Business Technology

2009-07-01T20:38:00.004-04:00

Critical success factors for ERP implementations

2009 from International Journal of Operations and Production Management – “This paper explores the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system implementation at Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs)…

Operational process discipline. The concept of process discipline has been formalized by Collins and Schmenner (1993) and Collins et al. (1998). In our study, companies were asked about documentation and consistency in executing operational processes (i.e. information flows) prior to the implementation. Companies having greater consistency prior to implementation appeared to achieve more successful implementations regardless of the level of documentation. The two unsuccessful cases had good documentation, but low discipline in adhering to standards set in documents. For example, Company 4 cited ISO audits that revealed non-conformance in sales and engineering. Company 3’s poor record led to problems such as excess procurement to buffer for inaccurate inventory data; as the Accounting Manager indicated, “We were a custom job shop with “craftsmen‟ who would each do things a little differently. The BOMs [bills of materials] were “loose‟ and standard routings were non-existent… it was very dysfunctional.” Consequently, both companies had difficulty adhering to processes that were newly developed by the ERP.

Overall, it seems that having inconsistent operational processes conflicts with the procedural rigidity of ERPs. Where such inconsistency exists, it may be necessary to carry out some process benchmarking and improvement prior to enforcing standardized procedures brought in by the ERP. This finding looks consistent with Schniederjans and Kim‟s (2003) conclusion (from a large company survey) that best implementations involve reengineering processes before rather than after the ERP introduction. Ross and Vitale (2000) similarly stated that ERP implementations posed challenges as they “... were instilling discipline into relatively undisciplined organizations.” (p. 240).

Thus, it appears that operational process discipline should be identified as a major CSF for ERP introduction at SMEs, especially given their frequently informal type of environment..."

180 View – Thanks go to Bluelink for alerting us to this article. For a quick summary of the CSF’s by Bluelink, click here.

I have only copied the first CSF above as it discusses a number of very interesting points. There is an assumption that ERP systems impose standardization. I disagree in that ERP systems have flexibility to accommodate different business processes. However, the implementation team may decide for different reasons that standardization is a good idea.

It seems that undisciplined organizations run into problems with standardization of business processes. This can also happen for many reasons. It may because there are different business units that do things differently to maximize their profitability and don’t want corporate to impose standards.

Another point raised is “that best implementations involve reengineering processes before rather than after the ERP introduction”. I disagree. Reengineering should take place during the implementation. Why not leverage existing business processes embedded in an ERP system than try to reinvent processes or create processes that are too expensive to implement.

In any event, the red flag needs to go up early for an implementation where there is a lack of standardization. When there are strategic reasons for non-standardization, the implementation should accommodate it. When the reasons for non-standardization have more to do with personal preferences or power, the implementation team needs to have the full backing of senior management to enforce standardization.

2009-07-01T20:32:00.003-04:00

Magic Quadrant for Midmarket and Tier 2-Oriented ERP for Product-Centric Companies

June 4, 2009 from Gartner via Epicor – “Despite the mergers and acquisitions, there are many ERP offerings for midmarket companies and firms deploying Tier 2 ERP systems. This Magic Quadrant evaluates products that have a global presence and are specifically tailored for product-centric midmarket companies with roughly 100 to 1,000 employees…”

180 View – The Gartner Magic Quadrant has been around for many years and I suspect was and still is a big factor in which systems have been selected especially by larger organizations. There is a lot of useful information in the article. You will also find Gartner acts as a judge in assessing strengths and weaknesses of the various systems including getting feedback from “reference” clients. However, we question whether the feedback from clients can be relied upon. Gartner would need a large sample of clients to draw any conclusions. I did a scan through the report looking for information on how many customers were interviewed and how the customers were obtained – I did not find anything.

