Navision ERP business process-how good it is..

johnson_alonso

Dear All,
I am currently passing the manufacturing exam, after passing it, I was in euforia and feel high, but it's just 3 days. I am involved in Navision since June 20... I've got 3 months tuberculoses and in vacation because of that.
Before moving into Navision, I am an industrial engineer in manufacturing company and chemical engineer too, I am a graduate in chemical engineering. ERP is really good system, but how good navision ERP based on ERP business process, and how good the consultants (technical/business) have good knowledge on it (ERP generally and Navision ERP). I saw that Navision consultants here only create/maintain report/created daily, other busy for maintain relationship with old customer that want to upgrade their navision and add some new modules that beforehand not yet added. I mean, how could this happened ? Are the other NSC around the world also doing this ? Is there any different ? Can you share to me ?


Rgds,
Johnson

Shenpen

I am not completely sure I understood correctly what you are asking, but Navision from a business processes viewpoint I think is mixed.

For Manufacturing, my first implementation was a candle factory and it didn't really fit. However, I presented Navision Manufacturing to the Transportation Engineering professors of the local university, they became quite fascinated, they said that those manufacturing companies who use CNC lathes etc. so they work with metals and manufacture machinery with it, are exactly working this way and it will fit perfectly.

For warehouse, I think Navision presents the best practices - but one needs to understand the strange terminoligy - for example, a warehouse shipment is actually what companies call Freight Route Document.

For Sales, Purchase, and simple Inventory I am not very happy with the processes. Actually, I think there ain't any processes there at all, just a bunch of functions. I mean the guy who thought up this "post an order as a shipment" logic might have been totally drunk or something

For Finances, the processes is again quite good. This is clearly the strongest part of Navision. However, some features are missing, such as vendor invoice confirmations.

radianis

Hi Johnson,

I really understand your concerns regarding Navision ERP in your environment and I would like to share my view. I was in your position before and after having some small research I found some interesting findings. I started my ERP/EAM consultation role in 1998 using MIMS and started Navision in 2002 after using another ERP application..

Your statement "ERP is really good system, but how good navision ERP based on ERP business process, and how good the consultants (technical/business) have good knowledge on it (ERP generally and Navision ERP)" is a common question that every consultant and researcher want to have an answer.

One interesting finding is a study by Rajapakse & Seddon "ERP Adoption in Developing Countries in Asia: A Cultural Misfit". They concluded that "Although factors such as the high relative cost of hardware and software compared to costs in the West, limited national infrastructure (including countrywide knowledge of ERP systems), and well-documented difficulties with IT implementation projects are clearly important in explaining the relatively low adoption of western-based ERP systems in developing countries in Asia, we have chosen to focus on the possible impact of cultural factors, to explain the relatively low adoption of ERP systems in developing countries in Asia. Our basic argument is that the business practices embedded in western-based ERP software are likely to reflect US and European business and national cultures, and that when such systems are implemented in developing countries in Asia, problems may be experienced due to mismatch between cultural assumptions and practices embedded in the software and those in the client organizations. Our conclusion is that cultural factors do matter. In this study, we used two cultural dimensions from Hofstede (2001), namely Power Distance and Individualism/Collectivism, to explore potential cultural misfit between westernstyle ERP systems and Sri Lankan organizations. By identifying culture clashes through these dimensions we managed to explain some reason for problems in ERP adoptions in developing countries in Asia. Our analysis reveals that four pairs of opposing cultural forces (see Table VII) work against the ERP adoptions in developing countries in Asia."

From two different standpoints, your statement "how good navision ERP" is talking about ERP made by european, whereas "ERP business process" is talking about the user who uses the ERP which is by Asian. The way european think would differ with the way asian think according to the study, so it explains your those two questions.

So in my opinion Navision ERP is always good from european standpoint as it is fullfil european business process that affected by its culture. But to say it will also good for asian business process ? not completely right..

How to solve the problems ? and how to fill the gap ?

You should be thankful to Navision, before taken by Microsoft (I hope Navision still open.. ). It give you a freedom to change the way application think about business process. You can customize in a degree that you think necessary to change the even biggest and hardest part. Your limitation only your technical consultant capabilities and of course, cost.

The business process gap could be handle easily using Navision, trust me even if you try GP or Axapta is not as easy as Navision. In my experience you need 10-30% business process customization (BPC).

