A very close number two; having an unrealistic timeline is the second reason for implementations running over schedule.  Many companies will attempt to implement ERP’s entirely in-house, and choose existing staff with little or no relevant ERP experience to carry out the project.  The inexperience frequently results in bad decisions, work having to be redone, and a lot of testing of different methods that would not have to be done if the staff had an advanced knowledge of the systems.  Even when consultants carry out the work, they can be held up by unforeseen issues, such as not having a clear understanding of the company’s processes, although this can be mitigated by a good business process analysis.

Expanded project scope is often at fault, although this can be exceptionally difficult to manage, especially when the project is carried out in house.  This is the difference between using a good consultant and working with the provider themselves: it’s not in the providers’ interest to keep the scope nailed down, as the larger the scope the more they get out of it.  A good consultant on the other hand, will clarify the scope right at the beginning and keep it nailed down – their reputation is staked on a good result.  When the project is managed in-house this can be even more difficult, as inexperienced staff won’t be able to write a proper process map and lay out the scope accurately in the first place.

Vendors not delivering in time accounts for a fair chunk of schedule overruns, and although this is far from ideal, it has to be considered that many ERP providers and consultants are running at maximum capacity, and struggling to fit more work in.  There’s a high volume of companies requiring new ERP’s, and the length of time that every project can take results in a high workload for the industry.  That said, the issues that result from trying to implement in-house are far outweighed by the benefits of using a good provider or consultant to implement the ERP.  What the reports can’t show you is that even though the vendor may sometimes work slowly, doing the work in-house would have been more time-consuming, more difficult, and can result in more issues in the long run.

Technical issues are a big hold up, and this is exacerbated when the implementation carried out in house.  Consultants and ERP providers usually have access to several developers that can customise the systems, debug and analyse issues with them and much more.  However, this isn’t to say that vendors don’t run into technical issues: the quantity and variety of systems and integrations required, can often make it very difficult to run perfectly.  This is one advantage of cloud ERP systems: the client usually has limited access to the system itself, as it is like to be set up correctly in an ideal hosting environment under the providers control.  The user client is browser based which means there’s no specialist software for the client’s staff to install.

Resource constraints: a new ERP system is a big disruption for every business, and when implemented properly, a large portion of staff are involved in the process.  Staff need to put time into different areas – such as helping to map out existing methods, checking through the ERP system as it’s being built, signing it off, and training.  Implementation time often revolves around how much time the staff can put into the project, which impacts deadlines.  Finance is another resource that gets hard hit, but an experienced consultant will be able to give you an accurate estimation of costs before implementation begins, minimising the surprises.

Data issues can often cause problems: the process of cleansing, validation and importing data into your new system is prone to errors for many reasons.  Again, a good consultant that understands the system he is working with will minimise these issues greatly.  Co-relatively, this means that if data transfer is carried out in-house by staff that are unfamiliar with the system, issues are multiplied.  The result is a system that although new, is inherently incorrect and unreliable.

Priority conflicts is a big deal, especially in larger organisations.  Sales are down this month, cash flow is being undermined by our biggest supplier, our staff are flat-out dealing with support calls for our latest product, it’s our busiest season, do I have time to proactively allocate resources to work on our new ERP system?   Day to day running of the business has to come first, and deadlines need to be met which can mean that long projects such as ERP implementations are more likely to be pushed aside in favour of the tasks that are going to bring in the bread and butter.

Training is usually like either hate it or love it.  Staff may be too busy with other projects to feel that they can spend time in training, and there’s also the resistance to change to contend with.  Resistance to change happens for many different reasons, but ultimately it leads to delays, frustration, and fractiousness within teams.

Trying to implement a new ERP in-house is an option for sure…  But it’s certainly not the best option.  Companies that set up their own systems usually do so in an attempt to keep costs to a minimum.  In this situation, the company usually underestimates the cost of the staff’s time, and no allowance is made for mistakes – but definitely they will happen.  A reputable consultant will give you a clear understanding of the costs and timescales involved, but what you’re paying for is an ERP system that is set up correctly from the start, that holds reliable data. You could save time by implementing ERP in-house, but the time saved is likely to be offset by the time wasted in future by struggling with a poorly functioning system.