The report also discusses a number of trends including packaging of industry-specific functionality, technology modernization using service-oriented architecture (SOA) and the need for global deployments. I agree with the first one about industry-specific functionality. Some vendors have done this by partnering with industry specific developers. The vendor provides tools and marketing, the industry specific developers provide the extensions to the system. I have also heard vendors touting SOA as the road to salvation. Any problem with integrating multiple systems can be handled using SOA… The cynics out there including myself are not swept away by technology hype. Global deployments can be a problem with respect to language, taxation and statutory requirements. However, I don’t agree that the vendor needs a presence in countries all over the world. The preferred approach is to Train the Trainer and let internal resources roll out the system. With the use of low cost communications and remote access over the internet, a physical presence is not always required.

Also take a look at more criticism of Gartner's report by The Enterprise System Spectator by clicking here.

2009-07-01T20:29:00.001-04:00

Business Processes and the Weather!

June 26, 2009 from Business Finance – “Will Rogers once said, “Everyone talks about the weather, but nobody ever does anything about it.” Sometimes I feel like that about business processes. I like to complain about them but don’t do enough to change them.

Think about some of your own experiences. Have you ever wondered who came up with the process being used to “service” you? I have had some recent experiences with major retail and service companies that were mind boggling at best – complicated package deals, pricing terms, and rebate requirements. Not only was I confused, but the customer service employees were struggling, too! It always makes me wonder how organizations establish and maintain effective internal controls around all this complication…

In a recent conversation with an assurance partner at a national CPA firm, he told me he sees lots of situations where an organization’s ERP system isn’t implemented in its entirety or management doesn’t seem to trust it. Instead, they use procedures outside the system (i.e., spreadsheets) to verify what’s going on inside the system or to “do the consolidation.” He surmised that this may be caused by people at the functional level not wanting to be overly reliant on the ERP system or on IT people. Sounds like a matter of trust to me.”

180 View - This short article raises 2 big problems although it does not get into any detail or solutions. The first big problem is complexity of business process. When the complex process was introduced, it likely made sense. The question is whether it still does. A design principle in improving business process is to reduce complexity. So challenge the reason for the complex business process and try to keep it simple.

The second is reliance on spreadsheets. The article points out two reasons – lack of trust in the system and not wanting to rely on IT people. Lack of trust in the system is a huge problem and the answer is not more spreadsheets but the implementation of strong internal controls. Not wanting to rely on IT people is understandable as it may require a long wait time, but the solution should not be more spreadsheets. The solution should be using reporting tools that leverage the data in the system. The reporting tools likely exist, they just need to be implemented, which requires an investment in training and support.

2009-07-01T20:26:00.000-04:00

How About Those Leading Indicators? Do You Have an Early Warning System?

June 22, 2009 from Business Finance – “How well have you advised your organization on developing leading indicators to provide an early warning system for your board and executive and management teams? Are you still managing off the financials or lagging indicators? By the time the books close 10, 15, 20, 25 days after month’s end, the impacts of yesterday’s decisions are already being felt. Wouldn’t you want to get ahead of the curve to know with some degree of certainty what is coming? Of course, we all do.

180 View – The article does not get into any detail but reminds us of the importance of leading indicators. When developing Key Performance Indicators, make sure you have a mix of both leading and lagging indicators.

2009-07-01T20:20:00.001-04:00

IT's Role In The Recession

June 1, 2009 from Forbes – “Information technology experts didn't cause the current economic downturn, but they certainly made it worse. The creation of incredibly complex risk models on Wall Street by pedigreed quantitative analysts, or quants, and the almost total reliance by trading houses on those models turned what could have been just another housing bubble into a global disaster…

Some people realized those equations had serious flaws from the beginning. But when things are going well people ignore those risks and make money while they can. These computers had a role in convincing people everything was OK. And obviously the top management in firms can't understand these equations. They're very complex. There are lots of variables, lots of equations, and they assumed they were OK. In the end, it gave them a very false sense of confidence...”

180 View – I think the bigger problem with the “models on Wall Street” was not the complex equations but in the underlying assumptions. There is also the greed factor that will find a way to make the models and statistics work in a favourable way. The same lessons should be applied to any organization’s forecast or ROI calculation. You need to validate the assumptions. You also need to be wary if the person who did the forecast or ROI had something to gain by it.

