Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Technology-enabled vs. Clean slate reeng

0 helpful
7 replies

by jamie

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this but I need help in clarifying the above topic. I've read a book by O'Leary on ERP and I'm confused over the above topic and I hope someone can clarify this for me.

(Please correct me if I'm wrong while trying to explain what I think/interpret the book is trying to tell me regarding the topic above)...

Technology enabled: The way the book explains it, it's trying to say that companies who adopt this strategy will use ERP and at the same time, no customisations is done onto the ERP system. The only thing that changes is the business processes - i.e. Working around the system.

Clean Slate: On the other hand, for this approach, companies will adopt the ERP system but do customisations onto the system so that it "fits" into the organisation based on their needs and requirements - i.e. design the system so that it works for you.

By the way, what is "pure vanilla"? Does "pure vanilla" mean ERP systems that come as it is and the companies that adopt such system make no customisation at all onto the system and hence the term "pure vanilla"?

I hope someone can help me out .. I'm doing an assignment on ERP implementation and the topic above is confusing me.

7 replies

by jamie

Sorry, I forgot to say "Thanks in advance" to anyone who replies my post. :) - Jamie

by janez.vovk

I think that clean state implementation is more common - large companies have their own processes which differ from solutions in any ERP system, so customisation is the only way to implement them. Only small companies with non-complicated processes may use first kind of implementation - ERP system is right to work with.

Best wishes, Janez

by jamie

Thanks janez for your reply. I agree that large companies with complicated process would have to opt for customisation. As I've read on a few articles, even if the erp system is adopted with no customisation, its quite impossible as most erp software cannot do everything that you want them to do.

At the same time, customisation requires more resources - funding, maintenance etc.
Jamie

by zen37

If your company can customize their business procedure to the system, then an ERP system is right for you. SAP and JDEdwards are good exemple of these. These systems are built under strict and well proven business guidelines. It should pretty much fit any kind of business.

Clean slate reeng or costumized systems environment like i like to call it, is where you build your systems completly based on the needs of your industry.

There are pluses and minuses for each. The biggest one that comes to mind is an ERP is cost efficiant because changes to systems require reprogramming and that has a cost. But you need to reeducate your staff to the new way of doing things. On the other hand, customized systems fit your industry to a tee. But the changes cost money, the upgrades from the supplier do not apply to you because too many changes were done and you rely on your programmers or consultant who did the modifications to keep your system running (mucho $$$)

Vanilla installationis an installation right out of the box with no special requirements or options installed. You install the package exactly as it is.

Hope this helps.

by jamie

That helps to clarify what I've been confused about all along! I agree that there are plus and minuses for both methods. The problem is, the report that I'm working in, says this:

- Previously, the company used TRITON and had done a lot of customisations to 'fit' their needs and into the organisation.

- Now, they've decided to upgrade to Baan IV because their cost of maintaining TRITON has blown up and have decided not to do any customisations onto Baan IV as a result of this cost blowup.

- Funnily enough, the mother company uses SAP and no reason is stated to say why the 2 different systems. So I would have to make assumptions.

Therefore, my job as a consultant is to suggest ways on how to implement it all over again if I hadthe chance to do so.

I was thinking stick to technology enabled (Change their processes)but as many reports and articles out there suggest that no ERP system can do everything that a company requires them to do and hence would require some kind of customisation or add-ons using third party software. So there's really no "running away" from customisation, is there? That might be one drawback from not customising an erp system and by changing business processes would probably also cause conflict and resistance to the system. (correct me if i'm wrong :)

I guess they can adapt to "plain vanilla" but that would be too general for some company.

by zen37

Usually, implementing a pure ERP system will cause general if not major conflicts within the personnel. It's within the human nature to resist change. Which is why such implementations can take years to do.

There is also the problem of unions.As soon as unions get into your organization, you can pretty much throw the HR module down the trash chute. They are the best at asking for stuff the system was not setup to provide.

I guess the best solution is to implement the ERP and try to restrain the changes to a minimum. Not always easy to do.

Good luck.

by james r linn

As a manager of IT planning I can pull out lots of examples.

You can try and fit the product to current work processes. This seems the simplest way to many, especially the "customers" but it makes it a pain for the IT organization. It creates theneed for extensive customizations. Customizations cost, both at implmentation time and when patches are applied, maintenance is required and especially when migration to a new version is necessary.

And one big factor is that most orgs that want to use existing processes, haven't optimised them for either the human or the IS side, so you loose both ways.

Those who have been through this kind of exercise and suffered the pains, often wish for a move to a pure vanilla implmentation, which isas you've guessed, one completely devoid of customizations. This is not a bad goal but difficult to achieve in the real world. My company has 13 different unions, all with differing employment clauses, contract end dates, policies on overtime etc. Do you think we could implement a vanilla HR module?

The trend towards vendors like SAP indicate that moving towards pure vanilla is becoming more popular. SAP is very rigid in its processes and essentially requires you to change your processes to suit the software. As I indicated, for a company with out of date, non-optimal processes, this is not necessarily a bad thing.

Does that help?

James

This discussion is closed to new replies.