3 ms·

I am not sure why that statement, in itself, is bad. I've been in the enterprise software industry for a while, and I have seen how customers have a tendency to

by param 17y ago

I am not sure why that statement, in itself, is bad. I've been in the enterprise software industry for a while, and I have seen how customers have a tendency to request customizations on top of the base product that are huge in scope and would kill the project. My org always recommends 0 customization (never achieved, but intended) to shorten deployment time and go with codebase that is maintained by the product team and does not need a huge in-house IT staff post-deployment. Of course, if the software is crap that statement would make sense, but if that is the case, you should throw the tool out rather than try to plug the holes.

wallflower 17y ago
I look at the statement as not good or bad, just a statement of truth. There is no such thing as shrink-wrapped enterprise software. I've worked with at enterprise software organizations where the customer does their own custom modifications and tries to politically lobby us to get them baselined (and take ownership). Modifications form a lucrative and essential part of enterprise software, judging by what my co-workers and friends at other companies were billed out at an hourly basis (the consultant was always paid a mere fraction of the $100-$200/hr). Sometimes I wonder if paying for expensive consultants wasn't just a CYA-move by the client ("look, I hired the company to consult directly")
- param 17y ago
  Then don't you mean that the original statement is false? You always change the software to fit the company, and never change the company to fit the software?
  - wallflower 17y ago
    Yes, like motivational quotes, there is always a bit of untruth to a statement like that.
jodrellblank 17y ago
It's bad because if you change your company to fit the enterprise software, then you can be no better (at XYZ) than any other company using the same software. No competetive advantage is possible (at least, in that area). If you can customize the software, you can try to fit it around your company's strong points. If you can write the software from scratch, you can tailor it for your company. That's the dream, anyway.

by param 17y ago

wallflower 17y ago

I look at the statement as not good or bad, just a statement of truth. There is no such thing as shrink-wrapped enterprise software. I've worked with at enterprise software organizations where the customer does their own custom modifications and tries to politically lobby us to get them baselined (and take ownership). Modifications form a lucrative and essential part of enterprise software, judging by what my co-workers and friends at other companies were billed out at an hourly basis (the consultant was always paid a mere fraction of the $100-$200/hr). Sometimes I wonder if paying for expensive consultants wasn't just a CYA-move by the client ("look, I hired the company to consult directly")

param 17y ago
Then don't you mean that the original statement is false? You always change the software to fit the company, and never change the company to fit the software?
- wallflower 17y ago
  Yes, like motivational quotes, there is always a bit of untruth to a statement like that.

jodrellblank 17y ago

It's bad because if you change your company to fit the enterprise software, then you can be no better (at XYZ) than any other company using the same software. No competetive advantage is possible (at least, in that area). If you can customize the software, you can try to fit it around your company's strong points. If you can write the software from scratch, you can tailor it for your company. That's the dream, anyway.