2009-07-01T20:18:00.001-04:00

Managing Scope for Project Success

June 24, 2009 from Project Times – “Ever start a project without a stable foundation for scope? How did it go? To ensure project success, it is essential that scope be unambiguous and carefully managed. This can be accomplished with the Scope Management Process, which provides a formal set of procedures for planning, executing, monitoring and controlling scope…

Basic functions in the Scope Management Process include reviewing the project charter and other documents such as the contract, statement of work and request for proposal…”

180 View – Anyone familiar with project management methodology will already know most of what’s in the article. The main reason for including it is the discussion of where scope is defined. The article suggests the contract and statement of work as a source. It is extremely unlikely that scope will be defined well enough in either of these documents. The article also suggests the request for proposal. I agree with that but it needs to be part of the contract, which it is usually not. If using the RFP as scope, the requirements in the RFP need to be defined specifically enough to avoid misunderstanding later. The requirements should also be prioritized to ensure focus on the most important requirements.

2009-07-01T20:11:00.003-04:00

Why Debate? Let Formality and Agility Coexist

June 2009 from Project Times – “From PMI Network to blogs all over the web there is a continuing debate over Agile project management. I find it interesting, if not distressing, that the debate still rages. While there are distinct attributes of Agile methods, overall the basic tenets of formal PM are certainly there. Planning exists, there is a clear point of responsibility and accountability, there is monitoring and control (often a lot tighter and more useful than in more traditionally managed projects) as well as a closing. The predominant differences are in the way these are accomplished and the "weight" of the PM activities. The Agile Manifesto values some things over others, for example "individuals and interactions over processes and tools". This does not mean it seeks to eliminate processes and tools. Valuing the ability of "responding to change over following a plan" does not mean never following a plan…”

180 View – The article is biased to agile project management that includes formal project management as well as being able to not follow it if there are compelling reasons. When I was a bit younger, I was responsible for a multi-million dollar software development project. I was the project manager but I was also responsible for detail design along with a number of other things. I was told by some people that I should be allocating 100% of my time to project management but I never did. It was more like 30%. I was able to reduce the amount if time I spent on project management because of tools that I developed and acquired, and because I was intimately familiar with all aspects of the software. It would be very difficult for anyone on the project team to mislead me. I knew exactly where we stood in terms of quality, scope, timing and budget. So I think project management should adjust to the situation and especially the people involved.

2009-07-01T20:05:00.002-04:00

Telepresence shatters communication barriers

June 10, 2009 from InfoWorld – “Well before the current world financial crisis struck, organizations have sought inventive ways to engage in face-to-face meetings without the need to travel. Companies have turned to services such as Adobe Acrobat Connect Pro, Cisco WebEx, Citrix GoToMeeting, and Microsoft Live Meeting as a means for workers in multiple locations to share presentations and otherwise collaborate.

No question, these tools greatly reduce costly, productivity-sapping travel, with the added benefit of lowering a company's carbon footprint. Yet scratchy audio quality, out-of-sync slides, and tiny, Webcam-quality video often diminish these solutions' usefulness. Similarly, more traditional videoconferencing systems (which have been around for decades) suffer from low utilization rates -- partially because of complicated, unreliable technology.

The door has now opened for telepresence solutions: a conferencing environment that seeks to mimic the in-person experience as much as possible. Several technologies make telepresence possible. High-definition video cameras and large, flat-panel monitors clearly display participants in life size. Optimized networks -- making use of QoS and even application-aware protocol acceleration -- help eliminate audio and video delay over long-distance and high-latency WANs. As such, participants can make eye contact with colleagues and immediately pick up on all-important visual cues -- such as how someone reacts to an offer. Moreover, operating the systems can be as simple as using a television remote control or telephone…”

180 View – Telepresence is going to get better and cheaper until it’s the best way to travel – at least for business purposes.

