Organizations decide to select new Enterprise Software packages for a variety of reasons. Business growth may lead to the need for a more robust solution with wider functionality and the ability to deal with multi-site, multi-country operations. Legacy systems may be regarded as old-fashioned and lacking in up to date functionality. The corporate acquisition may lead to the need for systems harmonization across a group, and a new group-wide strategy may be called for, resulting in the need for a new system.
Once the decision has been made to proceed, the selection process should aim to identify a product that will provide easy-to-use functionality, efficient business processes, management approval, user acceptance, and a positive return on investment for shareholders/stakeholders. In today’s challenging economic environment, investment in a new system can help an organization move ahead of the competition. Although the implementation process may prove costly in terms of time and resources, the business’s long-term productivity and efficiency gains can be significant.
READ MORE :
- Want to Make Your App Successful?
- 5 Tips How to Drive Traffic to Your Site
- Importance of Document Management Software in the Health Care Sector
- Three Things to Do with the Lemon in Your Garage
- Why Do Small Businesses Need to Invest in Mobile Marketing?
Package selection is never risk-free.
Selecting a new Enterprise Software system can be difficult and time-consuming. Due to Enterprise Software products’ organizations available despite recent vendor consolidation, it is not unusual for organizations to select a system that may not completely meet their needs. This may result in a more costly and lengthy implementation and extra post-implementation costs. It is estimated that almost 90% of Enterprise Software implementations run over time and budget, usually due to poor planning and underestimating time and resources required for specific tasks such as data migration. Project milestones can be overly ambitious, aimed at satisfying senior management’s needs who will have high, not always realistic expectations. It pays to be cautious and realistic with these goals during the planning phase to avoid the risk of explaining later why deadlines have not been achieved and the system is not immediately able to provide the expected benefits.
Software deployment projects have great potential for error, but once the process has been started, it is advisable to run their course despite any problems encountered. It is not uncommon during a selection process for senior management to delay decision-making or implementation. It will quickly become evident how much time will be required and how much the project will cost during the process. This may make senior staff reluctant to proceed even if a clear business case has been established. Cost-benefit analysis can be carried out during the decision-making process to establish the savings to be gained from the new system. The longer a deployment is delayed, the greater the business’s loss in terms of the savings be made by using the new system.
With the right team in place and the correct deployment strategy, the organization can ensure they make the correct choice for long term business and user benefit and ensure that the new system is implemented efficiently, on time, and within budget. Selecting the right software is the first step in a lengthy process. It will help prevent implementation problems, surprise costs and mean that teething problems are reduced once the system is operational and should lead to high user satisfaction levels.
The following 10 step guide outlines the process required to select a new system successfully. If followed, it will ensure the organization selects the Enterprise Software product they need to meet their specific business requirements.
1. The selection team
First-class project management is the key to success for any major Enterprise Software change project. The participation of experienced, appropriately qualified change consultants with the appropriate mix of technical and soft skills and working effectively with users and the business is a pre-requisite. A team should be assembled to conduct the project once the business case has been established and the decision made to select a new system.
The selection team should be familiar with the process, including gathering user requirements, identifying potential vendors, liaising with vendors, attending product demonstrations, and obtaining customer references. The team should include an influential sponsor from the organization’s executive management team who will ideally report directly to the CEO and support fellow Senior Directors and other top managers in the affected business areas.
The Project Manager should coordinate the business’s internal needs assessment, draw together a team from the business to assist with the selection process, liaise with a software vendor s, and manage the evaluation process. Changing Enterprise Software is a business decision and not purely about technology. The selection Project Manager will often be the Finance Systems Manager or a member of the Finance team. However, some organizations hire externally for this role, so the selection process is carried out impartially. A Consultant with a broad range of systems and selection experience may also be engaged to provide specific product advice. If a third party is used to run the selection process, an in-house Project Manager will still be required to oversee progress and ensure the needs of all parts of the business are addressed during the selection process. Although using this approach is less disruptive in terms of internal time and resources, many organizations prefer to keep the selection in the house and oversee the process themselves. It is important to ensure that the external party is completely impartial and has no connection with the software vendors, and it is advisable to seek references.
The selection team should include individuals from all functional areas of the business affected by the proposed software change. They should be positive about the process and have a clear understanding of their specific functional area’s needs. These individuals should be champions of the new system, have good relationships with departmental colleagues, and gather information effectively to help the process and pass on knowledge to colleagues and keep them informed about the selection process. Employee input is critical in any large system change project. Employees who will use the new system daily will play a vital part in identifying current inefficient or ineffective processes and will be able to suggest functionality that will benefit their day-to-day working lives. Securing user buy-in for the change process and ensuring they are receptive to the new system is essential. People are naturally conservative and suspicious of change and may reject it if the process is not handled well, therefore ensuring user involvement in the process from the start means that they will be more likely to be supportive and helpful throughout, will wish to participate in the change process and be positive about the new system once operational.
