Adding value - it’s all about the process
The phrase ‘value-add’ has been so over-used in the parlance of IT implementations that its real meaning is no longer readily apparent. It is sprinkled through RFPs and statements of work like fairy dust in the hope it will clinch a deal or provide the intangible benefit a customer is looking for.
But in the heat of a project how exactly does a customer and implementation partner achieve this goal, and do so without ruining stringent budget, time and scope restraints? The answer lies in the attention given to each business process and recognition from the outset that not all processes are created equal.
Successful SAP projects deliver solutions that cater to multiple business processes. It is important for both the customer and the implementation team to differentiate at the outset exactly which of these processes are standard ‘must do’ processes, and which really add value, providing the organisation with useful differentiation and true competitive advantage.
The design blueprint for a ‘must-do’ process will differ considerably from one used for a key differentiating process. For the latter, the blueprint will often begin with a blank sheet of paper and the design will be worked through iteratively as feedback from business users is gathered – a typical consultancy approach in other words. For a standard ‘must do’ process, I would argue it is better to use SAP ‘best practice’ or at least a standard solution.
This is a simple thesis to follow, but it is surprising how seldom such deliberation takes place prior to the commencement of a project. Failing to realise which camp each process falls into can be costly. There is little point, for example, in investing huge effort in the design of an accounts payable process. An industry standard solution for accounts payable will typically meet most, if not all, the customer’s needs. By showing the customer what the solution can provide out-of-the-box, valuable time and money can be saved.
The starting point on the ‘process-value’ journey is to ensure the organisation assesses the importance of its business processes at the beginning of the project. To do this it needs to understand and agree the role of each process within the business. This will not only help inform the organisation about the real business benefits from doing the project, but will help the implementation team discover where customer sensitivity is greatest. It is also worthwhile benchmarking existing process performance prior to commencing the implementation, as this will enable improvements to be measured once the new solution is in place.
Once this is done and each process tagged as ‘standard’ or as ‘differentiator’, it is important the project team treats each group separately, developing different design and blueprint approaches for the two different process types.
Wherever possible the project team should leverage SAP ‘best practice’ to meet the needs of standard business procedures. Don’t reinvent the wheel for the sake of it. Detailed design methodology should be reserved for processes that create significant advantage, such as improving the design for a complicated multi-user workflow. SAP implementations are, by their very nature, complex and when energy is devoted in the wrong areas it can defocus attention and potentially derail the success of a project.
Following this approach means the elusive ‘value-add’ can be achieved in a number of ways. Standard processes receive tried and tested solutions that slot in with minimal disruption to day-to-day business routines. As a result, ongoing training costs are reduced because new employees with standard SAP experience are able to come up to speed quickly. In addition, support and upgrade costs are reduced thanks to a reduction in the number of transactions that need to be managed and maintained. Differentiating processes that are unique to the organisation receive considered and appropriate design attention – simplifying tasks for users and increasing efficiency and productivity for the business. Smiles all round.
Related Tags:
stuart dickinson,
implementation ,
implementation,
value,
