What are the most common mistakes in conflict resolution for ERP?

Surely the first objective should be to avoid “Conflict”? In ERP utilisation in support of cross functional business management we are trying to build trust, transparency and tolerance. Trust in each others behaviour and the numbers, transparency on the assumptions and natural deviations s to forecast etc and tolerance when it doesn’t quite go to plan, we are all part of the solution to serve our customers. ERP is merely a tool to support the business process.

Root cause analysis and at first finding the root cause is utmost important, else people waste energy in actions which would yield any results to correct what’s gone wrong .

Stakeholders engagement is of utmost importance if a project like ERP is to be implemented. In realistic scenarios, we very well know the level of concurrence is needed in implementing any project wrt. growth alignment and stakeholders convenience. So with ERP, being a very different ball game, following steps might be followed- 1. Scope definition to be finalised with a definite timeline 2. Sprint plan to be scoped with certain buffer 3. Sprint deliberation should happen constructively before next sprint plan 4. Sprint review to be held with scrum team and stakeholders 5. Training to be given at the end of project and stakeholders would be happy with periodic review. 6. Push - Pull communication strategy must be adopted for MIS.

Es ist extrem wichtig, die Grundursache eines Problems nicht zu ignorieren. Oft steckt der Teufel im Detail. Deshalb müssen Schw?chen in den Prozessen verdeutlicht und offen angesprochen werden. Nicht selten habe ich es in meinem Berufsalltag erlebt, dass Anwender eigene Schw?chen in ihren internen Prozessen nicht wahrhaben m?chten. Doch genau die müssen klar angesprochen werden. Denn sonst kann auch die ERP-Software nicht bestm?glich arbeiten und Arbeitsabl?ufe werden nicht so effizient, wie sie sein k?nnten. Sobald diese Schw?chen offen und durch Zahlen belegt auf dem Tisch liegen, gilt es, gemeinsam mit dem Anwender, L?sungen auszuarbeiten. Auch wenn es nicht jedem gef?llt: In diesem Prozess müssen alle im gleichen Ma?e mitziehen!

The most common mistake in conflict resolution in ERP transformation program is "missing the wood for the trees"! Transformation programs are ideally business driven and IT needs to be aligned with the broader business goal. Conflicts are nevertheless natural in any program, it also indicates a healthy and active ecosystem. A culture of relentless focus on business goals is one of the best ways to pre-empt conflicts, and it also provides an indisputable yardstick to arbitrate and close conflicts.

On the contrary Escalation mechanism is must in all ERP programs! However, how it’s done makes all the difference! Any conflict should be highlighted to key stakeholders as early as possible, but not with a view to blame or complain, rather, the objective should be to seek out management support to resolve the conflict. Critical aspect-Psychological Safety should be ensured within the Program team; they should be encouraged to raise issues, without worrying about the fall out. After all everyone is working towards the successful completion of the program!

Wenn Konflikte eskalieren, hilft das niemandem weiter. Deshalb finde ich es sehr wichtig, immer auf einer sachlichen und respektvollen Ebene miteinander zu kommunizieren. Wenn die Situation bereits festgefahren ist und der H?rtefall tief in den beteiligten Personen sitzt, lohnt es sich, ein deeskalierendes Gespr?ch an einem neutralen Ort zu führen. Hier helfen klare Fakten und Zahlen, um ein eventuelles Fehlverhalten einer Person deutlich zu machen und auf einer neutralen Ebene eine L?sung zu finden. Am besten ist es aber, es gar nicht erst so weit kommen lassen. Dokumentiere deshalb immer eure Meetings. Halte wichtige Absprachen und ?nderungspunkte fest. Damit wird einer etwaigen Eskalation erst gar kein Raum mehr geboten.

