Four Ways to Botch Your ERP Implementation Process (ERP導入プロセスに使ってはいけない4つの手法)

Page 1 of 4

レポートの概要

企業向けソフトウェア選定を失敗へと導いてしまう４つの手法をご紹介したい。導入プロセスの戦略的側面を重視しそびれること、一度に多くを手掛けようとしてしまうこと、新しいソフトウェアにレガシーシステムを複製しようとしてしまうこと、導入プロセスを独自に考案しようとすること、の４つである。これらの間違いをうまく回避して無駄な投資を免れていただきたい。

In the process of implementing an enterprise application suite like enterprise resource planning¹ (ERP) or enterprise asset management² (EAM), an almost infinite number of things can go wrong. A successful implementation depends not only on selection of the correct application, but on the quality of the communication between you and your application vendor or implementation consultant.

1. enterprise resource planning (ERP)：統合基幹業務; 企業資源計画
2. enterprise asset management (EAM)：企業資産管理

Some of the more disastrous ERP implementations that you read about in the news—the ones that public companies¹ blame for their poor financial performance, going well over² budget, and taking years to complete—might be blamed on the complexity of the product being implemented or the perceived unresponsiveness³ of the implementation consultants.

1. public company：株式会社; private companyは、民間会社
2. well over ～：～をはるかに上回る、超える
3. ùnrespónsiveness：反応が鈍いこと; 敏感でないこと; 反意語はresponsiveで、反応が早いこと

But the success of the implementation often depends on the customer organization and the project management ability of its implementation team. Those on the receiving end¹ of an implementation are in a very challenging position because in many cases, none of the team members have been through an implementation before. Ostensibly², the team representing an application vendor or implementation consultant should be experienced and professional, but miscues³ on its part are not unheard of⁴ either.

1. receiving end：endは端; 末端の意味; 受け手側; ソフトウェアを導入する側
2. osténsibly：表向きは; 表面上あることのように見せかけているが、実際は見かけとは違うこと。
3. miscúe：間違い; ミス
4. not unheard of：notとun-で二重否定になっている; hear of ～で「～のことを(噂など人から)聞く」こと。聞かないことはない。

In white papers, there is no shortage of advice about what best practices¹ can lead to success. But equally important is a thorough understanding of the worst practices² to be avoided during an implementation. Problems during implementation are never deliberate³. Following is a review of four practices that should be avoided, unless an organization wants to go out of its way to cause its implementation to tank⁴.

1. best practice：最も効果的な実践法; ベストプラクティス; 主に企業業務に取り入れるべきビジネス手法を指す。
2. worst practice：一般に使われることはないが、best practiceの反意語として筆者は使っている; 望ましくない業務実践法。
3. delíberate： 故意の; 意図的な
4. tank：完敗する; 大失敗する

1. Underestimate the strategic importance of the implementation process.
(導入プロセスの戦略的側面を重視しない)

This is a very broad topic, but failure to understand the various ways an enterprise application implementation is strategically critical to your business can cause a number of problems. But perhaps the most common result of this cognitive failure¹ is reflected in the type of people a company assigns to an implementation team, and the problems that naturally ensue².

1. cógnitive fáilure：認識上の誤り
2. ensúe：(必然的に)結果として起こる

Some companies are understandably¹ reticent² to devote their most valuable human assets to a months-long implementation process, and instead, assign more junior people to the team. This tends to create problems of vision, as younger, less experienced employees of a company, or those in staff-level positions, tend to have an excellent grasp of their own jobs, but a lack of understanding when it comes to the company’s strategic goals or company operations as a whole. These employees may be more likely than their more experienced peers to be interested only in making their own jobs easier, perhaps even at the expense of others in the organization, and skew³ project resources accordingly.

1. understándably：無理からぬことだが; 当然といえば当然だが
2. réticent：気が進まない
3. skew：外れる; 逸れる

Another common error is to heavily load the team with C-level executives¹. These senior players have an excellent grasp of where the company is today and where it needs to go tomorrow, so their buy-in² is vital to the project. However, senior executives often lack an understanding of the specific processes and activities that are used within the company. A hands-off³ manager will be at a loss when it comes to discussing precisely how things are done within the company today, and how, on a granular level⁴, it is reasonable and desirable for business processes to be executed in the new software.

