- E-Commerce (5)
- NetSuite and NetSuite Consulting (23)
- SaaS (28)
- Technology for the Small to Medium Enterprise (38)
- Uncategorized (6)
To answer the first question we must ask another: What drives complexity?
Vendors tell you that they respond to customers, and it’s true that many customers demand that software meets their highly idiosyncratic requirements, that’s true, and requirements drive complexity. But is it also true that vendors for many reasons welcome their customer’s desire for more complexity, even encourage it. But why?
Would the question be easier to answer if we replace ‘vendor’ with ‘employees working under the same flag’? You probably see where I am going with this. The way many employees think about their employment reminds me of the story about economist Milton Friedman who was taken to see a government construction project in a third world country. Why, Friedman wondered, are the men digging a canal with shovels instead of earth moving equipment? He was told that using shovels created more jobs, to which Friedman replied, “Then why not use spoons?”
Many employees who work under the same flag understand that adding complexity is in fact the equivalent of digging a canal with spoons. But, you might ask, management exists to make sure that employees don’t put their own needs before the customer’s, right? Well, management also understands that complexity helps to increase their software’s economy. As complexity grows, professionals and experts show up to help manage it. The more professionals and experts who show up the more cachet the software wins in the marketplace.
Complexity is also a prime driver of customer tie in. After you spend 10 times the license fee to implement SAP or Oracle applications, the probability of your changing applications in the mid-term, or even long term, future approaches zero. Or consider desktop office applications. You not only purchased the licenses but then you trained several hundred or several thousand users. The probability you are going to move to free OpenOffice applications much less on-demand versions of spreadsheet or word processing apps is nearly nil. By the way, have you seen anyone providing training for the free OpenOffice apps? Some probably exist, but you don’t see them around very often.
Recently Microsoft started offering its office apps online, calling it Office 365. I’m not sure how many users they will find for their service, but they have provided plenty of material for the blogosphere. So far, commentators who have tried the service, or tried signing up for it, have a single word to describe the experience – ‘complexity’.
The thing that stood out to me as I read the articles is that the business thinking that motivates so much of what Microsoft does sits in the middle of Office 365. They tied in as many of their applications as possible, for example. Outlook you can understand, but Silverlight? They are also offering a complex pricing plan that encourages users to sign up now for as much of the service as they can afford, since if you decide to change later you cannot migrate your documents.
With the complexity of the interface and the difficulty of installing and using it, it’s only a matter of time before there are training courses devoted to Office 365. You can see legions of corporate users marching into training centers eventually.
Meanwhile I have also caught up on reading some of my favorite online writers, and one of them, Brian Sommers wrote a great article about SAP and Workday; the old on premise ERP giant SAP vs the young SaaS Workday. The question Sommers asks is do legacy ERP vendors have what it takes to build applications for the future requirements of business? It’s one thing to address social, cloud and mobility; these are important notes Sommers. But perhaps even more important Sommers states:
The big changes that businesses are facing are centered around: extraordinarily rapid, curvilinear innovation and changes impacting regulation, competition, finance, etc. The speed of business is not just increasing; it is growing at a skyrocketing pace while the ability of ERP solutions to change is approaching an asymptotic path. The gap between the speed of business and the speed of ERP is expanding not contracting at many firms.
Our question here is do legacy ERP vendors have the ability to innovate in their core apps, or are they outmatched by the complexity they have built in over time. Go back to mobility for a moment. NetSuite order management module is fairly straightforward, and putting an app on a tablet or phone that allows for order entry is a challenge, but one that has already been met. Putting Oracle’s order management system on a phone and making it usable for a saleperson is an order of magnitude more difficult. It can be done, but it’s complex, and takes a lot of cash and time.
In another good read we came across Bob Warfield’s post on a new payment service for mobile called Square. They just raised 100 million in venture capital. This is where the economy is growing and going in many ways. How long will it take NetSuite to integrate Square? Will SAP or Oracle even bother?
We have heard more than once that SaaS software is not ready for the big leagues, that it cannot manage the complexity of real business. Our question is can complex legacy software meet the exigencies of their client’s marketplace today? Or is legacy code buried under a mass of complexity and tangled spaghetti that prevents the old on-premise ERP vendors from quickly adapting to the market’s requirements? The key to survival is not the rote hunting of the slowest mammals, but adaptation. Only those who are able to adapt to a changing environment are going to make it, and adaptation requires quickness, agility, flexibility – all attributes that are the antithesis of complexity.
I’ll start by asking what can you expect if you travel around the world looking for a tasty chicken dinner?
In Vietnam you can buy a live chicken, rest is up to you.
In China you can buy a chicken that’s been killed, you pluck and eviscerate and cook.
In Paris your chicken has been plucked, you eviscerate and cook.
In Des Moines the chicken has been plucked and eviscerated, you cook.
In New York the chicken arrives on your table plated, garnished and sauced
Now it may not seem like the world of software and the world of chickens have a lot in common, dear reader, but don’t give up yet. There is a point that I want to make here. A recent conversation with the Enterprise Irregulars around the difficulty of moving ERP systems forward with the business brought some interesting ideas to the fore. It all got started with an article by the now famous, in these parts, Thomas Wailgum in CIO about a study partly commissioned by CIO and Enterprise analyst IDC concerning this very question. Wailgum’s title says it all “ERP’s Paralysis Problem and the Repercussions for Businesses Everywhere.” The repercussions, as you might have guessed, are not good.
