A typical ERP implementation has a team of consultants typically the System Integrator, working to develop and implement a solution. However, there has to be ample involvement from the client along with the consultants. This is primarily because while the consultants come with rich domain expertise, the processes of a particular organization that are peculiar to the organizations are not fully known to the consultants. These are best developed, and addressed by people from within the organization. This set of people who are working with the consultants, are typically referred to as the Core Team. This is a set of people who are responsible to work along with the consultants to deliver a valuable and workable solution to the organization.
The Core Group’s involvement is imperative because, as pointed out, they are the ones who know the details and all the intricacies of the business processes and policies in the organization. However, this team of people should not work in isolation from the ERP product that is being implemented. This is because, the product being the reference point, this team needs a thorough understanding of the solution that will be delivered to the end users. However, an appreciation of the nature of the solution being delivered to the users would not be workable unless the core team is trained in the details of the ERP product being implemented.
A certain level of understanding - and thus a certain level of training - is absolutely necessary. A core team member who comes from the organizational perspective needs to obtain at least a certain level of understanding of the modules being implemented to be able to assess possibilities. But this alone is not enough. The core team member needs to work in close conjunction with a person who is aware of systems, and who can guide the core team members through the possibilities of the proposed system. Therefore, there needs to be an extensive training mechanism for the members of the core team, and this is complemented over a period of time by association with the consultants, who bring system expertise to the table. A core team with employees who know the current processes and system but do not understand the future system will be unable to add sizeable value in the implementation process. There are two ways an organization can overcome this issue:
One is to add to the core team, which is made up of experienced employees a handful of consultants who would advise on how processes could be mapped in the new system.
However, the drawback with this approach is the disjoint between the two components of the team that is developing and implementing the solution.
The other method to overcome the handicap is Training. An intensive, hands-on training can build about an appreciation of the proposed system, and build up the skills required to bridge the gap between the current systems, and the proposed systems.
Ultimately, the implementation team has to be comprised of a good mix, or be trained in one aspect – whether it would be the new system or the existing business processes. This is important because even after design is completed the core team has to constantly return to the user community to get answers to nitty-gritty details of a small aspect of a process that had either not at all or only briefly been touched on during previous conversations. This is a very time-consuming activity. Repeatedly, when the team believes it has completed a rough design, it finds out new information that causes it to again make changes to that design. Having someone who is very familiar with the process and at the same time, who understands the details of the relevant modules can give most answers immediately while the team is hammering out the details of a design.
Another consideration that should be borne in mind is that ERP is not simply an IT Project. However, once the project is over, and the solution has been delivered to the users, the management of the system becomes the responsibility solely of the IT department. This is another serious disconnect with respect to the long-term viability of the solution. The IT department needs to manage the technology, not the business processes. The latter need champions from respective business areas to run along with them. This is another aspect that is addressed by a detailed, hands-on, product centric training.
In the light of this reasoning, we can arrive at the conclusion that the type of training that the core team should undergo should be a detailed training, detailing the various aspects of the product, including, setups, master data, and transactions. This is because unless the core team members are aware of the setups and their implications on the transaction processing aspect, their vision is necessarily restricted, leading to a solution which may not necessarily be the best possible solution that could have been delivered to the users.
The Core Group’s involvement is imperative because, as pointed out, they are the ones who know the details and all the intricacies of the business processes and policies in the organization. However, this team of people should not work in isolation from the ERP product that is being implemented. This is because, the product being the reference point, this team needs a thorough understanding of the solution that will be delivered to the end users. However, an appreciation of the nature of the solution being delivered to the users would not be workable unless the core team is trained in the details of the ERP product being implemented.
A certain level of understanding - and thus a certain level of training - is absolutely necessary. A core team member who comes from the organizational perspective needs to obtain at least a certain level of understanding of the modules being implemented to be able to assess possibilities. But this alone is not enough. The core team member needs to work in close conjunction with a person who is aware of systems, and who can guide the core team members through the possibilities of the proposed system. Therefore, there needs to be an extensive training mechanism for the members of the core team, and this is complemented over a period of time by association with the consultants, who bring system expertise to the table. A core team with employees who know the current processes and system but do not understand the future system will be unable to add sizeable value in the implementation process. There are two ways an organization can overcome this issue:
One is to add to the core team, which is made up of experienced employees a handful of consultants who would advise on how processes could be mapped in the new system.
However, the drawback with this approach is the disjoint between the two components of the team that is developing and implementing the solution.
The other method to overcome the handicap is Training. An intensive, hands-on training can build about an appreciation of the proposed system, and build up the skills required to bridge the gap between the current systems, and the proposed systems.
Ultimately, the implementation team has to be comprised of a good mix, or be trained in one aspect – whether it would be the new system or the existing business processes. This is important because even after design is completed the core team has to constantly return to the user community to get answers to nitty-gritty details of a small aspect of a process that had either not at all or only briefly been touched on during previous conversations. This is a very time-consuming activity. Repeatedly, when the team believes it has completed a rough design, it finds out new information that causes it to again make changes to that design. Having someone who is very familiar with the process and at the same time, who understands the details of the relevant modules can give most answers immediately while the team is hammering out the details of a design.
Another consideration that should be borne in mind is that ERP is not simply an IT Project. However, once the project is over, and the solution has been delivered to the users, the management of the system becomes the responsibility solely of the IT department. This is another serious disconnect with respect to the long-term viability of the solution. The IT department needs to manage the technology, not the business processes. The latter need champions from respective business areas to run along with them. This is another aspect that is addressed by a detailed, hands-on, product centric training.
In the light of this reasoning, we can arrive at the conclusion that the type of training that the core team should undergo should be a detailed training, detailing the various aspects of the product, including, setups, master data, and transactions. This is because unless the core team members are aware of the setups and their implications on the transaction processing aspect, their vision is necessarily restricted, leading to a solution which may not necessarily be the best possible solution that could have been delivered to the users.