2009-07-01T19:53:00.001-04:00

Lessons From Supply Chain Disasters

June 25, 2009 from Supply Chain Digest – “…it is striking that all of our most recent disasters on the list had little or nothing to do with technology problems. They were all problems resulting from failures of strategy or execution. Technology meltdowns are simply much less likely today…”

180 View (written by Lawrence Young) – In this follow up to an article published on May 7, 2009 in Supply Chain Digest entitled The Top Supply Chain Disasters of All Time, Dan Gilmore writes about the following eight key lessons that can be learned:

1. “Big Bang” go lives are risky business
2. Being a pioneer often leads to arrows in the back
3. Do not ignore early warning signs
4. Avoid hard cut-offs/transitions
5. Get some outside perspective
6. Beware of the ROI trap
7. Be brutally honest about your skill sets
8. Limit the number of moving parts

While the companies mentioned in the May 7, 2009 article are all large enterprises, the eight mistakes listed above are often relevant to companies of all sizes that are embarking on the implementation of new supply chain software.

Dan’s message is that many of the top supply chain disasters could have been avoided, or at least minimized through damage control, by applying the above eight lessons in a timely fashion.
Our decades of experience has taught us that implementing business software is indeed tricky business-lots of unknowns and certainly some issues that are substantially out of one’s control. However, the same experience has proven time and time again that most implementation problems are substantially if not totally avoidable if one simply develops and monitors a well-conceived implementation plan that takes into consideration, among other things, the above eight lessons.

Costly and painful problems can often be avoided by simply asking the chosen vendor the right questions at the right time. For example, extreme caution is well advised for any company who is considering being the ‘guinea pig’. And as the article states:

Step one is first understanding whether or not you are that guinea pig, which sometimes, in software at least, isn’t always so easy. A long time software executive once told me: “Every new version of software has a “beta” customer [the first company to implement the software]. The question is whether they know it or not.”

2009-07-01T19:32:00.001-04:00

Test

2009-06-08T12:08:00.001-04:00

A problem becomes an opportunity

June 2009 from CAmagazine and written by Michael Burns – “…Many organizations have been forced to lay off employees and cancel or postpone new projects. Companies that are not facing collapse are just hunkering down and waiting out the storm.

There are obvious ethical reasons for keeping employees in tough times, but there are also excellent business reasons. What better time to train employees than when they have some extra time? They will learn new skills and forever be motivated to work that much harder for their employer. Does it make sense to invest in IT projects during tough times?...”

2009-06-08T12:01:00.002-04:00

Epicor ERP project sparks customer lawsuit

May 18, 2009 from ComputerWorld – "...Epicor's representatives were given the Requirements list prior to entering any contract negotiations, and Epicor represented its product would be able to perform all of Ferazzoli's requirements," the complaint states...

In June 2007, Epicor officials visited Ferazzoli's headquarters to learn about the business and demonstrate its software. The officials made further assurances that Epicor's technology would be satisfactory, according to the complaint...”

180 View – There are many reasons for failed implementations, and we can’t speculate what happened here. However, we think the problem is not likely the software but more likely the selection and implementation process. In the article, a suggestion is made - "You want to make sure that all demos, marketing materials, and assurances are put into the (contract) document." We partly agree with this recommendation. But demo’s and assurances are too vague. Better would be to include specific requirements from an RFP to which the vendor responded.

2009-06-08T11:57:00.001-04:00

7 Steps to Better Benchmarking

May 7, 2009 from Business Performance Management – “…Organizations' goals all too often fall short of stakeholder expectations. A primary contributor to this sad state of affairs is the fact that goal-setting tends to be based on past trends and current internal practices. The external perspective is frequently overlooked, yet customers' expectations are driven by their experiences with the best providers in the industry and superior providers in other industries. Benchmarking can capture these external references and provide a basis for comparative analysis…”

180 View – We think benchmarking is a great idea, but it’s not easy. Access to so-called “world-class performance levels” is hard to obtain and may not be comparable for many reasons. As well, “deciding what you're going to measure” is also difficult. The article does not discuss how to do this. We suggest choosing metrics that link to critical success factors – what the organization must do well in order to be successful.

