Can someone comment about the better of ERP application providers in terms of tracking all quality aspects of a capital equipment Mfg operation (ie. semi conductor capital equipment)? We are considered at this point (although a start-up) targetted to be a small to medium sized business (relative to ERP providers). This means we will be in the neighborhood of 250mil -- 500mil gross revenue in a couple of years.

Thanks
Steve

Anyone have any comments to share?

I this is Best ERP you can use is : SAP-AG
Let me describe the Overview of SAP-AG:

Moderator's note - please see the link in the post below for the text of this post.

Maybe it's just me being picky and with my student head on, but should you really post that here and not at least reference the source. This is word for word the overview provided in "Sams Teach Yourself SAP in 24 Hours (Sams Teach Yourself)" by George Anderson. You can view this very part of the book on Amazon: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0672328224/ref=sib_fs_top?ie=UTF8&p=S00K&checkSum=91Hqyz3fWGhHYJzzUrPtC8HSkI7KhYm2V%2Fbc5hmqVvg%3D#reader-link

I think it's important to ensure you reference any source you present regardless of where you use it! I know this instance maybe of little consequence but I still feel it is applicable.

Can someone comment about the better of ERP application providers in terms of tracking all quality aspects of a capital equipment Mfg operation... What else, besides the quality aspects, are you looking to track? Some software, such as SAP, is aimed at large companies and are often too expensive for smaller companies.

The biggest questions are:
Company size (employees)
Aspects to be tracked
Many companies use different products for different aspects. Some use database content from other products ('add-ons').

I would start with a list of exactly what your needs and expectations are (Aspects to be tracked). It's hard to give advice without our knowing some specifics.

What else, besides the quality aspects, are you looking to track? Some software, such as SAP, is aimed at large companies and are often too expensive for smaller companies.

The biggest questions are:
Company size (employees)
Aspects to be tracked
Many companies use different products for different aspects. Some use database content from other products ('add-ons').

I would start with a list of exactly what your needs and expectations are (Aspects to be tracked). It's hard to give advice without our knowing some specifics.

I think Marc's advice is spot on! You must understand what you want to get from such a system at all levels and functions. So you should try and list the 'Critical Success Factors' for each level of the org. Plus like I have posted in these forums before, ensure your processes are optimised, which maybe aided by the application of the software. There is little value in simply replicating your existing processes in software form unless they are of the required effectiveness and efficiency.

Unfortunately I have no experience of selecting vendors, but do ensure that if you enter into an implementation effort that you organisation is ready for the huge change and that the contract between you and the vendor has no hidden surprises. Ensure you plan effectively and everyone understands what is expected of them.

Thank you Carolx, Kdsaggi, Manix and Marc!!!
Appreciate you input. We are only 11 employees now. We plan to be about 50-70 employees in 12 months pending success with first few key customers. In 3 years we hope to be approx 120 employees with approx. 100 mil in revenue.
We all came from semiconductor capital equipment (the likes of Novellus, Applied Materials, etc...). We have history/experience with SAP, Baan, MANMAN etc.... however, now with a clean sheet of paper in a start up would like to select the best MRP for the money (with the best functionality, extendability etc). We have seen demo's from MS Dyn Nav, Epicore, SAP All inone, Sage Mas500. We are interested in all aspects of ERP (not just Mfg/MRP). We are mostly engineers, so we hope not to miss the important aspect the financial types would be concerned with. We do know that SOX compliance is a must. We look at modules in the areas of: Finance (general ledger), HR, Service, Quality, Mfg (MRP), Engineering (ECO), and so on. So far SAGE and SAP are winning the race... (we have a review committee, have a report card we are tracking demo's with), in fact, MS and EPICORE threw the towel in (maybe because were not big enough yet?). Local MS sale person recommended looking at IFS (which is almost local, down the street a hour plus in Tucson).

We do understand that we have to have our business processes already mapped. Although being a startup, I have to say that we are lean in that area. The beauty is, there will not be any hassle of migration from previous ERP!!! However, I wonder if the equivalent effort (or more!) will be extended creating processes from scratch. I guess that lead to the next question. Is there an ERP provider that has an out of the box solution that is 80%. We can just turn it on and organize our business to follow processes compiled by the provider that are based on industry best practices? SAP and SAGE claim they have this. SAGE second demo revealed they seem to be more orgaized by linked tasks rather than by business process flow (we all like to be organized by a block diagram instead of a slew of check lists).

