The Fundamentally Flawed ERP Implementation Ecosystem

The ERP implementation and support ecosystem is plagued by systemic flaws that empower third-party system implementers (SIs) to exploit organizations through various deceptive and nefarious processes. This ecosystem is built on a foundation where integrity, transparency, and collaboration are conspicuously absent. Instead, the relationship between the SI and the client is often dictated by ambiguous language in statements of work, such as "SI owns the implementation." This phrase grants the SI near-complete control over critical decisions regarding hardware and software, sidelining the client organization’s input and expertise, while exposing the client to enormous risk.

Under the guise of this authority, SIs frequently prioritize their own convenience and profit over the long-term success of the implementation. Decisions about technology stacks, integration methods, and customization are made with little regard for the organization's existing capabilities or future needs. This approach leads to a "smoke and mirror" show, where the immediate results may appear satisfactory, but underlying issues are hidden from view. The organization, often lacking the necessary technical knowledge, is led to believe that the implementation is progressing smoothly, even as technical debt accumulates.

The consequences of this flawed process become painfully apparent once the SI completes their duties or is rolled off the project. The organization is left to grapple with a system that is riddled with inefficiencies, inconsistencies, and unsupported technologies. This technical debt is not just a minor inconvenience; it represents a significant obstacle to the organization's operational efficiency and adaptability. The technology choices made by the SI, often without sufficient input from the organization, require specialized knowledge and skills that the organization does not possess. As a result, maintaining and updating the ERP system becomes a daunting task, further compounded by the lack of comprehensive documentation and support.

Moreover, the lack of transparency and collaboration during the implementation phase means that the organization's internal teams are not adequately trained or prepared to take over the system. The knowledge transfer process is often superficial, leaving critical gaps that hinder the organization's ability to effectively manage and utilize the ERP system. This situation forces the organization to either continually rely on expensive external consultants or to embark on a costly and time-consuming re-implementation process.

The root of these issues lies in the inherent imbalance of power and knowledge between the SI and the client. The SI, allegedly armed with technical expertise and experience, holds all the cards, while the client, focused on their core business operations, must trust the SI to act in their best interests. Unfortunately, this trust is frequently misplaced. To address these systemic flaws, a fundamental shift in the ERP implementation and support ecosystem is necessary.

Organizations must demand greater transparency and accountability from SIs. This includes insisting on clear, detailed documentation of all decisions and actions taken during the implementation, as well as comprehensive and official training for internal teams. Furthermore, organizations should seek to retain a measure of control over critical decisions, ensuring that they are made with a full understanding of the long-term implications. This can be achieved by fostering a collaborative environment where the SI and the client work as actual partners, rather than in a hierarchical, top-down relationship.

The current ERP implementation and support ecosystem fails to serve the best interests of client organizations, enabling SIs to exploit their position through having an express lane to individuals outside of IT building critical relationships while leaving FTE IT resources in the dark. Addressing these flaws requires a concerted effort to rebalance the power dynamic, ensuring that organizations are empowered to make informed decisions and are adequately prepared to manage their ERP systems in the long term. Only through such changes can the true potential of ERP systems be realized, free from the burdens of technical debt and operational inefficiencies.

Command and Control SI with Tactical Oversight

The issues inherent in the ERP implementation and support ecosystem, as discussed, can be effectively mitigated by bringing onboard independent consultants who are not associated with the system implementers (SIs). These consultants are tasked with building and maintaining a symbiotic relationship with a selected subject matter expert (SME) from within the organization. This SME, typically an internal employee with a significant amount of tribal knowledge, understands the intricacies of the organization’s operations and can provide invaluable insights into the implementation process while also remaining cognizant of technical debt and overhead.

By working closely with the SME, the independent consultant ensures that the organization’s unique needs and operational nuances are factored into the ERP system's design and implementation. This partnership forms a bridge between the SI and the internal IT team, ensuring that decisions are made collaboratively and with full transparency. The internal SME and the independent consultant jointly develop standard operating procedures (SOPs) and technical guidance that govern the SI's activities. This structured approach prevents the SI from making unilateral decisions that may not align with the organization’s long-term interests.

Establishing this framework of governance and technical guidance is crucial. It ensures that the internal IT team is actively involved in the implementation process rather than being passive recipients of the SI's decisions. The IT team members, working alongside the independent consultant and the SME, are assigned actual deliverables. This not only enhances their engagement but also builds their expertise and familiarity with the new ERP system. By having internal IT team members work on deliverables, the organization can ensure continuity and retain critical knowledge in-house, reducing reliance on external consultants post-implementation.

Moreover, this approach fosters a culture of accountability and transparency. The independent consultant’s role includes monitoring the SI’s activities to ensure they adhere to the established SOPs and technical guidelines. This oversight prevents the SI from implementing hidden agendas or making decisions that could lead to technical debt and operational inefficiencies. The presence of an independent consultant acts as a check against the SI’s potential conflicts of interest, ensuring that the organization’s best interests are always at the forefront.

In addition to providing technical oversight, the independent consultant and SME partnership facilitates effective knowledge transfer. They ensure that the internal team is adequately trained and equipped to manage and maintain the ERP system post-implementation. This proactive approach to knowledge transfer mitigates the risk of the organization being left with unsupported technologies and processes once the SI completes their duties.

Onboarding independent consultants who work closely with internal subject matter experts and the IT team can transform the ERP implementation process. This strategy ensures that the organization retains control over critical decisions, enforces consistency, and prevents the SI from implementing their own hidden agenda. By fostering collaboration, transparency, and accountability, the organization can achieve a successful ERP implementation that aligns with its long-term goals and operational needs.

Reclaiming the Castle: Ending the Era of ERP Pirates

While there are certainly some system implementers (SIs) who demonstrate integrity and transparency, unfortunately, they are the exception rather than the rule. The reality is that 85% of the industry is dominated by large firms built to maximize billable hours, often at the expense of their clients' best interests. These firms frequently deploy inexperienced individuals into overstated roles, where they function more as liaisons or "receptionists" than as genuine consultants. These individuals often have to seek help from more experienced resources who are not even part of the project team, leading to delays, miscommunication, and a lack of accountability.

This systemic issue is exacerbated by self-serving and politically compromised managers within organizations who enter into such agreements, often without fully understanding the long-term implications. These managers, driven by short-term gains or external pressures, fail to prioritize the organization's needs and end up handing over critical control to SIs. The result is a vicious cycle of dependency on external parties who prioritize their own profit over the client’s success.

It is well overdue for organizations to identify and stop tolerating this behavior. They must adopt an approach that places control back in their hands, leveraging independent consultants and internal subject matter experts to ensure transparency, accountability, and collaboration throughout the ERP implementation process. By doing so, organizations can control their own destiny, free from the undue influence of self-interested external parties, and pave the way for a more sustainable and successful ERP livelihood.