Why SAP Process Understanding, Troubleshooting Ability, and Knowledge Transfer Techniques Are Missing in SAP or ERP Projects
Because an ERP system such as SAP has a single database or a single instance of data, a full process chain of dependencies is developed. Every organizational function becomes dependent on the process steps before and after it, no matter what department or area is responsible (Kallinikos, 2004). Because of these dependencies, a data error is no longer contained in a single isolated system as in times past. Each data error, or each problem that occurs, has both upstream and downstream consequences, and you cannot make corrections in isolation. Improper configuration or system design can have huge impacts on how much effort you need to correct the data and maintain the system in an ongoing fashion (Sia and Soh, 2002).
A good consultant’s role on an SAP or other ERP project is to guide the company through design decisions and make the system settings to support those design requirements. This is usually called the implementation process. During this process, the consultant should focus on knowledge transfer as well. However, many of the consultants who implement SAP or other ERP systems have little process or troubleshooting understanding (see A Cautionary Tale About SAP Knowledge Transfer). Because of this lack of consulting experience, and because of the fakes in the marketplace, knowledge transfer is usually not sufficient.
Speaking in technical terms may make a consultant sound smart or knowledgeable, but it does not mean they are actually smart or knowledgeable. Someone who has true experience, intelligence, and knowledge can make the complex or technical seem simple or at least understandable.
For long-term business benefit and ROI, your implementation vendor must provide consultants with solid overall process understanding. Without this process understanding, as well as their module specialization, those consultants cannot achieve a process-oriented implementation. If they do not have a process understanding, how will they help you realize any process efficiencies or improvements during the design process? Without the overall process understanding, how can they guide your company through the change management process needed for competitive business transformation?
If you fail to demand that the SAP implementation vendor provide strong end-to-end process consultants, your company will struggle with day-to-day operations after the consultants are gone. Without those strong end-to-end process consultants, your transition to proficiency with the system will be much longer and more difficult. In the end, any increases in productivity, or in business value, will take much longer to realize (if you ever realize them).
SAP systems are typically implemented for business transformation. That transformation generally is related to process improvements, automation, and customer focus; to address competitive pressures and business value propositions. One of the most important components of that business transformation effort is the change management and knowledge transfer (however you describe those activities).
Achieving SAP Maturity by Using the Correct Knowledge Transfer Techniques
Business transformation and change management techniques are often described by many different names: knowledge transfer, learning organizations, sustainment, production support, knowledge management, agile enterprises, etc.
A number of quality change and training programs are available for SAP projects, but few of them achieve a level of competence needed for an SAP Center of Excellence. As the next post lays out (Change Management Strategies and Knowledge Transfer Processes for a Successful SAP Project 2) change management and knowledge transfer for business transformation requires several activities. A more complete list of knowledge transfer methods includes the following:
- Transactional processing (typical keyboard training),
- Business process understanding (some projects use this method with transaction flowcharts to show dependencies),
- Master data dependencies (few projects do this level of end user training because it is generally the implementation consultants who have this level of understanding),
- Operational processing (fewer projects still do this type of training because this is the production support “troubleshooting” type of training that requires seasoned consultants to be on site long enough to help users work through the issues),
- Ongoing knowledge transfer activities such as ad hoc troubleshooting meetings with all affected users (work through problems as a group in a conference room),
- Continuing communication about tips and tricks after the system is live.
For long-term success in the marketplace, beyond the operational excellence proposition, a continuing change and transformation program needs to be undertaken after the system is live. This requires post production support efforts to begin evaluating real areas of opportunity in the marketplace. Organizational and business change is no longer an option; as Mike Myatt notes, it is an imperative in today’s global economy (see Leading Change and Change Management).
Poor Knowledge Transfer Planning or Methods and Implications for Long Term System Support and Cost
One of the biggest workforce readiness problems with any SAP implementation is that the consultants who implement the system rarely have significant production support experience. Without that production support experience, and the end-to-end process understanding, they cannot have the meaningful knowledge transfer techniques you need for long term success. Without the understanding of support they are unable to address items 4, 5, and 6 listed above. And without that complete level of knowledge transfer, organization maturity takes much longer.
That lack of production support experience (and I do not mean the month or two after go-live, but longer term support) means these consultants don’t know how to design a solution that considers the lessons learned from the past. They do not know how to prevent you from “driving off the road” with your solution after you go live, because they have never had to live with the decisions and “solutions” they have provided. Most of the consultants who come to these projects do not understand how to untangle, resolve, or fix problems that occur in the system when it is productive (cf. Scott and Sugar, 2004). Because they aren’t even aware of what to expect in a live environment, they don’t have any basis to transfer that knowledge of troubleshooting techniques or methods to you as the customer. As a result, your support pains may be far greater and last much longer than you anticipate.