Any input you have further will greatly help our investigation...
thx
steve

Not to throw cold water on anyone's enthusiasm, but here are the ERM/ERP situations I know about. Of course, your mileage may vary.

But these are all actual cases:

1. Total failure. Company halted cut-over after one week because of missed shipments and production delays caused by the system.

2. Partial success (or partial failure; is the glass half full or half empty?). Company has ERP system in place, but also has hidden system consisting of yellow stickies attached to computer displays. The yellow stickies tell people what's really going on. At the end of each month they correct data in the ERP system to match what the yellow stickies tell them so the monthly reports will be reasonably accurate.

3. A large company tells customers to expect no shipments during the week of cutover to the ERP system.

4. Another company with a long-time implementation has accumulated so many exceptions and gotchas in their system that no one completely understands it. It is impossible to write work instructions that will work in all situations, even for simple tasks like printing shipping labels. Not to mention that the system forces them to do things the same way they were doing them in the mid eighties. Continual improvement, anyone?

5. A consultant (not me; an acquaintance) implements a lean manufacturing system in one plant of a major US corporation. Immediate savings to the plant: $250K (in the days when this was real money. not pocket change!) Last step in the implementation? Disconnect from the corporate ERP system.

What I would do? Get a relational database, hire a couple of sharp programmers and write my own. Heck, you can get an enterprise-worthy database for the cost of a download, nowadays.

The most successful company of which I am personally aware did this, and it has worked very well for them.

Is there an ERP provider that has an out of the box solution that is 80%. We can just turn it on and organize our business to follow processes compiled by the provider that are based on industry best practices? SAP and SAGE claim they have this. SAGE second demo revealed they seem to be more organised by linked tasks rather than by business process flow (we all like to be organized by a block diagram instead of a slew of check lists).

I am sure most vendors offer this, but do consider the opposing trains of thought in that approach:

A. it's great because then you can concentrate on your core competency, whatever that might be, instead of configuring your processes and info systems. This more standard approach is established as effective, but don't forget what works in one environment may not work in another.

BUT

B. It means the way you do the transactional and even the planning and controlling elements of your business are not differentiated from that of your competitors. Unless of course your competition all operate bespoke systems and if that's the case lets hope it's not working for them and the standard approach is working well.

CliffK - The failures you describe appear to smack of poor planning and the incorrect implementation methodologies. It may well be the case that relational DBs etc.... work well for some and that is great, but ERP systems should not be written off because ill prepared companies fail to realise the benefits. Orgs should think long and hard about such a change, it is no different to the adoption of something like TQM, which requires cultural shifts to workout, plus effective and thorough planning and risk assessment to ensure all bases are covered.

As with any large project, planning is key and as you wish to consider application to beyond manufacturing, I'd suggest developing a cross-functional team who can highlight their:

Own specific needs
Current state
Future state


From there, I would develop a matrix with all criteria listed along one axis including a weighting system (also determined by the cross-functional team).

Working with the potential vendors and as part of the Request For Quote (RFQ) process, each proposal is evaluated and a score is entered into the matrix.

My own organization uses such a technical-commercial matrix for all large scope and CAPEX projects. It not only helps the technical folks understand who can best meet their needs, but it helps out in the formal negotiations, as well.

My experience with such software is predominently Maximo. SAP is coming in for Procurement - with all purchase orders requiring a Maximo work order number. The receiving is done in Lawson (i.e., the financial stuff).

Our go-live date for SAP is currently set for in May 2008. :cfingers:

Ill prepared companies fail to realise the benefits.

Okay. I know in one case vast sums were paid to implementation consultants. Was it not their job to make the company well prepared?


Orgs should think long and hard about such a change, it is no different to the adoption of something like TQM, which requires cultural shifts to workout, plus effective and thorough planning and risk assessment to ensure all bases are covered.

I couldn't have stated the risks better myself.

I suggest anybody considering an ERP system should take a gander at Lean Thinking, Womack and Jones, available for less than $10 US (plus shipping) from Amazon.