2009-06-08T11:53:00.003-04:00

The BI Survey 8

2008 by Board International and written by Nigel Pendse – “The BI Survey provides a detailed quantitative analysis of why customers buy BI tools, what they use them for, how successful they are and why they eventually abandon them. It is based on the analysis of the real-world experience of over 2600 respondents (1894 users, 256 consultants and 472 vendors) from around the world. This year’s Survey also includes more analyses of how vendor, user and consultant perceptions vary. As such, it is the largest, most thorough fact-based analysis of the growing BI market. The BI Survey 8 benefits both from the experience of the seven previous editions and the ability to analyze trends based on up to eight years of data…

In descending order, 23 products or groups of products had enough usage to be analyzed individually throughout this Survey: MicroStrategy, Infor PM OLAP, QlikTech QlikView, BOARD, Microsoft Analysis Services, Cognos Reporting, BusinessObjects, SAP BI/BW, WebFOCUS, Cubeware Cockpit, Cognos TM1 Server, arcplan, Microsoft Reporting Services, Panorama NovaView, Bissantz, Hyperion Essbase, Crystal Reports, Cognos Analysis, Targit, Oracle BIEE/BISEO, Actuate Platform, Microsoft Excel PivotTables and MIK. LogiXML is also included in some analyses, even though its sample size was just below the threshold…

Just as was found in previous years, product functionality has a relatively low correlation with project success, being the second lowest ranked product-related factor. This was the most frequently cited reason for choosing products, not only in this edition of the Survey, but in every one of the previous editions — and yet it ranked only eighth in the BBI-driven rankings. This again confirms that organizations spend too much time assessing product features — even though most mature products are likely to have all necessary features, and minor gaps can be worked around — and too little time evaluating query performance, despite the fact that poor query performance cannot be disguised and always antagonizes users…”

180 View – This report is a summary report prepared by Board – one of the Business Intelligence vendors. Naturally, they have been selective in what they have summarized, but there is enough interesting material to check it out. However, we suggest caution in the acceptance of the conclusions of the report that found some of the better known products to provide less benefits. The better known products may have been implemented in much more challenging environments.

2009-06-08T11:50:00.001-04:00

CFOs on IFRS: Forget about It

April 17, 2009 from CFO – “When the U.S. economy went into a tailspin last September after big financial institutions faltered and the credit markets seized up, many a project was put on the back burner. One was the Securities and Exchange Commission's proposal to move all publicly traded U.S. companies to international financial reporting standards by 2016...”

180 View – Canada has a much more aggressive timetable for IFRS adoption than the US. We have heard of many Canadian companies investing significant dollars in getting ready. You have to wonder whether the costs of IFRS will ever be justified – especially now. Senior financial executives throughout corporate Canada are spending time ramping up for IFRS when they are more needed just to keep their companies afloat in the economic storm.

2009-06-08T11:44:00.002-04:00

CRM On The Cheap: 5 Strategies That Backfire

April 27, 2009 from ComputerWorld - “Your company knows that it wants a serious CRM system. But the CFO, nervous about the costs, starts to suggest strategies that could keep things under control. Meanwhile, you know the implementation team has some ideas that go in a completely different direction. How can you manage executive expectations that may be based on misinformation? This two-part article will cover common traps that you should avoid, followed by advice on the best ways to save some real money.…”

180 View – The article makes some good points that apply not just to CRM. For example – “The complete-system launch, sometimes called a Big Bang project, just doesn't work very well for software. The warning signs of Big-Bang thinking include: Infrequent project milestones; large, complex, monolithic project deliverables; little consideration of political or change-management issues; fake, vague, or overstated requirements, particularly for scope of system integration or historical data; scope creep. Better to deliver incrementally, deploying something of value to the business at least once a quarter.” We believe that during the design phase, you should consider the big picture/bang, but build and roll it out in manageable phases.

