foundation.

About.com’s Martin Murray’s post “Non-Profit Organization Suing ERP Supplier” A Sign of the Times?





In a white

paper that I had written in 2007 titled “SAP Procurement for Public

Sector” I had highlighted how the challenges with failed ERP-centric

initiatives extended beyond the public sector to include the private

sector. The difference as one senior Colgate-Palmolive executive told

me shortly after scrapping a failed program was that “unlike the public

sector in which a failed initiative becomes front page news, private

sector company ERP failures rarely make a blip on the media’s

collective radar screen.”

The lack of media awareness notwithstanding, the frequency of

failures in the private sector is comparable to the number of setbacks

that occur in the public sector.

For example, and I am quoting from the above referenced SAP paper,

“Following an SAP R/3 implementation in the mid-to late 1990s,” the

bankruptcy trustees for FoxMeyer Drug “filed a $500 million lawsuit in

1998 against SAP, and another $500 million suit against co-implementer

Anderson Consulting, claiming the companies’ software and installation

efforts had contributed to the drug company’s demise.”

On June 23, 2004, “SAP reached a settlement with FoxMeyer pursuant

to which SAP was required to pay a specified amount.” For those who

would like to get more into the specifics of the FoxMeyer, as well as

the myriad of other similar misadventures, check out the "25 Terrifying Information Technology Horror Stories" article that appeared in CIO.com. A kind of “scared straight” version

for organizations that are still for whatever reason contemplating a

traditional-type licensing model initiative.

In today’s post by Martin Murray in his “Martin’s Logistics Blog” on

About.com, he shares with us the breaking story regarding nonprofit’s

Public Health Foundation Enterprises (PHFE) suit filed against Lawson

Software for “more than $1 million over an allegedly failed ERP

(enterprise resource planning) implementation.

What is amazing is that issues Murray lists has part of the PHFE

complaint have been a long-standing problem in the ERP world.

Specifically that “the consultants did not possess the knowledge

necessary to answer PHFE’s questions,” and “the consultant Lawson

initially assigned did not know how to properly configure the system to

meet guidelines.”

The piece de la resistance is that “PHFE has spent more than $1

million on various programs, rather than one integrated program as

promised, that do not work.”

Murray’s article "Non-Profit Organization Suing ERP Supplier) concluded by stating the PHFE is “now using its

previous system to run operations.”

This is an all too familiar story that is repeatedly played out the

world over as demonstrated by the 85% rate of ERP-centric initiative

failures.

The reference to the “consultants not possessing the necessary

knowledge” and, not “knowing how to properly configure the system” is

in line with a comment I received from an individual who attended one

of my seminars. During a break in the session, and in response to my

disclosure of the 85% rate of failure statistic, the individual who at

the time was (and may still be) a consultant with CGI (a major systems

integrator), indicated that the number seemed about right.

When I asked this individual to provide their perspective as to the

reasons for the dismal results, they said that within CGI there are

only a handful of consultants who possess the necessary knowledge and

expertise to take on the majority of the contracts the company wins.

Unfortunately, once they land the deal, they are reassigned to landing

the next opportunity.

Subsequently, the implementation team (or second team as referred to

by the individual) is then left in charge of the project. Rarely, if

ever do they possess the prerequisite skill necessary to successfully

implement the program.

All this of course leads to a simple question . . . when will

companies stop capital commitments to pay exorbitant up front fees

based on the promise of a result that only occurs 15% of the time?

Regarding Lawson, they were highlighted as an up-and-coming small

ERP player in an August 30th, 2007 Canadian Business On-line article

“ERP: Small fish, big sea” by Mike Ouellette. I myself had referenced

the Ouellete piece (and Lawson) in my August 2007 “The Ariba

Interviews” post, in which I cautioned against using financial

performance as an indication of market acceptance. The “warning” while

directed more towards Ariba, extends to include performance capability

as well.

What does this all mean. It means that the market is finally cluing

into the fact that bigger or global is not necessarily better. It

might also be an indication that some – not all of course – of the

traditional sources of industry insight and analysis (i.e. blogs,

analysts etc.) have become somewhat stagnate.

Ultimately it should mean that the days of big dollar capital

projects should cede very quickly to the adaptive and results-conducive

on-demand models provided by the more technologically savvy and

seasoned SaaS vendors.

But that is a story for another day.



Author:.

Personal Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jwhansen

Go Deeper | Website

Have a question for Jon?

* Required information
Name:
Email Address:
(never displayed)

Your question or comment:
Human? Enter the word table backwards.
 
Enter answer:
 
Tell me when Jon responds to me.
 
Remember my form inputs on this computer.
 
 
 
New Graphic
Subscriber Counter