What are the top reasons ERP software integrations fail?

Too many times I’ve seen customers rush into ERP delivery, spending more time on graphics for the kick-off or naming the project than actually considering what the business needs, what the moving parts are - having a realistic view of the state and availability of enterprise data, how organisational change will be managed or what the split of activities between your organisation and any partners really will be are great examples of typical misses - and how they come together to achieve success without overwhelming the organisation. The most successful programmes have a decent planning phase where all participants work together to shape the roadmap for success and the parts they will play to realise it.

The key to success is high levels of user engagement in the implementation process. User experience is paramount and users don’t want a system imposed on them. The users need to own and believe in the solution. Another key aspect is data management and preparation. I once hosted a visit about our SAP system for a small manufacturing company who were due to embark on an SAP implementation. I asked them why they had decided to implement SAP. The answer “was nobody maintains and believes our current system so we want to start again.” My response was “why will SAP be any different? If you don’t maintain a relatively simple system what do you believe a more complex one will help?”. The data and culture needs fixing first.

ERP software integrations need detailed planning, analysis, unit and through end to end testing with participation from each integration touchpoint in the design. Along with above, real data availability/migration in test instances, detailed process mapping matching with data mapping in integration software plays a crucial role. Missing on these aspects is a recipe for failure adding errors in the flow during execution / post production deployment impacting the overall customer satisfaction.

Well Integration with ERP is always tricky and communication is the key to success. It's very important to understand the client requirements and educate them how ERP works . Being successfully delivered more than 30 SAP integration, we understand that design the right integration solution is more important than start doing the Development work. We always dedicate first two weeks for assessment. Those discovery calls always help us to understand the client and also we educate client that how that business process works in SAP which make us clearly define the integration scope. We always happily say no to clients who just want to start integration without carrying out the assessment phase. You can only add value if you know the client well

For sure lack of planning can derail any project. Few tips to achieve success: - Plan well - Train your IT coordination team before time - Select competent power users - Involve the Business Process Owners and middle management. Educate them of the implications of the project and how it will shape the future processes of the organization - Create enough fuss in the company that everyone that matters knows that a new system is being implemented and getting it right is very important - Give enough time to testing - Avoid customization (ABAPing) to the max, instead go for Process Re-engineering - Have your top man head the steering committee meetings (even if its once a month) - Have well planned integration meetings - Stick to the deadline

Poor communication in ERP integrations can unravel even the most sophisticated systems. Take the case of a company implementing SAP EDI Integration with a major customer. Despite the technical prowess of the SAP system, the project faced setbacks due to inadequate communication. Critical details about data formats, transaction sets, and integration timelines were not clearly communicated between the company and its customer. As a result, there were constant discrepancies in the EDI transactions, leading to order errors, shipment delays, and frustrated customers. Had there been a robust communication strategy in place, outlining expectations, data requirements, and regular check-ins, these issues could have been averted.

Poor communication?refers to inefficient information sharing between project stakeholders. Decision-making delays, miscommunications, and coordination problems may arise from this. Successful collaboration and resolving issues during the integration process depend on clear and regular communication.

Incompatible systems describes a circumstance in which an organization's current systems are not interoperable or compatible with the new ERP system. ERP deployment success may be hampered by this incompatibility, which can also impair easy data transfer, integration procedures and general system functionality.

Fore sure bit by and large it’s not the testing that fails its when the testers work out the original requirements were wrong, in which cases it’s too late

For sure but by and large it’s not the testing that fails its when the testers work out the original requirements were wrong, in which cases it’s too late

When the process of creating, approving, registering and running test cases (eg on ALM) is so painful that time and budget constraints reduce you to "Sunny Day Testing" and not covering real like complex and variable scenarios.

In my opinion and experience, it is not only testing the reason. Major issues come from: - the design phase in which super sophisticated integrations and replications are defined and - the selection of humble integration tools like middlewares when really strong mediations are needed like #SAPMediation by #DigitalRoute. Integration is a discipline that requires a lot of experience and not just theory. And my final recommendation is keep simple the architecture, sophisticated integrations are always going to be a headache and source of inconsistencies and future reconciliations and data cleansing.

Listing of all probable Scenarios while planning the Test Cases is important.More Negative testing to be carried out in addition to positive testing for example passing only mandatory data without optional data.Data Validation checks will help to improve integration

Some, but usually this can be resolved by swat teams and the first few weeks after go live will settle Down . Ongoing support and training is just as important

Lack of training means that staff members and users who are interacting with the new system are not receiving enough guidance and training. This shortcoming may cause a lack of experience with the ERP programme, which could result in mistakes, inefficiencies and resistance to change. Sufficient training is essential for a smooth integration, guaranteeing users can use the new system efficiently.

Probably the biggest issue , the procurement process tends to increase the number of promises that the suppliers can not keep and the team buying normally know less about what it takes . Or bury their heads in the sand. Your need to be real and get good advise from the start

Unrealistic expectations refers to having unrealistically high or aggressive implementation process goals. This can involve underestimating the complexity involved, anticipating quick outcomes, or ignoring possible obstacles. Unreasonable expectations raise the risk of failure, cause delays in projects, and leave one disappointed.

I would rather have a more positive spin in this article as most actually succeed , many are a little emotional but change is hard. Also very few (certainly with SAP) fail because the software is not up to it. Its largest as there is a mismatch between what is bought , what is sold and the expectation of what it takes to do it

Lack of management's commitment is yet another contributing factor. Integration requires handshaking among different modules each with their own processes and procedures. Integration requires minor tweaking in these processes, thus requiring the users of each system to come out of their comfort zone and embrace change. People are in general reluctant to change. When they see the lack of management commitment towards the project, they start taking strong stands as to how the other modules should change to meet their need. Instead of changing the processes to align with the best practices, they try to have the software changed to meet their processes. You can see where this is leading to. With 7 successful lifecycles, I speak from experience