2009-06-08T11:39:00.002-04:00

Eight simple steps to successfully manage a project

June 3, 2009 from itBusiness – “…Businesses of all sizes embark on thousands of projects for new products and services every year. Unfortunately, most projects are doomed to fail outright, or at launch, because the original success criteria were not met. Some project failures lead to delays in product launches, such as the AirBus A380; others, like Boston's Big Dig, incur huge cost overruns. These examples, as well as the results from survey after survey, show that American businesses have not been able to figure out how to consistently get products and services delivered on time, on budget and with the highest quality…”

1. Definition

It is critical to start with a solid foundation. The foundation must be built at the organizational level and not with individuals. It is imperative that, from the CEO down, there is understanding and buy-in when it comes to defining or redefining the following items:

Roles and Responsibilities: This can be painstaking, but the effort will pay off when it's time to execute. The exercise may outline the need to develop new organizational structures to better support efficiency and communication within the delivery teams…"

180 View – There are some good points in the article. We would like to emphasize and expand on the first one – defining roles and responsibilities. You need to be very specific about responsibilities. Consider for example the issue log. Many projects will have an issue log to track issues that arise during a project. Who is responsible to prepare it? Who is responsible to review and give feedback? Who is responsible for approving it?

2009-06-08T11:34:00.002-04:00

Five tips for proving the business case to the CFO

2009 from Nucleus Research – “1) Credibility is #1; 2) Build value early; 3) Calculate a worst case; 4) Payback is stronger than ROI; 5) Focus on a few strong benefits”

180 View –We think Nucleus Research is missing the main point about business case. It’s not a sales tool. It should be an independent evaluation of whether an investment should be made. Often investments are made when the business case shows a negative ROI. This is because there are compelling intangible benefits. Don’t ever try to bias the business case as it will come back to haunt you.

2009-06-08T11:12:00.001-04:00

Warehouse Management Systems Continue to Expand Role in Logistics

May 20, 2009 from SupplyChainDigest – “Warehouse Management System (WMS) software applications have been around for more than two decades, really getting a market foothold in the 1990s, as the traditional concept of “warehouse” gave way to high velocity distribution center and need for much greater capabilities. Since then, the market has seen many changes, with the WMS vendor landscape changing dramatically, especially with a raft of mergers and acquisitions since 2001, and continuous expansion of overall WMS capabilities…”

180 View (written by Lawrence Young) – This article talks about Warehouse Management Systems, and the increasing role that they play today in managing a company’s inventory and related logistic processes.

A Warehouse Management System, or WMS, consists of software and hardware designed to increase the accuracy of the perpetual inventory counts reported by an ERP system, and to increase the efficiency of the handling of inventory items from receipt to shipping. A WMS is used for inventory planning and management, and can usually have a material effect on the dollars a company has invested in its inventory i.e. a better inventory mix of Stock Keeping Units (SKUs), better minimum and maximum targets for each SKU, etc.

WMS software deals with the receipt of stock and returns into a warehouse and the management of stock within the warehouse, including the putaway, picking, packing and shipping functions. Manufacturers will typically deploy a WMS to manage all SKUs, including raw material, work-in-process (WIP) and finished product, whereas distributors typically manage only finished product (unless they do some light manufacturing such as kitting, in which case the WMS would also manage raw materials and components).

Warehouse management systems often utilize Auto ID Data Capture (AIDC) technology, such as barcode scanners, mobile computers, wireless LANs and potentially Radio-frequency identification (RFID) to efficiently monitor the flow of products. Once data has been collected, there is either batch synchronization with, or a real-time wireless transmission to, the ERP system’s central database. The database can then provide useful information about the status of every SKU located in each warehouse and, for manufacturers, each factory.

WMS software can be deployed as a stand-alone module, but most times maximum benefits are realized by integrating the WMS to the ERP system. For example, the WMS module can be integrated to the Purchasing and Order Processing modules, and in some cases can electronically interface with external supply chain applications of some of your trading partners i.e. suppliers and customers.

If your company is a manufacturer or wholesale distributor, a WMS might be a good investment. The first step to take would be to do a cost-benefit analysis to see if there is a sufficient business case for deploying a WMS in your company. Sometimes a WMS makes good sense, but at times it can be overkill. Depending on your ERP system (or old legacy back-office system as the case may be), making some custom software changes to your currently installed Inventory Management module may be the best way to go.

