CUT THE CLOTH TO FIT THE PATTERN

ERP is a generalized set of tools that applies to any manufacturing
company. Part of the A-item implementation task is to help people
break through the “we’re-unique” syndrome that we talked about
earlier. When people recognize that there is a well-defined, universally
applicable body of knowledge in this field, they’ll be able to use
it to solve fundamental problems.
On the other hand, ERP is a set of tools that must be tailored to fit
individual companies. The implementation project must also reflect
the individual company, its environment, its people, its processes, its
history, and so on. Here are some examples of special situations that
can affect the specifics of implementation:
Flow shops.
Flow shop is the term we give companies with manufacturing
methods that can be described as purely process (chemicals, food,
plastics, etc.) or as highly repetitive (tin cans, automobiles, razor
blades, etc.).
The overall concept of ERP definitely applies to these kinds of
manufacturing environments. However, each and every function
within ERP may not be necessary. One good example is shop floor
dispatching on an operation-by-operation basis, which is typically
needed only in a functional, job-shop form of organization.2 The
technique known as detailed Capacity Requirements Planning
(CRP) is another. In most flow shops, all of the necessary capacity
Company-Wide Implementation—Overview 49
2 For an explanation of the job shop/flow shop differences, see Appendix B.
planning can be done at the rough-cut level. Simple output tracking
can be used instead of the more complex input-output control.
A company in this situation, not needing detailed shop dispatching
and CRP, should exclude them from its implementation plan.
Simple plant schedules (plant sequence lists, not shop dispatch lists)
can usually be generated directly from the master schedule or Material
Requirements Planning as a part of phase 1. And that’s good
news. It’ll be easier and quicker to get to Class A.
Financials already integrated.
Some companies, prior to implementing ERP, already use operational
data to drive much of their financial reporting. Numbers from
the operating system are converted to dollars for certain financial
planning and control purposes; product costing and inventory valuation
are two functions often already integrated. At a minimum, of
course, the current degree of financial integration must be implemented
as part of phase I, not phase III.
Companies with high degrees of financial integration, prior to
ERP, are often seen in the process world (i.e., flow shops). For many
of these companies, virtually all of their financial system implementation
will occur in phase 1.
Re-implementers.
Some companies have already attempted to implement ERP, but
it’s not working properly. They have some or all of the pieces in place,
yet they’re not getting the results they should. Now they need to reimplement,
but this time to do it right. Darryl Landvater said it well:
“The jobs involved in improving an (ERP) system are the same as
those in implementing it correctly.” As we said earlier, the difference
is that, for re-implementers, some of the tasks may already be done.
That’s perhaps the good news. However, in a re-implementation,
there’s one big issue that makes it tougher: how to convince all the
people that it’ll work the second time around3 when it didn’t work
50 ERP: M I H
3 Or third possibly? We’ve talked to people whose companies were in their third
or fourth implementation. This gets really tough. The best number of times to implement
ERP is once. Do it right the first time.
well after the first try. This will put more pressure on the education
process, which we’ll discuss later, and on top management’s actions.
Words alone won’t do it. Their feet and their mouths must be moving
in the same direction.