PeterStuer 4y ago
"'sitting next one internal IT guy and another 3-5 internal business people with a very deep understanding of the business processes in question and solid basic knowledge about ERP systems"' Where do you think the customer is going to find that army of hyper competent experienced staff ideling around their premisess waiting for the day an SAP project drops?
- hef19898 4y ago
  The externals arw hired as needed, expensive of course. The latter because having good people helps in any scenario.
  - PeterStuer 4y ago
    Yes. I have been one of those. Where do you think the externals get the expertise needed that is particular to the business? We can be professional about it and try to point out the real exceses or answer generic questions, redress and inform on specific knowledge traps or consequences of answering choices placed in front of the customer, but in the end it is still a business that is running 'right-sized' being required to drop everything for a few years to assist an IT transitioning project? Overloading the customer is one of the simplest ways to make sure ít is not your fault when things most often go south.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
j-bos 4y ago
Then why would any one choose to use SAP with that additional tax?
- hef19898 4y ago
  Becasue the alternative might even be more expensive, business wise. Also, ERP projects are not be taken lightly.
- psytrx 4y ago
  Because SAP is what most other companies in the sector use and because there are few alternatives. And because everyone else is m uses it, it must be good. Right? Right?! Also, because leading employees usually have no idea about the intricacies of the "old" system and think it's easily replaceable with a solution from the shelf.
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  I think key part is "for duration of project". Savings, if successful, then come for the lifetime of erp. One thing I've seen frequently is treating erp implementation as IT project. I'm a technical team member doing erp implementations for last 25 years (not sap) but I'll freely admit erp implementation is not about me or technology. It's primarily a business transformation project. You need those erp business process experts to guide and customize, AND you need thorough willingness to change your internal processes to fit the industry best practices you're buying. "successful erp project" empathically does not mean "installed it and it runs". It means thorough and detailed understanding of requirements, mapping to new processes, customization where absolutely positively necessary, substantial and organized and embraced business transformation, extensive training, and thorough testing including user acceptance testing. If you think is erp as something you just install and life will be the same but magically better, you're gonna fail hard. Missed requirements and edge cases, and or significant internal resistance to change, are frequent challenges.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
marcosdumay 4y ago
Yeah, I can't see any better argument against contracting an ERP package. This is exactly true, and those 3-5 way more expensive new developers you are hiring through a 3rd party won't create anything better than the original one that knew your company. (They are not temporary either, because the duration of the ERP project is forever.)
- hef19898 4y ago
  And the alternative to an ERP in an manufacturing environment is what exactly, in your opinion?
  - marcosdumay 4y ago
    The alternative to an ERP package is creating software that manages it.

spaniard89277 4y ago

I work for a large telco in the tech support side. We had a bunch of internally-developed tools that were clumsy but worked and fitted our workflow. We've been fed an off-the-shelf solution with modern tech like Angular and the like. And even without the SAP burden the company is basically destroying our departament. I guess they don't care to lose us poor peasants but they're basically losing al know-how and one of the only two edges they have against competition. I can't say I care too much at this point, but it's amazing how easy can companies destroy themselves for not caring about their employees.

moffkalast 4y ago

This is intentional and part of the business model of most companies selling ERP solutions. They deliberately (or incompetently) make their product so overcomplicated that noone outside of their consultant team can make heads or tails of it. Then they can charge big bucks or consulting fees.