2009-06-08T10:40:00.003-04:00

Worst Slide Story

180 View – We have nothing to add to this terrific piece of work.

2009-05-01T20:00:00.001-04:00

Oracle Buys Sun

April 20, 2009 from Redmonk – “As you must have heard, Oracle is buying Sun. A deal this big has a lot going on. Really, the only thing you can do is wait and see what Oracle will do with the massive portfolio they’re buying. If you don’t like waiting, here’s some scenario-speculation…”

180 View – You may soon be able to buy all your technology from 1 company. The advantage is you have 1 throat to choke, but you may lose bargaining power and flexibility. But we think Oracle will sell Sun’s hardware business and will just expand their software business.

2009-05-01T19:57:00.003-04:00

Duffield Takes On Oracle, SAP

April 29, 2009 from Forbes – “…Duffield is royalty in the software industry. He founded PeopleSoft, which became the second-biggest applications company in the world, with $2.7 billion in sales, before it was swallowed by Oracle after a long, nasty takeover battle. Now Duffield at it again, trying to take on Oracle and SAP…

Workday is thriving despite curbed technology spending. The firm more than doubled revenues last year, to over $50 million, and is on track to reach profitability within the next 18 months…”

180 View – There is something to be said for starting all over again without any baggage.

2009-05-01T19:56:00.003-04:00

Insights from Lawson CUE 2009

April 23, 2009 from The Enterprise System Spectator – “Lawson invited me to attend its annual conference in San Diego this week. I last attended Lawson's CUE in 2005, so this was a good opportunity to catch up on the latest with this vendor of enterprise software…

Here are some of the points that to me were most meaningful, from discussions with Lawson executives and customers as well as from dialog in the analyst meetings. I'll try to comment beyond what is in the announcements and press releases…”

180 View – We think it’s useful to know what is happening at the conferences held by the technology vendors, and appreciate Frank Scavo’s writing about it. I am hearing more about Lawson lately and one can see from this write up that they continue to invest in their systems and should be considered in certain industries such as the fashion industry and equipment manufacturers.

2009-05-01T19:54:00.001-04:00

Accelerate Your Customer-Centric Journey: Four Best Practices

September 2008 from CustomerThink and sponsored by RightNow Technologies– “…By the mid-1990s, Customer Relationship Management (CRM) became a hot buzzword. The premise was that by managing customer information better, more profitable relationships would result.

However, our research has found that technology-focused CRM projects have mainly delivered productivity benefits through the automation of marketing, sales and service processes. Good for short-term ROI but generally not sufficient to deliver the loyalty-building experiences that customers crave.

But still, while conventional CRM thinking has not been the end-all, be-all that some had hoped for, it’s a necessary foundation for most companies. CRM technology can enable a company to run more efficiently, focus attention on more valuable customers and equip employees to deliver competent service. What’s wrong with that?...”

180 View – The article is about best practices, and not surprisingly they are more about people than about technology. The best practices are:
1. Staff Your Front Lines With Friendly and Competent People
2. Experience What Your Customers Experience
3. See Your Customers From All Sides
4. Build Genuine Relationships Through Collaboration

2009-05-01T19:52:00.004-04:00

Improving Project Success Rates with Better Leadership

April 29 from ProjectTimes - “Factual and anecdotal evidence confirms that IT investments are inherently risky. On average, about 70% of all IT related projects fail to meet their on-time, on-budget objectives or to produce the expected business results. In one KPMG survey, 67% of the companies who participated said that their program/project management function was in need of improvement. Why? A number of leading factors for project failure were suggested by the survey, including the "usual suspects": unreasonable project timelines, poorly defined requirements, poor scope management, and unclear project objectives. Granted, all of these factors can play a role in project success. But are they the cause or project failure, or just a symptom of some larger issue? In this article, we will discuss that the root cause for many of these common failure points is really the ability to lead projects, not just manage them…”

180 View – The article identifies missing leadership as the key reason for project failure and discusses the competencies required by leadership – 1) Leading courageously, 2) Influencing others, and 3) Acting with resilience. We agree that leadership is vital but we are not convinced that project management leadership is the primary driver of success or failure. Project managers are often middle management types or external consultants. The real power is usually found elsewhere. So it is vital that management demonstrate clearly their support of the project manager. The project manager may also not be able to select all the project team members or the amount of time they can spend on the project.