1. C-level executives：CEO (chief executive officer; 最高経営責任者)、CFO(chief financial officer; 最高財務責任者)、CTO (Chief Technology Officer; 最高技術責任者)、CMO (Chief Marketing Officer; 最高マーケティング責任者)など、Chief(最高責任者)という肩書きを持つ企業内の経営幹部を指す; つまり、C-levelの“C”は、Chiefの頭文字をとったもの
2. búy-ìn：合意(agreement)のこと
3. hands-off：不干渉の; 口出ししない
4. granular level：granularは、穀粒のように細かいものを形容する; 細かい、詳細なレベル

Page 2 of 4

So who belongs on the implementation team? Choose middle managers who are key users of the software and who have extensive knowledge of both company strategy and detailed processes. They must be empowered to make decisions regarding the implementation, necessitating C-level buy-in and support, as they will be responsible for determining how the application is used and dictating the business’s process flows for a long time.

Another way that failure to appreciate the strategic importance of the implementation manifests itself is to assign what might be the right team, but to then give them no time to work on the implementation. Once the members of the team are chosen, it is vital to make sure their regular jobs are backfilled¹ so they have time to concentrate on the implementation. In too many circumstances, I have seen situations where someone is assigned to an implementation team but is told he or she still needs to do his or her job, and has to implement this ERP package on the side. This is not a viable² situation, as the implementation will be starved for³ resources. It will either grind to a halt⁴, or it will be forced to move ahead with inadequate information, resulting in multiple problems at the go-live stage⁵.

1. báckfìlled：元々は掘られた穴に最初に入っていたものを埋め戻す、の意味; ここでは、導入作業のために、従事できない分の通常業務(regular job)の埋め合わせをする、という意味
2. viable：目的どおり成功すると思われる; 実行可能な
3. starved for： ～に枯渇する; ～が欠乏する
4. grind to a halt：目的どおり成功すると思われる; 実行可能な
5. go-live stage：(システムを)稼動させる段階

2. Bite off more than you can chew¹.
(一度に多くを手掛けようとする)

There are two ways to try to do too much too fast with an ERP implementation. One is to try to implement too much with regard to geography or sites all at one time. Some ERP vendors and implementation providers advocate² the “big bang³” approach, encouraging companies with multiple locations to take their entire organization live all at once. But often, this proves to be too much for an organization to handle.

1. bite off more than you can chew：慣用句。文字通りには、噛みこめる以上の量を食いちぎる、という意味だが、つまり自分で対処できる以上の責任や仕事を引き受けようとすること。高望みするな、出来ること以上のことをするな、といいたいときには “Don’t bite off more than you can chew”という。ここでは、限界を踏まえず、一度に多くの事業所や拠点にシステム導入し、稼動させようとすること。
2. ádvocate：支持する; 推薦する
3. bíg báng：ビッグバン; 宇宙の大爆発; ある企業の多地域にわたる複数の事業所にERPを導入し、一斉に稼動させることを比喩したもの

In many cases, it is better to implement an enterprise application at one or two sites at a time. This allows a company and its implementation consultants to work kinks out of¹ the business models and process flows that were decided upon by the implementation team.

1. work kinks out of：kinksとは、(機器や計画などの)欠陥、障害を指す; ここでは、コンサルタントが業務モデルの欠陥の排除にあたること

Another way to bite off more than you can chew is to make too many dramatic changes in your organizational culture, all in one fell swoop¹. When you buy packaged software, you are not only buying technology—you are buying a way of doing business that can improve the efficiency of your organization.

1. in one fell swoop：一挙に、同時にたくさんのことをすること; “at one (fell) swoop”ともいう。

In many cases, elements of an application’s functionality may represent business practices that you currently do not engage in, either because they have not been a part of your corporate culture¹, or because they are not supported by your legacy system². These process improvements and best practices are likely good opportunities to move your business forward, but trying to implement all of this functionality at the same time may prove to be too much for a business’s management structure and employee base to absorb. Consider that vitamin C is a very good thing to ingest³, but taking too much of it at one time can upset your stomach!

