With the benefits of a standardised delivery model in mind, Mysoft has adopted a two-stream delivery approach to ERP projects: Kickstart & Toolkit. Both of these follow a standardised process at their core, with Toolkit building on this standardised framework to deliver more sophisticated, and bespoke, solutions.
Implementing an ERP system is never the same twice, every business is different and needs an approach that respects that and works with the business – not against it.
Mysoft has two types of approaches to implementing Sage X3– a “standard” delivery and an “extended scope” delivery. Both approaches deliver amazing results but normally one is more suitable than the other. Depending on where you are coming from, what you want to bring with you, and how fast you want to go live will help dictate your choice.
This is an “off the shelf” solution, pre-configured with industry best practice settings and ready to get going quickly. This approach works fantastically for businesses which may not have established formal business processes, are looking for a more efficient and streamlined approach to business, or simply a return to a more refined business management solution.
Best for:
This takes the “off the shelf” solution as a starting point and allows you to dive into the details in every area, allowing for more extensive configuration and a solution that more closely matches what your business looks like today.
Most suited to:
Every ERP implementation project is unique in its own merit as each client has a set different set of requirements, capabilities and data metrics. One can adopt, as a rough rule of thumb, a reasonable metric to estimate project timelines, however, it is noteworthy to mention that these are estimates without any prior knowledge of the project. For an accurate delivery time, please contact us.
Project management, which typically accounts for between 15% and 25% of a System Integrator’s time spent on an ERP project, is a concurrent activity. It continues throughout the project and takes place alongside other services.
Applications Consultancy (scoping, workshops, design, build, etc.) is typically delivered in a sequential fashion; with the component activities forming a ‘natural flow’ within a single subject (e.g. Finance, distribution, manufacturing, etc.) taking place from end to end. This may run in an interspersed fashion with the other subjects, in order to ensure a holistic vision is appreciated of the operation, however typically each sub-phase will be completed before commencing the next (i.e. build is complete before testing can commence). Therefore it is prudent to plan this as a sequential volume of days. Applications consultancy makes up the bulk of any ERP project.
Development typically takes place parallel to the project, running in its own stream; but will be contingent upon core system build for implementation to be completed. Therefore must be viewed as a “complexity factor”. There is no metric for this, as is is based on a case-by-case requirement.
Training typically takes place in waves throughout a project, and while other activities can theoretically take place at the same time it is traditional that training takes place at phases of the project which are lighter on other service provider activity (early days and pre-UAT) – therefore this is best planned sequentially. Training volumes range from project to project, but let’s estimate ~10% of a project is training.
Most businesses are trying to actually continue to run a business around an ERP project, not just engage in a systems deployment; and in many cases, the project team is not purely dedicated to the deployment of the project, but rather taking the project on alongside their core role. As such, most businesses cannot absorb 20+ days of consultancy and training in any given month. One may expect a load of around 10-12 days per month may be reasonable for a business to accommodate.
Working on the basis that some data will need to be migrated over there will inevitably be a data cleansing exercise, which is always best performed by the business rather than the partner.
If you have adequate resource to clean and format the data for migration in parallel to the build phase of the project then there is no reason for this to extend or delay the project. However, high-quality data is required not only for go-live but also for UAT, therefore it is imperative that this is undertaken from as early a stage as possible in the project. If large volumes are being migrated, inevitably longer activity times will be associated with this and therefore this has the risk of elongating the project.