Okay. I know in one case vast sums were paid to implementation consultants. Was it not their job to make the company well prepared?

Depends on whether it came into the scope of the contract!! I must confess I don't have experience in dealing with consultants and vendors so can't fully represent their common stance, but I have read in a lot of the literature and in discussions with a colleague of mine who used to be an IT consultant, that there is often a tendency for them to concentrate on the technical and leave the organisational and management issues to the company involved, which of course is a poor situation. Perhaps things have changed and ERP vendors recognised the need to support organisations in the softer aspects. It would provide a competitive edge to those vendors, but at an additional cost I would imagine! :rolleyes:

Back to the orginal post, was it an ERP or MRP system you were looking at?

Depends on whether it came into the scope of the contract!!
Actually it was a rhetorical question. There was certainly an expectation of success on the part of the company and it was created by the vendor.

I must confess I don't have experience in dealing with consultants and vendors so can't fully represent their common stance, but I have read in a lot of the literature and in discussions with a colleague of mine who used to be an IT consultant, that there is often a tendency for them to concentrate on the technical and leave the organisational and management issues to the company involved, which of course is a poor situation. Perhaps things have changed and ERP vendors recognised the need to support organisations in the softer aspects. It would provide a competitive edge to those vendors, but at an additional cost I would imagine! :rolleyes:
I believe that's true. But setting those points aside, I think the installation of any monumental system like this effectively makes it harder for the company to change its processes, or even correct problems.

People who work in the company with the problems printing shipping labels are very much in the "live with it" mode. They've given up on the idea of improving their processes.

I don't think that's a desirable outcome. Though I have only anecdotal evidence to support my conclusion, I also firmly believe it's a common outcome with these enterprise class systems.


Back to the orginal post, was it an ERP or MRP system you were looking at?My original post? These were five different systems with different levels of functionality. The complete failure was an ERP, but it didn't have all the modules installed.

I just saw this article about a lawsuit claiming a SAP implementation "a complete failure."

http://www.intelligententerprise.com/channels/enterprise_applications/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207000273&cid=nl_ie_week

I have no connection with the web site or any of the companies involved.

I believe that's true. But setting those points aside, I think the installation of any monumental system like this effectively makes it harder for the company to change its processes, or even correct problems.

People who work in the company with the problems printing shipping labels are very much in the "live with it" mode. They've given up on the idea of improving their processes.

I don't think that's a desirable outcome. Though I have only anecdotal evidence to support my conclusion, I also firmly believe it's a common outcome with these enterprise class systems.

My original post? These were five different systems with different levels of functionality. The complete failure was an ERP, but it didn't have all the modules installed.

I agree with the flexibility angle, but I believe systems are becoming easier to change and amend, especially with the use of 4GLs 4GL. However, on the flip side, some systems and their processes suffer as a result of constant changing to suit the preferences of the user. If you have so much flexibility, you often see electronic replication of existing processes which is not the best use of the technology in most cases. Perhaps this is not helped by the vendors, whereby they sell a product to senior management based on fact that it does what you do but faster. Also flexibility can often defeat the object of integration, where individual units are amended or sub optimised to the detriment of the system as a whole.

Again though this all comes down to an effective planning process. Know what you will need to be flexible and what you don't, control the change processes etc....

I can tell you that successful ERP/MRP implementation is greatly dependant on the company looking to implement the software, NOT the software.

We are currently looking at implementing an ERP software package here. We are ISO 9001:2000 registered which makes part of the planning MUCH easier. Know how you do things before you automate them! If you haven't done this, you will fail!

Secondly, have both sides available to determine needs (re: technical and operational). Again, if you only have one you will not reach your goal (at least you won't be as successful as you would have been otherwise).


Last, don't expect instant improvement. There is a learning curve that needs to be ridden. Don't try to avoid it. Accept it and plan accordingly.

How do I know this besides dealing with the current project? My wife was a lead in an Oracle implementation and a family member is a sales manager for a CRM software company. I will tell you that the family member will NOT sell the package (when he wasn't the manager) to someone that he thought it would not be a good fit. Based on my experience, many of the sales people in that industry are that way. Maybe this is something new; hence, the bad taste that many people have about ERP or MRP software packages.

