Thomas Wailgum writes some good articles and is frankly one of the few writers on the subject of ERP and enterprise software who appears to have some real knowledge of this market. His most recent piece on The Future of ERP is a sound reporting of the happenings of the last year since the world’s asset bubbles burst. A few of the ideas in this article really standout.
First, we have been as guilty as anyone of taking a Bridge to Far in our ERP thinking. Simply put, we believed strongly, and still have intense moments of remorse since we changed, in the idea of a single instance. A single database and application instance into which all corporate data could flow. We spent many years putting systems like these together for large corporate clients. We could recite in our sleep the benefits of an integrated single instance that would not require an army of personnel to manage the data links between varied and disparate systems. We were true believers in other words. Until recently.
NetSuite itself seemed like a godsend when we first started to work with it. Access from anywhere at any time. Pretty cool. The suite covers a lot of the business, but in some cases, we must reluctantly admit, it makes more sense to have several systems. We have seen many of our clients make links from NetSuite to another system, using of all things a Software as a Service integration tool – Boomi. NetSuite itself has also started to make some inroads into the small divisions and business units of very large enterprises for the simple reason that trying to install SAP or Oracle in these smaller, or small, units is not cost or time effective and in most cases does not work. Yes, we will even admit that the integrations required for the business units to communicate with corporate are much simpler today than they have ever been. We can use tools to map out the integration process and make point and click changes as needed. Not the bad old days of hand to hand integration, exactly.
In the background we also hear some other long resting ideas begin to stir. If we can accomplish integration less painfully, more efficiently, and have a more stable outcome then why not best of breed? Pick the best of every category and cobble them together. Our first inclination is to ask “Why bother?” If you have the opportunity to work within a single integrated system then why wouldn’t you? We’ll stick by this. In a lot of cases it just does not make sense to create an integration where it would be better to use a suite. But let’s face it, the snowballs in hell will be frozen solid before any of the well known SaaS vendors, NetSuite included, go to the trouble of building a strong HR module in their suites. It just does not make sense. The result is that small and medium enterprises need to integrate a best of breed product, which many of them are already doing. In many cases they use a SaaS HR offering.
So let’s be clear: We still believe in the integrated suite, especially when it comes to running the transactional revenue and cost processes of a business. But there are a lot of areas of business, depending on business size, model, complexity, etc., where the suite cannot by itself run the entire company. In these cases it only makes sense to reach out to other solutions, and with public API and web services the reaching out is not nearly as painful as it once was.
OK, we are all going for beer now.

(Cross-posted @ Sightings in SaaS)



Very nice article! I agree with your points about going too far in our ERP thinking and that small and medium enterprises need to integrate a best of breed product. I think it’s also important to consider the history of ERP before reaching conclusions about its future. ERP has become an important business application, and needless to say, ERP has helped industry in both capital and noncapital aspects, but there’s still much room for improvement. More information at http://blog.technologyevaluation.com/blog/2009/07/17/business-solutions-of-the-future/ , if you’re interested.
Best regards…
Melissa Vaes
“ERP selection experts…”
The Future of ERP in a Disrupted Organization is more descriptive. The logic of a fully integrated ERP in any business is not flawed. The inability to gain control of the pieces and ownership of the subordinate processes is the flaw.
Management has to be willing to grasp the big picture and refuse to permit sub optimization of the enterprise to optimize the lobbying of one of the subordinate pieces.
ERP is not a business application, it is the engine that processes all the transactions to run the business and in that context a single instance is more than definable, it exists. The alternative is stove pipe ERP’s justified as suites that detracts from the overarching objective of end to end transactional processing.
The ERP’s that take too long or fair are those that fail to institute change management and either do not understand or can grasp the big picture.