1. corporate culture：企業風土; 社風
2. legacy system：既存のシステム; レガシーシステム; legacyは元々遺産や遺物を指すが、IT業界では、レガシーシステムで新しく導入するシステムの前に使っていた旧式システムのことを指す。
3. ingést： (口から体内に食物や薬を)摂取する; 取り込む

In order to avoid disruption that can result from change that comes too quickly, it often makes sense to take a more gradual¹ approach. At the initial implementation, reach out to your functional² leaders to see whether or not adding various elements of new functionality creates too great a burden. Sometimes it’s better to go live with functionality you currently have in your legacy system, and to schedule add-ons³ later, when you are genuinely ready for them after an initial stabilization period.

1. grádual：漸進的な; 段階的な
2. fúnctional：ここでのfunctionalとは、ある分野で専門的であること
3. ádd-òn：アドオン; ソフトウェアに追加する拡張機能をもつアプリケーション

Page 3 of 4

3. Replicate your legacy system on the new software.
(新しいソフトウェアにレガシーシステムを複製する)

While trying to change too quickly is one way to hobble¹ your enterprise application implementation process, trying to avoid change altogether can be just as damaging.

1. hóbble：ぎこちない様子で歩くこと; ここでは、導入プロセスが順調に運ばず、手間取りながら進むこと

Some people just don’t like change, and the idea of abandoning the way they have done things in the past upsets them. These people, if they are part of an implementation team, come into the project with their own paradigms and their own ideas of how things should work, which are often based on the old system. Oftentimes, it does make sense to go live first on just enough functionality to replace the legacy system, but resistance to change of this nature can bring² an implementation to a halt.

1. bring ～ to a halt：～を停止させる; 中止させる

A fervent¹ desire to replicate an existing environment can be very granular, and team members may even have a specific idea of what screens they should see, what reports they should get, and what buttons they should click. People who are reluctant to move away from their legacy system focus on the functions of the software rather than on the business requirements behind those functions, and they often request numerous modifications to the new environment, which cause cost to spiral² without real business benefit.

1. férvent：熱心な; 熱意のある
2. spíral：ここでのspiral(動詞)の主語に当たるのはcost(費用)で、費用が増加することを指す; spiralにはらせん状に旋回する、という意味もあるように、増加する、といっても経過や動きが掴めない複雑な過程を経て増加する、という状態を含意する。

It is important for an implementation consultant to understand the current processes and how the legacy system is being used. That is why a consultant will ask not only what processes are currently being followed, but what the underlying reasons are for each of these processes. Sometimes these questions are asked to make sure that each process is necessary, but this line of questioning can also determine the business need that process is fulfilling.

An implementation consultant or applications vendor should understand that anything the customer does in its current process is likely for a good reason, and it is the consultant’s or vendor’s job to find what that reason is, and then to find the best way to satisfy that underlying need in the new software. The goal should not be to replicate the way things are done in the legacy system. Indeed, most times, an implementation may bring a slightly different process flow, different screens, and different reports. People assigned to a company’s implementation team have to be able to think outside the box¹ and realize that their business requirements are being met even if the screens and buttons are not exactly the same.

1. think outside the box：従来とは違った考え方、独創的な考え方をすること; 新しい観点から考えること

There is a relationship between the ability to successfully navigate this process and the degree to which the right people were assigned to be a part of the implementation team. It is crucial that the implementation team be able to look beyond the superficial elements of the legacy system, and see past the screens and reports to which they have become accustomed. They need to envision¹ how the new application will be made to meet their underlying business requirements.

1. envísion：想像する; 思いを巡らす

Implementation team members must be comfortable opting for a slightly different approach or a slightly different process in order to meet the strategic goals a new enterprise application is meant to achieve. In some cases, team members should even be empowered¹ and unafraid to suggest organizational changes outside the application that will better accommodate a new process flow and make for a smoother implementation. Perhaps certain departments should be merged, or people who had worked on opposite sides of a building should be moved closer together to better facilitate the new way things are to be done. With too great an attachment to the past, it is hard to realize a more productive and streamlined² future.

1. empówer：権限、権利を与える
2. stréamlìne：能率化、合理化された; 簡潔な

Page 4 of 4

4. Reinvent the wheel¹.
(導入プロセスを独自に考案する。)

A fourth and final way to foul up² an enterprise applications implementation process is to reinvent the wheel by disregarding established implementation methods. Regardless of the implementation provider or the enterprise software product you choose, your implementation team will come in with an implementation method consisting of specific steps to go through in order to ensure success. This implementation method is proven, and has been developed over long experience at dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of companies.

