Fixing an ERP mess!
Filed in archive Point of view on April 25, 2006
I saw a piece written by Eric Kimberling in IT Toolbox and put a comment for him. Eric and I have different point of views in fixing an ERP mess. The thing is Eric believes that, in order to fix an ERP mess, we should:
Develop two-tiers of potential solutions: stop-gap / "quick fix" solutions and long-term solutions. Determine the costs and time required to implement each of the options. After prioritization, Begin implementing these low-hanging fruit solutions. The goal should be to build organizational Momentum and confidence with these "quick wins."
I think his points are really valid but one challenge is that people will become used to those "quick-fix" things which is not necessarily the optimum way and if you go and try to improve it in the future, they hardly accept. They don't accept numbers, they just don't want to have trouble again.
But Eric has found the opposite to be true: if done correctly, "quick fix" or stop-gap solutions in place can be a good way to build momentum and confidence in the system, particularly if the implementation has caused a lot of pain in the past.
What do you think? Should we really rely on quick fixes?
Permalink: Fixing an ERP mess!
Tags: ERP implementation
Vote for Fixing an ERP mess!:
|
Rating: 8.33 out of 6 vote(s) cast.
|
Response from:
Zubair
(04/27/06 10:13am)
Yes, i feel that quick-fix stop-gap solutions are appropriate; but for projects where a very specific mindset about the implementaion has developed. Successfully implementing new functionality is not possible without gaining the confidence of end users and the quick fix even if not as per best practices, does help gain build confidence. It's akin to the famous cliche....'to be able to change the system, you have to first become a part of the system.'
Response from:
Eric Kimberling
(04/27/06 10:20pm)
As you already know from my referenced blog entry, there are different schools of thought on this. I think it is a very healthy discussion and disagreement that we have.
The good news is that we are both concerned with the same common goal: to increase user acceptance, job effectiveness, and efficiency. That's a huge first step that many companies overlook, so I think it's ok that we approach the solution from different perspectives.
Eric
Panorama Consulting Group LLC
www.panorama-consulting.com
The good news is that we are both concerned with the same common goal: to increase user acceptance, job effectiveness, and efficiency. That's a huge first step that many companies overlook, so I think it's ok that we approach the solution from different perspectives.
Eric
Panorama Consulting Group LLC
www.panorama-consulting.com
Response from:
Rajiv Renganathan
(05/02/06 8:16pm)
I think "quick-fix" will always exist simply because they are "quick" and gets the work going.
I think it about successfully managing the change wherein the "quick fix" does undergo relook.
I think it about successfully managing the change wherein the "quick fix" does undergo relook.
| RSS |  |
 | |
| Yahoo! |
|
| Addthis |
|
| Bloglines |
|
Most Popular
Basics
Best of
Best practice
Book Review
Did you know
Education
Employment
General
Green supply chain
Green supply chains
Guest Column
Implementation
Interviews
Market Overview
merger and acquisition
Misc
News
Partnerships
Point of view
Practical Tips