So disclaimer: I am a SAP consultant ( for a consultancy specializing in a vertical industry set, so not working for SAP directly). I also don't disagree with what is said. I have a background in .NET/Symbian/MS SQL/Java so I have a bit of perspective.
And another small clarification: Normally when SAP say "SME" the normally mean all the companies that are not multinationals
So an SME can have hundreds of employees, with massive financial turnover. Bear in mind that their traditional market has been the companies with 20,000+ employees.
The funny thing is, everyone I've ever met who has used SAP (from normal users to IT people) have had nothing but bad things to say about it. I've seldom seen a piece of software so broadly hated by its users. Just say 'SAP' and even the mildest-mannered people launch into a tirade. I haven't used it myself.
Yes. The user interface is horrible. Most business software from all major vendors are written to make sure employees know their place, i.e. the slave galley.
The actual reason was that historically there was no "ROI" measurement for user interfaces. A lot of software is essentially just pretty pictures over traditional green screen mainframe software. I feel this is slightly changing for business software, as 1) senior execs are expected to use the software directly (hence the major acquisition's in the "business intelligence & visualization" space i.e BusinessObjects etc.) 2) live systems demos are now expected as the internet is everywhere.
But what always surprises me is that users need the most intense training to understand the most basic business software user interface. But facebook can change their site a couple of times a year and these users have no problem getting FarmVille.Gifts. Photos. Mobile. etc running which is sometimes way more complicated
So yes - true to a degree. But I expect the only way to have some users happy is if the software posts things on their facebook wall! The good news, that usability of business software will rapidly improve in the coming years due to competitive pressures.
I have been developing software for the SME and Micro market for the last 15 years, and the general comments are correct.
ok.
I have always maintained that the intellectual property of a busines smust not reside in the heads of people that can leave at a moment's notice.
Agreed. But whether it is employees or consultants, the same thing applies. There is always a balance - you need good employees, but pulling in consultants IN at a moments notice can really help a businesses (if done correctly). Having the ability to pull in people outside your organization with knowledge of your business is a big plus (if done correctly).
I also prefer the business processes to be formalised, and one way of doing that is to have software that runs according to these processes.
Definitely - that is something that is done during a so called "SAP Business Blueprint". A decent business blueprint has almost no technical muble-jumble (in the portions for business use) and just decent business process.
What we have found is that software alone is not the answer, but couple it with business advice, communications services, support services (not just software) and just plain good customer support (putting the customer first), and you have happy, profitable,clients and clients for life.
When working with big implementations, especially in the SAP world this is actually broken down quite formally. You have the software vendor (SAP) which provides the software and provides a support contract for the actual software, the implementation partner(s) which configures the system to the business requirements. The implementation partners often provides installation specific support afterwards. We normally have a lot of components i.e. Project Management (business and technical), Change Management (part of business advice, communication services), Realisation (doing customization) etc etc. From my experience things normally go pretty bad when the client cut out project management and change management and training out of the budget, because they are "soft deliverables". Of course they always somehow expect it to be delivered regardless of whether they requested its removal in the first place. SAP projects is definitely not just about the software (if implemented by the right party).
11 times out of 10, doing custom software and business process development for clients, forces them to re-look at their own businesses, most times realising for the first time where their costs are, what is actually happening in their businesses and how their business are actually run by the employees.
11 times out of 10 doing a SAP implementation also forces a business to re-look at its business. If you have a really awesome, politically free, organization with unlimited budget, and a massive army of skilled people then probably a bespoke solution will fit the company better. The truth is a lot of times you do not have it. Packaged software can do wonderful things to focus the business, and to get essential processes done quickly. Bespoke software often gets derailed from the important objectives by a) people who don't really know what they are doing ( you would think an invoice is an invoice, but give a junior developer and a admin clerk the task to create one in a bespoke software solution you would throw up when you see these results) b) people who want to throw their weight around c) people locked into old paradigms ( person A must have a button, because they currently have a rubber stamp, and their pay grade is determined by the colour of their stamp)
Unfortunatly SAP does have a bit of a bad name.
I think that is a very difficult statement to make. The problem is all the implementations gone bad has hit front page news, while if things go well you never hear of them. I have not heard a lot of people complain about SARS* turn-around time and processes since they moved to SAP. A ridiculous number of big business run SAP, and continues to use SAP for new implementations - and it works for them.
Because big software implementations like SAP are normally considered a potential "competitive advantage", not a lot of companies actually go around talking about the successes too much - but read for example Pick 'n Pay's* annual report on what they say about SAP.
With all of the above, I do want to re-iterate, that I do not necessary disagree with you, I just want to bring balance to the force!
A good SAP implementation and a good bespoke implementation have my thumbs up.
A bad SAP implementation and a bad bespoke implementation have my thumbs down.
The choice between SAP and bespoke should depend on what the business wants strategically, what is available in the market, what support is in the market and what is practical given the unique constraints of a business. There is no answer which is right for all businesses all of the time and businesses should really not make these decisions by flipping coins.
*I have not worked on either SARS or Pick n Pay, and I really just regurgitated what I have read in the media or heard through the grapevine. Unfortunately these nasty things call NDA's prevents us from speaking about the projects I am working on myself.
Very Kind Regards
Johan