However, it must be remembered that users involved in the selection and subsequent implementation process will need a reduced “day job” workload during this period. Additional resources may be required to cover some day to day activities; otherwise, multiple demands may have a detrimental effect on the change program and may result in a bad feeling, putting the project at risk.
2. Needs analysis/requirements gathering
It is important to define what the business aims to achieve by introducing a new system as critical success factors that will help determine business needs and help keep the project on track and focused on the most crucial business objectives. If the business does not know exactly what it wishes to achieve in terms of cost-saving, time-saving, streamlined processes, additional functionality, and improved reporting processes, it is unlikely to select the most appropriate system. It can be hard to identify all the features and functions required from a new system, so it is normally advisable to review current system functionality, what is used, what isn’t, and discuss with users their likes and where improvements can be made. It is also important to look at the organization’s plans to ensure that it is appropriate for these needs.
It is possible to obtain a list of key features provided by software vendors; however, at this stage, it is more important to focus on the business process rather than be distracted by features that may not be relevant to the business. Situations where users spend the most time or have the most difficulty searching for or adjusting data are typically the areas of functionality that require an overhaul and will need further investigation. The business must also ensure that these requirements are totally unambiguous and not open to misinterpretation as vendors respond to requirements in the same way and can be compared ‘like-for-like’ without further need for information requests. It is also important to establish which success factors really are critical for the project and are simply ‘nice to have’ if costs and functionality allow. These factors should be listed in order of priority. Essential functions such as ease of integration with current systems, which will be maintained, or the software’s ability to run on current hardware (if the business is unable to replace it) should be looked at first as these factors can instantly disqualify certain vendors. Differentiating standard or basic functionality available in all software packages from unique requirements to the business is also important as this will separate one vendor from another. Introducing new software should allow overhaul and improve business processes rather than provide new software to replicate previous processes. Rather than simply introducing a new system running legacy processes, the business should look to improve all relevant areas so the new system can take advantage of streamlined, more efficient working practices. Finally, the software chosen should offer value for money and a positive return on investment. In the long term, the change will have a positive effect on the bottom line and will not be so expensive that it creates significant short-term business problems.
3. Long list of possible software products
There are various ways to obtain the initial long list of potential vendors. Most finance systems professionals will be aware of the established software vendors and are likely to have worked with several systems themselves previously. But however knowledgeable the Project Manager, it is important to conduct a proper market review before selection to ensure every option is considered and none are discounted for evaluation. The selection team may be surprised by the service and functionality offered by the smaller or less well-known vendors and should not automatically opt for the more established well-known brands. At this, stage it is also important not to discount software resellers who may offer their own in-house developed functionality and workarounds, more competitive pricing structures, and perhaps a more personal approach to account management and support. Sources of vendors and resellers can be found using internet search, industry publications, colleagues, consultants, other industry contacts, conferences, and seminars. Remember that people are vital at this and every stage of the process, and communication should be as open as possible to obtain information from as many sources as is feasible.
4. Contacting potential vendors with requests for proposal (RFP)
Once a long list of resellers and vendors has been identified and system requirements defined and prioritized, these requirements should be clearly communicated to the vendors to decide whether their software offerings meet the requirements. A Request for Proposal (RFP) should be sent to each potential vendor asking them to respond if their software can meet the business’s needs. Vendors should be challenged with questions related to the defined critical success factors such as cost, functionality, customization potential, technology, implementation, support, and licensing. Questions must be clear and unambiguous to get a consistent response. Possible, vendors should respond to each requirement with a number relating to its availability; this can be used to give each vendor a score based on the ‘fit’ of their software to the business, although o course, this will not always be possible with all responses. It may also be beneficial to send an RFP to the business’s current software vendor for comparison. It should not be discounted as adding some additional modules, functionality, or an upgrade; it may be the case that the current software product may be the best fit for the business saving an expensive and lengthy implementation process. Evaluating the responses to several RFP’s can be a very time-consuming and in-depth process; if the long list is too long, it may be more practical initially to send out a shorter list of key questions to vendors, generally referred to as a Request for Information (RFI) covering only essential features and major requirements, to reduce numbers before sending out full RFP’s.
5. Initial evaluation and short-listing
The responses obtained from the RFP’s can be used to score vendors on their products’ suitability and how closely they fit the business requirements. This should help reduce the list of potential vendors to no more than 4 in the future for further evaluation. RFP’s should be assessed quantitatively with a grading system weighted towards the most critical business requirements, and scoring algorithms can be used for assessment. The scoring and weighting system and any criteria used in the initial selection should be pre-determined during the requirements gathering phase so that the evaluation is objective and avoids any bias. The lack of basic features such as critical functionality and a system that interfaces with legacy systems or databases may mean that some systems are instantly discounted; other evaluation processes may be more complex.