Collaboration and respectful approach towards weighing everyone’s opinion within a team and key stakeholders involved while deciding the way forward with definite concurrence would help immensely in project management to realise the value as envisaged. It not only helps in the followings- 1. Early conflict resolution 2. Support from every corners while facing any difficulty 3. Team management and building with trust and faith. 4. Team will become more realistic and resilient towards any future turmoils along with better stakeholders relationship and feedback. … but also it helps in better project management with capital efficiency. Scrum states it and it is true for all endeavours with more specifics to project management.

Escalating conflicts in ERP implementation exacerbates challenges, hindering project progress and team collaboration. Instead of resolving issues collaboratively, escalation can lead to increased tension, decreased morale, and disruptions in workflow.

Es ist schon m?glich, dass Konflikte sich zuf?llig auch mal von alleine l?sen. Eine nachhaltige Konfliktl?sung sieht aber definitiv anders aus! Der Ursprungskonflikt kann tief im Inneren der beteiligten Personen reifen und sich dort extrem aufstauen. Wird also hier nicht eine klare Aussprache durchgeführt, passiert es nicht selten, dass die Personen weitere Schritte in diversen Unternehmensprozessen bedingt durch diesen Konflikt verweigern. Ein Teufelskreis, der zu extremen Spannungen und noch mehr ungel?sten Problemen führen kann. Dieses Verhalten dann entsch?rfen zu wollen, stellt eine noch gr??ere Herausforderung dar, als von vornherein den konkreten Konfliktpunkt klar und offen anzusprechen und gemeinsam aus der Welt zu schaffen.

Avoiding conflict problems in ERP is counterproductive, as it may lead to unaddressed issues, hindering project success. Instead, organizations should embrace proactive conflict management strategies. Encouraging open communication, implementing conflict resolution mechanisms, and fostering a collaborative culture can transform conflicts into opportunities for improvement. By addressing challenges early on, teams can navigate complexities, enhance cooperation, and ensure a more resilient and successful ERP implementation.

Mit dem Kopf durch die Wand zu gehen, ist in Konflikten nie eine gute Idee. Genauso verh?lt es sich mit aufgezwungenen L?sungen. Denn: Im idealen Fall sollte eine L?sung immer zusammen mit den betroffenen Personen ausgearbeitet werden. Sie sollten abgeholt und in die entsprechenden L?sungsprozesse einbezogen werden. Das führt zu mehr Verst?ndnis und Akzeptanz. Eine aufgezwungene L?sung, welche im Worst Case-Fall überhaupt nicht zu Person und Unternehmen passt, muss unbedingt vermieden werden. Ich versuche in den meisten F?llen natürlich einen gewissen Einfluss darauf zu nehmen, in welche Richtung die L?sung gehen soll. Durch bestimmte Meeting-Tools kann so eine optimierte, für alle Parteien akzeptable L?sung ausgearbeitet werden.

I believe that the stakeholders should be engaged from the beginning and they need to have a keen interest in the status reviews. Whenever a conflict arises, it is important to bring the parties in disagreement to the table and talk through the possible approaches, potential solutions and try to get their buy in. Sometimes you might have to get the stakeholder engaged to help ease the decision making, but straight out imposing a solution will lead to poor adoption of the same.

Imposing solutions in ERP problems can lead to resistance, reduced team morale, and suboptimal outcomes. Instead of fostering collaboration and understanding, an imposed solution may overlook valuable input from team members, hindering innovation and stakeholder buy-in. Effective ERP problem-solving involves engaging stakeholders, encouraging diverse perspectives, and fostering a participatory decision-making process.

A prevalent error in conflict resolution within ERP is overlooking the follow-up stage. Failing to monitor and evaluate the resolution outcome, or neglecting to provide feedback and recognition, can result in confusion, uncertainty, and a potential recurrence of conflicts. This oversight may lead to a lack of accountability and hinder the learning process. To prevent this mistake, the project manager should actively follow up by tracking and measuring the results of conflict resolution. This includes offering feedback and recognition, and celebrating and sharing successes. This approach ensures accountability, continuous improvement, and the prevention of recurring conflicts in the ERP environment.