First,the premise, more exactly, is that ERP systems can prevent companies from seizing business opportunities because the systems are lumbering giants not given to flexibility, agility, growth and change. This leads us to conclude that the deeper the functionality of the ERP system the greater the difficulty of meeting business opportunity challenges. ERP in other words suffers from the New York Chicken problem: Once it’s served there is no turning back. You can’t change the recipe or cooking method at that point.
It’s an interesting thought. I am not sure that it is 100% on the mark, but having worked with Oracle ERP software for nine years I can attest from personal experience that there is more than a grain of truth here. Brain Sommer has a good post about some of the real sticking points in ERP systems that make changes and additions so difficult. This one stuck out:
5) Code block insanity – Just because your accounting modules can support a 30 segment code block doesn’t mean most companies should use this. Moreover, what views a company will want in its code block will change over time. Unfortunately, most financial software products (and all the feeder systems that supply accounting transactions to them) make changes to the code block akin to a complete re-install of the software. Nothing brings rigidity to ERP like the code block.
I’ll take the thought one step further – why do we have a code block, this huge accounting nightmare that attempts to pump all possible corporate knowledge about what the company sold and purchased into the general ledger from the subledgers where the transactions take place? When they began to create software for financial transactions they had only a general ledger, so to see as much data as they possibly could they tagged all the transactions in ht GL. Business software became accounting centric, and remains so even after real time relational systems came on board with multiple subledgers that can report out vast quantities of detailed information. Why do you have to update the GL with sales data when it exists in such fabulous detail in your CRM/Order Management system?
So what does a large enterprise do? They run Oracle, SAP, or something similar. Does the enterprise just forgoe new opportunities? I can’t imagine that , especially since the people who run large enterprises normally come out of sales and sales is where most of the new opportunities get their start. These folks are not going to be patient for long. Eventually the line of business, lob, will go ahead and start to do whatever they have to to tackle new business, even, in many cases, if that means writing custom software.
Now, developing custom software may not seem like such an odd pursuit to you and you would be correct – if it was the 1980s or earlier. But when so many large enterprises went to systems like SAP and Oracle they lost their development teams. That was the cost justification of the new ERPs. In the bad old days all large companies employed large teams of developers who built their custom business apps from the ground up on what came to be know derisively as legacy platforms, from IBM, Burroughs, etc. Coding custom software is like the chicken in Vietnam or China. Well, at least now you have more refined tools and platforms, so we will say it is more like China.
Well, apparently the wheel has turned again. Large Enterprises are again back to the custom software job enthusiastically and doing it with the aid of all the modern IT tools, platforms and business models – outsourcing, offshoring, onshoring, LAMP stack, Cloud, Free Open Source Software, you name it. They are coding software at a pretty good clip evidently, again in an effort to meet business opportunities.
Being on the cloud and developed in the SaaS, software as a service, model may help some of the newer entrants to the Enterprise software market avoid the New York chicken problem because the cloud can give a company greater access to partner software add-ons. But that is not a given. They must still walk a tightrope between offering a robust application that includes most basic needs while giving the Enterprise with more complex requirements a path to customize those requirements using the applications itself. Every NetSuite implementation, to be perfectly honest about it, requires a fair amount of explanation of what is not possible. You can run a lot of business processes in the system with no further customization and coding should be rare, but to have a system that truly represents your business today and your meets future opportunities, you will need to customize a quite a bit and code a little. It’s not an easy tightrope to walk obviously, and the balance struck is a subjective proposition.
However, I would also submit that every buyer contemplating the decision to move to one of these new enterprise systems should have a hard discussion about how much they want to customize and code, and how to do it in a way that prevents them from falling into the New York chicken problem themselves. For my part, I suggest that clients hold off on any customization except the most absolutely vital, and wait to add code completely, until you are live for six months. You will be surprised by how much your requirements will change once you know and understand the system.
The myth, not sure if it is still current, that SaaS prevented customization, has largely been itself eviscerated by Netsuite’s Business Operating System and Salesforce.com’s Force.com development platforms. These systems are not only open and customizable, they also encourage customers to make the applications meet business opportunity challenges.
Only time will tell if SaaS Enterprise vendors avoid the same fate as their older brothers like SAP and Oracle, but it is a good time to ask the question. Who would have thought 10 years ago that ERP would end up costing you money?
I have attended several of these in the past and I always find it interesting to hear how a particular company uses NetSuite for their business. Every company is different and NetSuite has the flexibility to accomodate a great deal of complexity. So if you are thinking that the cloud might be the right place for you, then this might be the right webinar to attend.
The most important question facing the company considering an ERP system, whether it is a replacement or a first time purchase, is ‘Does this system fit my business?’ It is a daunting question to answer, and most companies realize over time that the better question is ‘Is this system flexible enough to meet my business needs, not just today but in the future as well?’ It is impossible to meet all of a company’s needs out of the box, so flexibility is key. I’m sure that in this webinar you will hear a lot about flexibility. I hope you find it an hour well spent.
Recent Comments