An opinion on the use of Dimensions

Alex_Chow

This topic should really be a poll.

seckpin

Slawek Guzek wrote:

I have another end example as well. 1GB database, 17 dimensions, and posting of single line was taking around 60secs..

Can't help but pick this up. I wonder how can anyone stand waiting for 60secs for posting a single line? We have users who complained about system slowness when the posting was taking 15secs (over terminal services).

Alex Chow wrote:

The idea of dimension is great. I think everyone that's contributing here agrees. However, it's the implementation of dimensions that is terrible in NAV.

That really nails the point. I do agree that Dimension is a neat feature in NAV, but too many consultants take it as the solution to everything and do not implement it with caution.

As mentioned in my original post, i have great concern on how our vendor is implementing Dimensions for our company's requirements. Anything that we need to be analysed, they'd just think of, "hey, let's just add a Dimension to capture it". I am worried that this is gonna be a problem that is waiting to explode. Just too bad that they sell it so well to the management that now even when the consultants are not around, the management just say, "hey, why not we capture it with a new Dimensions"!

Alex Chow wrote:

The original post asks for an opinion and I think both sides has been expressed.

Yes, very different opinions, expressed somewhat enthusiastically.

Thanks all.

seckpin

Slawek Guzek wrote:

Deploing ERP system in the organization can and should be used to 'straighten' some business processes. I believe that there are always elements of business process where ERP system should be aligned to the company processing rules, and there are elements of business process where company rules can and should be aligned to the way ERP system is working.

If you computerize or automate a mess, you will get nothing more than computerized/automated mess.

That i definitely agree. Implementing an ERP system often helps to uncover the business processes that are, well, let's not say wrong, but not following the best practice. It does help to put in place a better procedure and streamline the processes.

Just one thing though... in an ideal world, things should flow smoothly accoding to how ERP system works. Too bad that we don't live in an ideal world, especially business world where it is not so structured like in IT, and too much human factors and situational factors come into play. As much as we can say this is how the system works and this is how the users should work, sometimes it is just creating unnecessary inefficiencies.

But then, i digress again, huh? :P My apology, just that i have had too much encounters with IT people who do not see things from the business perspective and often forget that ERP system is supposed to be an enabler of business and not dictacting it. (And no, Slawek, i am not saying that you are one of those IT people)

Slawek Guzek wrote:

Yes indeed, I've met many times users claiming the system (NAV) is stupid...

I used to say to myself, "there is no such thing as a stupid system, only stupid users". Then after some time, i realise there is also no such thing as stupid users, but just bad programmers and implementers.

idiot

Some companies are so unique that they cannot adopt "best practices" or they lose all competitiveness, that's why customization comes in...
Bringing back to dimensions, the questions to ask will be like:
1. Besides just the dimensions & their values, what other data is required? Does it make sense then to use dimensions at all when dimensions need to be linked back to some other table?
2. Does the dimension values form a finite list?
3...
4...

The question then becomes : Who asks these questions?

I used to say to myself, "there is no such thing as a stupid system, only stupid users". Then after some time, i realise there is also no such thing as stupid users, but just bad programmers and implementers.

Everything becomes stupid when users are not aware of how to do the things right & the system is not designed for the right things.

ara3n

David Singleton wrote:

IMHO (note the H this time) What they should have done is extended Deparments and projects from 2 to 4, and made that the limit.

But then NAV couldn't sell it to Danish Gov, who needed a system that supported unlimited dimensions. The main reason dimensions are implemented this way.

kine

Dimensions are like a fire... good servant - bad master...

It can help you if you know how to do it, it can burn your system if you will not take enough care...

Better implementation of Dimensions in standard NAV can only move the border between "servant or master", but it cannot fully solve it. And this can be applied to whole NAV (and may be to anything around us...). Each of us have different experiences with dimensions and our opinion is based on those exp.