Neglecting follow-up in ERP projects leads to missed opportunities for improvement, hindered system optimization, and potential recurrence of issues. Post-implementation monitoring and evaluation are essential for identifying evolving needs, user feedback, and areas for enhancement. A lack of follow-up diminishes the ability to adapt to changing business requirements, impedes performance analysis, and may result in underutilized ERP capabilities. Regular follow-up ensures ongoing alignment with organizational goals, fosters continuous improvement, and maximizes the long-term benefits of ERP implementations.

Change management before, during and after the ERP implementation is the solution. Communicate goals and expectations to all stakeholders, involve subject matter experts and other employees in testing and other implementation activities, train new users before and after go-live whenever there are new modules or features and actively support users to keep alive their interests in operating successfully the ERP as an integral part of their corporate culture.

Learning from conflicts in ERP is crucial for professional growth. For instance, if a disagreement arises due to miscommunication, reflecting on its root cause and implementing clearer communication strategies can prevent recurrence. Analyzing conflict outcomes helps identify areas for improvement, enhancing project manager and stakeholder skills. Seeking feedback and embracing lessons learned ensures continuous improvement, fostering stronger relationships and better project performance. This proactive approach not only resolves current conflicts but also prevents future ones, contributing to a more successful ERP implementation.

Addressing conflict has a continuum. On the one end is artificial harmony, and the other is hell. Many people choose artificial harmony, which is the most extreme version of avoiding conflict. However, there are a handful of people that will choose the other extreme to argue for the sake of arguing. Successful teams according to Patrick Lencioni are those teams that are able to manage conflict right in the middle. I.e. they have a healthy level of conflict between them that doesn’t push either side towards the extreme. This leads to the most successful and most cohesive teams in any team-based situation.

Life is full of lessons and we never stop learning what makes the difference in te future is how we address a similar situation. Will be seen as a déjà-vu ? And stay blurry until we figure out how to solve it again ? Or will it be quickly identified as an already solved conflict and will be handled quickly? In every project whether it comes with a high or low complexity all the lesson learned from different conflicts should be tracked, classified and shared with the project team. Such monitoring can even help avoiding the conflicts from happening at the first place and focus on the delivery and the results.

The most important thing I observe that if you start the discussion with blame game. If you don't have healthy culture in your organization then every one try to save his own skin rather than having focus on the root cause. I observe some managers just create toxic culture where everyone feel fear to speak true and rather than conflict resolution they were more focus to shift the monkey on some one else shoulder. So best way is to develop a culture where people speak truth and focus on the root cause of conflict and value each other opnion to find the root cause and find the ways to avoid it in future

Another important aspect is not understanding the business user perspective and forcing them for more cumbersome processes . Many of the ERP consulting team members have pre-defined mindset and assume that business users have same level of understanding . It is important for the consulting team to explain the rational and methodology. This will help to give different perspective conflict and help to get alignment quickly

One major mistake is assuming that legitimate disagreement in the business is a “conflict” that needs to be solved. There’s a Venn Diagram at play. ERP implementations are a unique type of business change that inherently surface differing perspectives and options. One department may be surprised to find out that how they always did it wasn’t really how it was supposed to be done. Another department may see a process as more critical than their counterparts across the hall. Those are bona fide process and business ops questions - not interpersonal conflicts. They can become true conflicts, but they often don’t, and the approach to each is radically different.

Common mistakes in ERP conflict resolution include not documenting implementation details thoroughly and applying solutions from past scenarios without understanding current client needs. Insufficient communication with stakeholders and a lack of comprehensive training often lead to resistance and dissatisfaction. Neglecting regular system audits and updates can result in outdated functionalities. To address these issues, prioritize meticulous documentation, tailor solutions to client requirements, foster open communication, invest in comprehensive training, and ensure regular system maintenance for a more effective and successful ERP conflict resolution process.

The most common mistakes in conflict for ERP include inadequate communication, unclear project goals, scope changes without proper evaluation, insufficient training, and underestimating organizational change impact. Addressing these issues proactively is crucial for successful ERP implementation and conflict resolution.