What is Sure step? Why do we need to know about surestep?

southindian

Dearll,

Am new to navision. I heard about Sure Step from my colleague, and they say it is necessary to know about Sure Step. What is the Need for Sure step and how will it help me in Navision Career. I feel that it like various Model that we have in Software management . For example Water fall model, Trail and error model etc. is it related to it. I heard there is certicication for Sure Step also. How would it help me?

rhpnt

Sure Step is necessary not only for novices but also for "experts" who are in NAV for years so they don't use waterfall or trial and error methodologies at implementing NAV in an business environment. Which of these methodologies you need to know depends on your future workpath - if you'll be involved in implementations and content or you'll be a pure developer. Anyway it sure won't hurt to read the documentation.

southindian

Sir,

U meant to say that it is a help Guide for the Developer in Implementation Process right from Case study till Training Process is completed

rhpnt

It is a complete implementation guide ment for the consultant. It sure won't hurt if a developer reads it as well..

Luc_VanDyck

More info about Sure Step is available on PartnerSource: https://mbs.microsoft.com/partnersource ... /surestep/

Duikmeester

If I remember correctly also it is a Microsoft requirement for all MS Dynamics NAV Gold Partners to use this method nowadays.

zamir

Correct from October 2011 onwards its a requirment that you also have the certification on the same in your organisation.

Zamir Gori

Alex_Chow

Sure step is a waste of time and money for both partners and customers. Just my option. :?

rhpnt

Alex Chow wrote:

Sure step is a waste of time and money for both partners and customers. Just my option. :?

Sad, that's exactly what it's all about in this sentence:

rhpnt wrote:

...but also for "experts" who are in NAV for years so they don't use waterfall or trial and error methodologies at implementing NAV in an business environment.

jglathe

I second Alex' opinion. Major waste of time.

with best regards

Jens

Alex_Chow

Whoever developed Sure Step targeted the content for Dynamics AX.

If it was targeted specifically for NAV, instead of detailed guidelines, they would've given just general guidelines on implementations. Having general guidelines (1 maybe 2 pages) should be more than sufficient as a framework so NAV implementors does not have to do trial and error.

Come to think o it, I think this may be a good blog topic. Simplifying Sure Step for NAV.

rhpnt

Well SureStep can be used as an universal tool for implementing any ERP system in a business environment. Sure, there are many topics that seem boring or obsolete to some people but it's those boring things at the start that can make a difference at the ending stage of a project - will it be a success story or one of those never ending ones. It's always harder to think and plan an implementation project upfront, because the customer is impatient and pushes towards a "quickie" and most partners even agree on that - it means that an invoice will be issued sooner than expected. In most cases its more "bang for the buck" for the partner because if the project doesn't turn out as expected the partner can always blame the customer for the pushed "quickie" or in the end the product itself. From that point the implementation goes on and on and on...invoices keep on coming...service plans are getting bigger and bigger...a perfect world for the partner?

Personally I welcome SureStep with open arms. Now I have an official "weapon" against those "quickies" and a strong argument why some things just take time to develop in the right way. MS didn't implement SS into the partner structure without reason - maybe one of them is the sheer number of bad projects and even worse "partner" companies out there. Maybe SS is to become a future "sweeper" for such partner companies or a benchmark for projects?

ssingla

rhpnt wrote:

Well SureStep can be used as an universal tool for implementing any ERP system in a business environment. Sure, there are many topics that seem boring or obsolete to some people but it's those boring things at the start that can make a difference at the ending stage of a project - will it be a success story or one of those never ending ones. It's always harder to think and plan an implementation project upfront, because the customer is impatient and pushes towards a "quickie" and most partners even agree on that - it means that an invoice will be issued sooner than expected. In most cases its more "bang for the buck" for the partner because if the project doesn't turn out as expected the partner can always blame the customer for the pushed "quickie" or in the end the product itself. From that point the implementation goes on and on and on...invoices keep on coming...service plans are getting bigger and bigger...a perfect world for the partner?

Personally I welcome SureStep with open arms. Now I have an official "weapon" against those "quickies" and a strong argument why some things just take time to develop in the right way. MS didn't implement SS into the partner structure without reason - maybe one of them is the sheer number of bad projects and even worse "partner" companies out there. Maybe SS is to become a future "sweeper" for such partner companies or a benchmark for projects?

SureStep needs to go a long way before it can be adopted universally. I can see none of my project can follow SureStep. I unsucessfully tried it couple of times. As Alex said it suits AX more than NAV.

Alex_Chow

rhpnt wrote:

Well SureStep can be used as an universal tool for implementing any ERP system in a business environment. Sure, there are many topics that seem boring or obsolete to some people but it's those boring things at the start that can make a difference at the ending stage of a project - will it be a success story or one of those never ending ones. It's always harder to think and plan an implementation project upfront, because the customer is impatient and pushes towards a "quickie" and most partners even agree on that - it means that an invoice will be issued sooner than expected. In most cases its more "bang for the buck" for the partner because if the project doesn't turn out as expected the partner can always blame the customer for the pushed "quickie" or in the end the product itself. From that point the implementation goes on and on and on...invoices keep on coming...service plans are getting bigger and bigger...a perfect world for the partner?

Personally I welcome SureStep with open arms. Now I have an official "weapon" against those "quickies" and a strong argument why some things just take time to develop in the right way. MS didn't implement SS into the partner structure without reason - maybe one of them is the sheer number of bad projects and even worse "partner" companies out there. Maybe SS is to become a future "sweeper" for such partner companies or a benchmark for projects?

Again, all these can be described by a simple 1 to 2 page guideline. Not a detailed monster where the implementor will end up removing at least 90% of the methodology.

SS sounds good on paper, but not in practice. At least from my experience in NAV.

David_Singleton

To me SS seemed targeted at Vertical partners, where your implementations are all the same, so you do one huge job to customize the SS process, and then reuse it over and over again.

Since Microsoft are pushing Partners to become vertical oriented, it makes sense to do that. The thing is that the "sell the stack" concept tends to orient away form being a specific vertical provider to a "Jack Of All Trades". Either way its very hard to read the message that is being presented.