:2cents::2cents: (I guess this is worth about 4 cents ;))

John

.
.....My original post? These were five different systems with different levels of functionality. The complete failure was an ERP, but it didn't have all the modules installed.

Hey!! I started this .... :bigwave: But seriously... thanks Cliff, Manix, Roxane, John. I think all valid input. My blackberry (corporate leash) only indicated there was one response... and whamo... checked the thread this AM and all you have been diligently tapping in responses. Again, thanks for your time!

So, we're looking at ERP level (of course MRP included). Whether per your diligent responses above or from experience thus far dealing with various ERP providers, it's clear that the exact "chosen" software application will most likely not make or break the implementation. Rather, it will be the ability of our 11 person company (at this point) to put aside the time to define processes and answer critical process questions as the ERP partners "implement!" Also, critical will be the ERP partners involved "imple-MENTORS" and their ability to blend with our team. Most of these concerns are related to companies already operating with manual processes in place, or already using other s/w applications if not another ERP system such that the task is considered a "migration."

Some concern I have is the risk of implementing such a vast entity while in 'start-up' mode. On one hand, it's good we can start with a "clean sheet of paper", on the other hand it's bad that our sheet of paper is empty! Regardless, it means we have a whole lot of work to do to fill up the paper. Although there will not be limitations that a current process can not easily modeled, there will be same amount of effort agreeing on key characteristics of all the initial (hopefully pertinent) processes we need, and the timing.

I can't remember who above gave good advice on making a matrix by functionality for prioritizing. We have done that in light of trying to objectively score each application against another to help us assess functionality. We realize functionality is only part of the criteria used for selection.

At this point, I would like to hear more specific experience related to small (start-up) companies trying to tackle complete ERP implementation (like us <20 people). My gut tells me this case is not so common.

Also, I will start another thread on Part Numbering schema. How intelligent should part numbering formats be these days based on fabulous business database functionality and the type of business we're in.

Thanks again for all your input!:applause:
Have a great weekend !
Steve

At this point, I would like to hear more specific experience related to small (start-up) companies trying to tackle complete ERP implementation (like us <20 people). My gut tells me this case is not so common.

Also, I will start another thread on Part Numbering schema. How intelligent should part numbering formats be these days based on fabulous business database functionality and the type of business we're in.

Thanks again for all your input!:applause:
Have a great weekend !
Steve

Well done Steve you appear to be absorbing the useful information this thread has given you. It is critical that you sit down and plan this correctly!!! In your planning don't forget to maintain that systems flexibility, as it sounds like you intend to grow quite quickly and your system must accommodate this.

I am currently doing an essay on the implications of implementing a company wide enterprise system in my organisation. We are an very small SME, sub 20 people. I will try and make some of the points I discover that may get you thinking about your scenario!

Lastly, you are soooooo privileged to have a blank canvass!!!! It may be hard to get started, but once you get going you have a great opportunity to create something great, without the constraints most of us face with existing, dated and archaic systems!!!

Good luck and let us know how you get on!

I can't remember who above gave good advice on making a matrix by functionality for prioritizing. Excellent advice, but remember to bear in mind the potential for company re-organization at some time in the future and how that will affect any software. Many companies find that a reorganization is difficult and expensive with respect to software that was originally set up for a specific organizational structure.

I would suggest that prior to committing you ensure you understand what will have to be done to address issues such as moving people's records, work flows, procedures (documents in general), etc. to other organizations/departments and aspects such as that.

In short, don't neglect assessing future potential issues.

Hey!! I started this .... :bigwave: <big snip>

Well thought out.

Of course you know my bias ... but let me add something to your essay. Let your processes run a while before going to software.

Crappy processes when automated are still crappy. And they may be harder to correct.

And if the non-automated implementations work really well, you may decide to forget the whole thing!

My last company which was in the Defense Industry used and integrated IQS Software, which was developed by an Aggie by the way (WHOOP!). It turned out to be great in functionality it did Nonconformance Reports, SPC, amongst other things. You should Google and see for yourself it just may be the system you are looking for!

Check some of the IT blog sites. There is much more specific advice concerning ERP package assesments relative to specific industries.
Good luck!

PS, I have seen several SAP installations run waaaay over budget.

PS, I have seen several SAP installations run waaaay over budget. I can't remember any that didn't run over budget, typically significantly over.