This same lack of consultant experience with post-production issue resolution prevents them from transmitting operational understanding to you, the client. In other words, consultants without deep and broad experience cannot ensure you have a relatively smooth go-live. So not only do they fail to design solutions that are more streamlined or automated, but they also have little ability to provide a smooth go-live experience. When you combine this lack of support experience with the number of outright fakes and frauds in the SAP consulting space, it is no wonder why so many ERP customers are unsatisfied (see Screening Methods to Find the Right SAP Consultant Part 1).
My experience has been that consultants who lack this broad and deep experience with production support rarely know what needs to be tested before the system is live. Without adequate testing, you can expect to find ongoing data and system design or setup problems for some time after you go live.
How Do You Remedy the SAP or ERP Knowledge Transfer Plans and Methods to Support Change Management Processes?
- If the consultants speak in overly technical terms, have a language barrier, or lack overall process understanding, ask your SAP implementation vendor to replace them (see Screening Methods to Find the Right SAP Consultant Part 2). Speaking in technical terms may make a consultant sound smart or knowledgeable, but it does not mean they are smart or knowledgeable. Baffling the uninitiated with technical jargon is a classic smokescreen to mask inexperience and incompetence. The mark of experience, intelligence, and knowledge is the ability to make the complex or technical seem simple or at least understandable.
- Communicate to all internal company project members before the project begins that they will be responsible for long-term support and training of end users. Let them know that they must immediately notify project management if any consultant(s) have significant barriers to transferring knowledge or understanding. This must be communicated early in the project, because by the time the knowledge transfer for training begins, making the needed resource changes will likely be disruptive and risky.
- If you need to remove a consultant, don’t wait until the timeline is so tight that it poses a significant project risk. Include a contract provision that if a consultant is replaced for lack of skill, language barriers, or other reasons related to skill, performance, or ability to ensure knowledge transfer, that a credit for at least the prior four weeks’ billing is due (four weeks is reasonable for you to discover the problems and is not unreasonable to insist on a credit).
- Avoid customized or technical solutions for anything other than mission critical requirements or solutions that directly address business goals and marketplace competitive pressures (see SAP Implementation Focus, Software Engineering or Business Process Engineering?).
- Use the RFI and RFP process to solicit comments, methods, tools, and resource examples of how knowledge transfer will be handled. Be sure to leverage a request for Information process and the RFP process as an educational experience (see Breakthrough Project Success: 3 of 4, Vendor Selection and Contracts).
- Use the RFI process to ask for sample consultant resumes, and the RFP process to insist that final resumes for the actual project be submitted. Note in the RFP that any non-response may disqualify the vendor. SAP is mature enough that there is no reason an SAP implementation vendor should have problems providing key resources.
- Check with client references from the consultant’s resumes (and not the sales pitch references) for application skill, ability to do knowledge transfer, and change management skills. Learn about Protecting Yourself from SAP Consulting Fraud.
- Construct your services contract with an expectation of knowledge transfer (which I define as “operational independence”) or with a penalty for failing to do so. For some ideas on how to structure a contract agreement to cover this see the section titled “Operational Independence is the Key Success Criteria or Measure of SAP or ERP Knowledge Transfer” toward the bottom of the post: A Cautionary Tale About SAP Knowledge Transfer.
- Be ready for a drop in productivity right after the system goes live. This should be a temporary situation, and the better the knowledge transfer and change management has been, the less pronounced and shorter the duration will be. If done successfully you should notice an improvement in overall productivity after a short (and shallow) initial drop.
- As you move into support mode after going live, begin to document the transaction processing steps necessary for fixing, resolving, or troubleshooting problems that arise. Conduct weekly or bi-weekly training and knowledge transfer sessions to internal employees and provide different tips, tricks, or techniques for problem solving. During the production support period, helpful fixes, reports, or tools will come up to resolve issues. These should be more broadly communicated.
- Monitor progress within each process area and continue to keep the communication program going within the company after the system goes live.
=========================
Kallinikos, J. (2004), “Deconstructing Information Packages. Organizational and Behavioral Implications of ERP Systems.” Information Technology and People, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 8-30.
Scott, J. and Sugar, D. (2004), “Perceived Effectiveness of ERP Training Manuals.” Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, pp. 3211-3215.
Sia, S. and Soh, C. (2002), “Severity Assessment of ERP-Organization Misalignment.” Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans, pp. 723-729.