1. Reinvent the wheel： 慣用句。文字通りには、車輪を再発明する、いう意味だが、既に造られたものをゼロから造り直そうとして時間を無駄に費やすこと、という意味に使う。ここでは、専門家が考案した従来の企業向けソフトウェアの導入プロセスに頼らず独自で導入プロセスを編み出そうとすること。
2. foul up： (間違いやへまをして)台無しにすること

Implementation consultants and application vendors follow this method because it suits their approach and the software in question. While methods of different implementation providers may vary, a viable method will generally include four distinct steps:

• Mapping¹
  
  At this stage of the project, a consultant will identify the business processes you will implement, and determine how, at a business process level, they will be handled by the software. IFS¹, for instance, uses its own IFS Business Modeler software for documentation of all process levels, automating the process of finding functional gaps and working them through to a solution.
  
  




1. mapping：各作業の流れや関連を示したフローチャートような計画書
2. IFS：1983年に設立されたソフトウェア会社。ライフサイクル管理、中間市場ERPなどを扱っている。


• Implementation-Definition
  During the implementation-definition phase, the consultant and implementation team will take the process maps and work through the details. There might be several rounds of work routine documentation¹, modeling data migration to make sure processes are well documented and that they will work.
  
  




1. several rounds of work routine documentation：roundsとは、(繰り返し循環する)期間; 作業手順を数回繰り返し、文書化すること


• Testing
  During the testing phase, the consultant and implementation team will tie all of the processes together and test them to make sure they will work. One way to do this is to run several days of the company’s transactions through the system, end to end, in a controlled business simulation environment.
  
  
• Rollout¹
  After mapping, implementation-definition, and testing are completed, it is time to roll the application out to users in the organization. This step involves training the users and ensuring that the IT infrastructure is in place to run the application prior to going live.
  
  




1. róllòut：広範囲にわたってシステムを導入、稼動させること

All of these steps are absolutely necessary. But sometimes, in a budget crunch¹ or on a tight timeline, there is the temptation to cut out some testing or some mapping. Even if you are not trying to reinvent the wheel in its entirety, it is not advisable to simply remove a few spokes² to see how it holds up under load! Skimping on³ any of these steps comes with a degree of risk that needs to be recognized. Straying from the established implementation method creates the opportunity for things to go wrong at a critical time—during go-live week or after go live, as poor preparation comes home to roost⁴. Typically, problems that result from diverging from proven methods cost more to fix than a more thorough and systematic implementation would have cost to begin with.

1. crunch：不足; 減少
2. spoke：(車輪の)スポーク、ここでは手順を省かないことがいいことを車輪の製造の手順を例にとってスポークの取り外しを挙げている。
3. skimping on：～をいい加減にする; 手を抜いて～をしない
4. comes home to roost：(間違った言葉や行為が)自分に跳ね返ってくる、しっぺ返しを受けること; “come back to roost”ともいう。

著者について

Jeff Kugler氏
米IFS社(ウィスコンシン州、ミルウォーキー市)のソリューション・コンサルタント。ソフトウェア業界に入る前は、製造及び運営業務に従事。顧客やコンサルタントの立場から導入管理を担当した経験を持つ。社内外を問わず、リーン(ムダを排除した)生産方式を積極的に支援している。レイクランド大学(Lakeland College、ウィスコンシン州、シボイガン市) コンピュータ・サイエンス学科卒業。

当社のTECオンライン評価センター:統合基幹業務(ERP)では、貴社特有の要求に合った企業向けソフトウェアの評価、選定をしていただけます。どうぞお試しください。

記事番号：TU_ER_XJK_02_13_08_1_JA

	写真ひとひらfromかえで (その5)
みなさん、こんにちは。今回の写真は、プレゼントです。TECでは、結婚や出産などの人生の大イベントを目の前にした社員にみんなでプレゼントを贈ることにしています。百人は超える社員を抱える会社ですから、ちらほら結婚や出産のお祝い事のある社員がいます。プレゼントを渡すときは、みんな部屋の真ん中に集合します。祝ってもらった人は、たいてい中身を開けてみんなに見せてくれます。みんな笑顔になって幸せを共有するこのつかの間の時間はまるで大家族のようです。毎回贈る物も微妙に違っていたりするので、見てる方もとても楽しいんですよ！