Did Massive industrialisation back in the day slow the SAP move to being seen as a digital platform
Back in the day (I always start blogs like this) I worked on JDE projects, it used to be me on my own turning up in a factory, asking a few questions and filling in forms and configuration and a supporting team that did interfaces, data loads and dealt with payroll.
A smallish factory took a few months to implement, and you know what it worked!
?
Whan I saw an advert to work a bit nearer home it turned out it was for SAP and I applied, my knowledge of business processes and how a three way match and product costing worked was enough to get a job in SAP, I honestly thought that I would be out on my own again implementing SAP but was immediately informed by my boss that I would not be alone and I would land in a large team on a client site with business analysts, EM’s architects testers etc.
?
So, I went overnight from a one-man army of one to an army of over 50 achieving roughly the same as I did before on JDE, but with more friends to talk to.
?
In all truth, the firms we were working for (I was aligned with a nameless big 4 - at the time one of 5 - accountancy firm), were really taking the micky out of clients with squads of young management consultants putting sticky labels on the wall and writing specifications for things that ultimately would not work.
?
The drive to be able to measure project progress and quality led to a huge amount of documentation and duplication and looking back how crazy was it to think that a project was half complete when all that had happened was that a lot of documents had been written and signed off by a user community who had no idea what they were reading.
?
Also, the rates were higher, the blended rate on my project in 1994 was twice as high as I expect now!?
?
It’s not hugely surprising that something had to change, and that was industrialization and the drive to off shoring, the arrival of low-cost delivery centers in the early noughties led to a massive reduction in blended rates, imagine reducing day rates by two-third?and maybe adding a few more days for extra coordination effort.
?
The issue was however that as rates were driven down and margins up the obvious approach was not to employ better (and possibly more expensive people) but to massively industrialize and drive down the unit cost, as well as maintain a constant stream of freshers to be worked into projects to feed the machine.
?
As we became more industrialized, we also became more risk averse. Additionally, we added more administrative steps to the design and approval process (a characteristic, I believe, unique to SAP). Consequently, the empires built around the SAP solution grew larger, with the inclusion of managers and other roles.
?
So where did this end up, avoiding P1’s etc. became the main obsession, not actually improving things for the business and governance became the new industry.
?
It’s a little surprising that when asked to change something or innovate, an SAP leader would ask for clear business cases and design documents before starting and in most cases had to fit any work in a release schedule and lots of approval boards. Meanwhile in the world of agile and digital someone said, “Okay let’s have a go, I will build an MVP and see if it works using a non-SAP solution (without the governance)”.
?
SAP of course remained the most functional solution with the most robust tools etc., but somehow this got hidden behind all the paperwork and management, it’s a little surprising that some of the areas on the edge of SAP drifted off, and it was reduced to a core that added things up very accurately.
?
Now I appreciate that SAP is hugely integrated and important, so there are more governance and integration topics, but not as many barriers are there in reality as long as you knew what you were doing, had a good solution team that understood what they were doing.
?
So finally my call to arms, don’t make things so complex, keep the core clean, trust the teams, buy more quality and less industrialization and keep the MVP’s and new stuff away form the CORE (making the changes minor) and let’s see things come back to SAP , let’s not make it hard to work with , make it the easiest solution to work with.
CEO and Founder of Kybos, a dedicated UK based Jedox FP&A software partner.
1 年Absolutely true David. Great post. A small team of expert consultants focussing on the customer and working well together, can implement SAP better and faster than a huge team. I’ve been on both. SAP can in fact be very flexible in the right hands. The trick I think is getting senior enough people at the customer to engage at a level of detail that allows them to take properly informed decisions Writing specs doesn’t work. Showing customers real working POC solutions gets real engagement. Piles of documents and hoards of consultants with poor business understanding does not!
Interesting in article. In the past SAP Consultants were usually business experts (Logistics, Finance, BPR ) - call this as Consultant and Expert "CoE". Consultants could do more, quicker, & advise on how to best use SAP, but were expensive. Then came the 'body-shop' type consultant vendors - they trained up a ton of 'consultants' via bootcamps and charged much lower rates - more like Commodities. The SAP Consultant as Commodity (CaC) model means you lose all that company-specific, domain-specific and industry-specific and even tech-specific expertise. And hence the need for more governance. And this meant your SAP guys can make SAP do what you tell them to make it do, but they cant tell you what you should do to get the most out of SAP. They take instruction, not advise. But the day rate is much cheaper & the cost impacts are obscure. So you'll never really get away from the cheaper day rate models. And for a lot of standard parts of the system, its usually sufficient.? To move to an pro-active/agile/MVP world I think you'd need a way to be able to find and bring in that deeper expertise you need while still operating under a general CaC model.? Working on ways to do this - would really like your opinion on this.
Independent Oil & Energy Professional
1 年Did SAP customize its products for the oil and gas industry? Any article written about this?
SAP Program Director | Tech Strategist @Tech Entry | MBA, PMP, SAFe 6, AgilePM
1 年Legacy complexity often breeds a 'future by past' design model. Getting stakeholders to buy into a clean core approach for S4 means they will need to buy into supplementary SaaS and involved change management too. As always it is about articulating the case for (usually with recourse to the numbers) to inspire the action required at senior decision maker level.