But this plan create another problem, you need a very good (wide open)business consultant to understand what client needs and communicate with a very good (wide open) technical consultant. These two are reciprocal, a business consultant that have a technical overview and a technical consultant that have a business overview. Frankly saying, these two quality is rare because you need a broad minded consultant not narrow minded consultant just like you said "I saw that Navision consultants here only create/maintain report/created daily, other busy for maintain relationship with old customer that want to upgrade their navision and add some new modules that beforehand not yet added"

This is just like Rajapakse & Seddon said that " .. limited national infrastructure (including countrywide knowledge of ERP systems), and well-documented difficulties with IT implementation projects are clearly important in explaining the relatively low adoption of western-based ERP systems in developing countries in Asia.."

On the contrary, I understand that Microsoft give a new NSC an easy path to become a partner. They want large number of NSC so they can sell more. But it will create another big problem, an "implementation success shortage" due to countrywide knowledge of ERP system. But frankly saying it will not suffering Microsoft, it will at the end will suffer NSC (You need someone to blame... :twisted: ). I think only a quality NSC will retain with this situation, I hope you are one of it =D>.


regards,


Radianis

johnson_alonso

Hi Shenpen, Radianis, all,
Tks for your opinions. you have explained and share some small parts of your experience. I will reply but it won't be used to fight your opinions to me but only reply as far as I know.
Shenpen wrote:

For Manufacturing, my first implementation was a candle factory and it didn't really fit.....
For warehouse, I think Navision presents the best practices - but one needs to understand the strange terminoligy...
For Finances, the processes is again quite good. This is clearly the strongest part of Navision. However, some features are missing, such as vendor invoice confirmations....

This is always the challenge and it wasn't caused solely by the consultant's mistaken. Especially about terminology, it must be navision-dynamics team to solve how to make it simple and can be understood asap by user or prospect customer. I don't understand so much about the finance but the module, I say again that it's a general. And can cope with general problems in finance application.
Do you think vendor invoice confirmations are needed ? I mean what will be the effect in navision if it exists ?

Radianis wrote,

...problems may be experienced due to mismatch between cultural assumptions and practices embedded in the software and those in the client organizations. Our conclusion is that cultural factors do matter. In this study, we used two cultural dimensions from Hofstede (2001), namely Power Distance and Individualism/Collectivism, to explore potential cultural misfit between westernstyle ERP systems and Sri Lankan organizations. By identifying culture clashes through these dimensions we managed to explain some reason for problems in ERP adoptions in developing countries in Asia. Our analysis reveals that four pairs of opposing cultural forces (see Table VII) work against the ERP adoptions in developing countries in Asia."...
...How to solve the problems ? and how to fill the gap ?
.....You can customize in a degree that you think necessary to change the even biggest and hardest part. Your limitation only your technical consultant capabilities and of course, cost....
The business process gap could be handle easily using Navision, trust me even if you try GP or Axapta is not as easy as Navision. In my experience you need 10-30% business process customization (BPC)...

I think you are correct. but in fact, this statement of Rajapakse & Seddon's book about this : "Our conclusion is that cultural factors do matter" is a local use not fit all and can't be considered for all developing contries. My reasons are:
1. Company without ERP still can be safe and continue to operate
2. Company has actually implemented ERP system especially its theory but not using computer.

you can read the Dr. Scott Hamilton's book or write to him to this mail ScottHamiltonPhD@aol.com.
His thinking and statements as following based on company's consideration before decide to implement ERP system:
1. Justification of ERP Investments
2. Quantifiable Benefits from an ERP System
3. ERP System Benefits on the Balance Sheet
4. Costs of Implementing an ERP System*
5. One-Time Costs
6. OnGoing Annual Costs

Anyway, if talking about customisation, it will give two types of thinking,
1. will it give a bad influence to other modules or tables or codeunit?
2. how long will it take to make it ?
3. will the additional cost be exists or free for us ?
4. 90% is bug free or not ?

My idea inside is that I disagree to customize because it reflects the weakness of navision.

Also, I want to know does, thisforum members, NSC consultant or Microsoft Partners company that sell Microsoft-Dynamics (AXA, NAV, Sol., GP) has calculated the pay out time (POT) or return on investment (ROI) based on company that has fully (finished) implemented Microsoft Dinamics ERP system ? I mean, for example you probably success in implemented navision and has finished and there's no more maintenance, etc..etc.., then you and the company's top management, or the company only but they give it to you, calculate the POT and or ROI. Could you send it to me pls ? [e-mail :johnson_221974@yahoo.com]


Rgds,
Johnson Alonso

"SAP := Setan aja Pusing (the devil is headache)"

Shenpen

I perfectly agree that cultural differences are what cause the most problems, however, I think it's important to define what differences we are talking about.

