Software project failures are no fun for anyone involved. They lead to piles of wasted money and effort, heaps of accusations and recriminations, and even to lawsuits. Here’s a look at some of the highest-profile problem projects to surface this year…”

180 View – One of the 10 biggest failures is “the attempt to provide electronic health records for all of the country’s citizens.” This is not an ERP system. Another of the 10 was for a company with 20 employees. It seems to me that the author had trouble finding big ERP failures in 2011.

Jim Hagemann Snabe gave the Wednesday keynote, which I found tighter and more balanced than similar messages delivered in Orlando. Back then, the keynotes seemed to overly emphasis HANA, SAP’s new in-memory database technology. Although HANA is still hugely important to SAP, the message is now more balanced between SAP’s three focus areas of innovation: mobile, cloud, and in-memory computing…

My consulting team at Strativa recently evaluated ByD (Business ByDesign) in a competitive deal and came away favorably impressed. Customer reference checks during the Madrid conference were also encouraging. I believe SAP has a winner with ByD: both for subsidiaries of its large customers and in net-new small business deals. Those who question the viability of ByD at this point should reconsider their assumptions…”

180 View – Although the author, Frank Scavo, was paid to attend the conference by SAP, Frank did a good job in providing an unbiased opinion about the conference. What was also interesting about the article was what was not discussed – mainly SAP ERP, SAP Business All-in-One and SAP Business One. SAP ERP and All-in-One are the same system except that All-in-One is preconfigured for a specific industry. It seems that SAP is betting on in-memory computing for these systems – “From an economic standpoint, in-memory computing is a sustaining innovation for SAP. SAP can use in-memory computing to continue to sell big-ticket licenses to big-ticket customers and receive large annuities in the form of maintenance fees.” But there was no mention of SAP Business One, which is conspicuous by its absence.

While this may be a drastic comparison, it really highlights the wide range of organizations served by nonprofit software vendors. Entry-level, off-the-shelf systems are intended for different types of nonprofits than the top-line, robust solutions. This is not a one-size-fits-all market… The review includes the following systems with their ratings:

• AccuFund – AccuFund Accounting Suite for Non-Profits (Overall: 4.75 Stars)
• Blackbaud – The Financial Edge (Overall: 5 Stars)
• Blackbaud – Fundware (Overall: 4.5 Stars)
• Cougar Mountain Software – Denali Fund+ Accounting (Overall: 4.75 Stars)
• CYMA Systems, Inc. – CYMA Not-for-Profit Fund Accounting (Overall: 4.75 Stars)
• eTEK International Inc. – eTEK Fundamentals (Overall: 4.5 Stars)
• Fund E-Z Development Corp. – Fund E-Z Accounting (Overall: 4.5 Stars)
• Intuit Inc. – QuickBooks Premier Nonprofit Edition (Overall: 4.5 Stars)
• Sage North America – Sage Fund Accounting (Overall: 5 Stars)
• Sage Peachtree Premium Accounting for Nonprofits 2012 (Overall: 5 Stars)
• Serenic Software – Serenic Navigator (Overall: 5 Stars)”

180 View – Although all the systems have a high rating and the rating seems somewhat arbitrary, the article should benefit a not-for-profit organization seeking a new system. However there are many more systems available. For example, check out Unit4 and Tyler Technologies, both of which are good high-end solutions.  You will also find that many of the well known ERP systems have either built not-for-profit functionality or have partners that have extended their system with not-for-profit functionality using the same tools and database as the core product.

Those identified as cloud vendors that publish financial statements are currently showing strong growth. Yet what we mean by “cloud computing” is likely to evolve, as will the incumbents’ offerings. The big vendors have big resources, they have (or will have) cloud offerings and are pursuing broader platform strategies that may provide compelling advantages to some customers. The smaller vendors are showing flexibility. The cliché of the fat lady has yet to sing applies to the current environment.”

180 View – Our view is that it is futile to resist the cloud. The major vendors have jumped on the cloud bandwagon and will soon offer cloud-like alternatives. We find that many small and midsized businesses are ready to take the leap into the clouds and believe there is a business case and that the cloud vendors will protect their data.

Some areas to assess during the implementation partner selection process include:

1. Vendor experience.
2. Company longevity.
3. Proposed consultant CVs.
4. Methodology.
5. Billing rates.
6. Expected implementation timeline…”

180 View – We agree with the article on the importance of the implementation partner. We would also recommend interviewing the key people on the implementation team to make sure they are a good fit based on their experience as well as their personalities in adapting to the corporate culture.

Starting this year, an average of 10,000 baby boomers will be eligible to retire every day for the next 19 years in North America, “and a lot of them are IT people,” said Cappuccio, people who are taking corporate knowledge with them…”

180 View – I believe that we have just started to see a major acquisition binge by companies that have no choice but to invest in an ERP system as their legacy system will soon no longer be supported by the baby boomers.

180 View – The report recommends that it’s time to replace ERP systems that are over 15 years old unless it provides a unique competitive advantage. The report had a number of interesting charts. One chart showed that that ERP extensions are mostly purchased from the ERP vendor for recently installed ERP systems but mostly from independent third parties for the old systems. Having one throat to choke is an advantage. Another chart shows a significant improvement in the time to implement the newer ERP systems which should not be surprising with all the lessons learned and better tools. The largest systems now offer preconfigured solutions. Another chart showed that the newer system required a lot less customization than the older ones.

The implementation costs were supposed to be US$190,000 but have reached more than $1 million, the complaint says. Whaley is suing Epicor for fraud, breach of contract, unfair trade and negligent misrepresentation. It wants its money returned along with additional money for damages…”

180 View – Unfortunately there are still failed ERP implementations. We believe that the problem is primarily people and not software. There is something seriously wrong with overruns of this magnitude. But overruns are avoidable. When there are unknowns and the implementer is unable to provide a firm price, we recommend that they be paid a fee to nail down the costs and prepare a project plan that includes the vendor’s time as well as the client.

180 View – You may get great support from the third party, but you won’t get upgrades. This is probably ok for companies that are stuck with old versions of their software because of customizations. If you go this route, read the fine print of the contract to know costs to restart support.

180 View – The article is partly based on a NetSuite user conference and discussion with attendees who will naturally be somewhat biased in their opinion of cloud computing and NetSuite. We would go further than cloud-based ERP is at a tipping point. It is now prime time technology and all the major vendors are scrambling to get on the bandwagon.

Together with Manufacturing AUTOMATION, we surveyed 74 Canadian manufacturers and distributors with the goal of uncovering common, key drivers of ERP success. We defined ERP success relative to implementation, because a solid implementation is the launching point of ERP-driven value. To meet our definition of success, an ERP implementation must have been delivered on time, within five percent of budget, and to a level satisfactory to all stakeholders.

Surprisingly, only 18 percent of the respondents’ implementation projects qualified as successful…”

180 View – This is not good news. However it’s not surprising that ERP systems are not on time or on budget. Most organizations that have selected an ERP system have engaged a vendor to implement the new system based on poorly defined scope/requirements and a time and materials contract. Another big problem is that most organizations have not defined measurements of success before starting an ERP implementation making it almost impossible to achieve a “level satisfactory to all stakeholders”.