The quality of ERP systems is generally low, there are no cultural differences regarding this question. The reason of it simply the quality of any software is generally low - it's hard to walk around in an office without somebody cursing Excel or Outlook or whatever -, because the whole software industry is still in infancy compared to f.e. construction or automobile industires. And the bigger software is the worse it is - it's natural.

The important cultural difference is how people react to this low quality. It seems that in the West people have accepted this long ago - and in my country people did not. This is the important difference.

If you know and accept that ERP is low quality, then you either hire dedicated assitants to operate it and shield most of your organization from using them or spend a lot of money to make it usable or accept that users spend a lot of time fighting with software and therefore you hire more employees that you would actually like to, or something like that. It seems that in the West either expectations are low or money thrown into a project is high. No one assumes that buying and ERP and fifty days, as our old joke says, will "make the computer sell your stuff by itself and banknotes come rollin' out of the floppy drive" (This joke originates from the CA-Clipper business software developers of the early ninenties.)

So the basic problem is too high expectations - or too low cost expectations. It IS possible to make an ERP software usable, but it costs about 200 days for the typical 20-user implementation. Of course, if it's the tenth company of the same industry and some developments can be moved from one project to another and things slowly taking the shape of a vertical add-on, it might be lower.

For example, pleasing only one user, a purchaser, would mean 1) removing unnecessary fields from forms, marking important fields red etc. 2) putting in a lot of restrictions and warnings to make the software foolproof so that it does not require Zen-like concentration from the user 3) adding accelerator functions like generating orders for all items of a vendor, all new items entered this month, all this, all that 4) loads of reports, like evaluating all vendors on how late the shipments usually are.

It's at least 10 days, for one single user, and one either buys this amount of time or will have a bad quality system, there is no third choice.

The important cultural difference is that for my users Navision is way too expensive therefore they think they expect these thinks by default. In the West, people alreay know that ERP's are generally low quality, generally don't have such functions, but they don't mind it as compared to their salary costs the ERP is not very expensive - and they know and accept that you either have to accept it or spend a lot of money. This is the important cultural difference, I think.

radianis

Hi Shenpen,

That is a good opinion since it reflect your people culture in your country, and I also agree with you. I think, any research today not yet emphasize on 'expectation' on the ERP product. This is an interesting topic, since I believe many country will have different level of expectation due to their culture (perhaps..). Thank's for your inspiration..


Radianis

johnson_alonso

I sometimes think that the culture in all countries will be different and it will give influence in their thinking to everything. I think modern people usually disregard the culture but they will learn the new things and calculating them. What I mean here is that all their assets are important but how to increase the assets value are more important than cultures. Expectation based on the assets value. If there is something that can increase the value, they will run after it although it will be costly but return on investment (ROI) must be calculated first beforehand. Navision ERP is one of a means to increasing the assets of companies either to resource, materials, equipment and money.
Shenpen has given his own idea based on his experience. And Radianis have been inspired by what Shenpen wrote. It's very best idea on the Shenpen side but for me, it will not fully best idea nevertheless, I agree but not inspired.
You must always realize that culture is one of Navision sales challenges although the problems are not solely in the culture, but what companies needed and what the companies's thinking in the future for their assets.



Rgds,
Johnson



"Strength beyond strength"

Thomas_Hviid_Thorn

Hej

I think, the discussion has turned a bit away from the original question. Not that I mind - the prior enclosures have been interesting to read.

If you want to evaluate how good Navision supports business process', you have to define the processes to support upfront. And you still have to remember, that Navision is a frame-work <* only *>, where the elements may be combined into your business process.

If the Navision frame-work may fit in the processes of a little carpenter in mid-Denmark, a factory in Hungary and an international-operating company in Jarkata - I still find it a bit impressive.
ERP-handling is not as standardized as e-mail- or a wordprocessors document handling. ERP is done very differently in different companies. It depends on the company-culture, which swifts even within same industry within the same country.

I would argue, that eventhough no business process is defined, many elements for doing so is present.
Since business processes is very company-culture-dependent, it's harder to make a general frame-work for supporting what-ever processes your customer may have. I guess, with the increased focus on roles, that's a path Navision will go focus on in the future - but who knows ??


Working with customers al over northern-western europe, I must state, that cost is still a big issue. On the other hand, the focus is more often to buy an ERP-tool to support business expansion (increasing work-flow), rahter than to sack people decreasing costs.