Choosing mid market ERP manufacturing software is fraught with potential traps besides the software itself. These may involve such issues as the character of the vendor, its ownership and litigation history, technology and the quality of its implementation and project management staff.
CTS Manufacturing Blog
A visionary individual is not enough to help your company succeed at evaluating, purchasing and implementing new MFG software Finding the right software – whether it is job shop, inventory, or primarily manufacturing accounting software – requires that managers and users commit to learning a new manufacturing software system well, and changing your business practices, at least a little bit, to accommodate the new software.
In the mid to late 1980’s through the 1990’s two major thoughts took root that changed the manufacturing software picture. First was the idea that manufacturing is only part of the picture; companies still had to deal with Order Entry and the Accounting Systems. Software companies then began to include these modules in an integrated database. This became known as ERP. Second was that as companies continued to grow with increasing order quantities, Job Shop technology was no longer the most efficient way of manufacturing. Aligning work centers into assembly lines for dedicated production facilities provided economies of scale for repetitive manufacturing. Software companies scrambled to adapt their existing discrete applications software to include Repetitive Manufacturing capabilities. Their logic – “we have 90% of the functionality already coded in our product.” This was a fatal mistake. It is the 10% difference combined with the existing functionality that over extends the software product and makes it unwieldy.
When the software processes offered by the vendor do not match the way the company operates their plant and the manufacturing modes they handle, the software in question would be a terrible choice.
Some of the issues involved in choosing ERp manufacturing software lend themselves to a balanced scorecard approach while others must rely on the old standby, human intuition and doing what feels right, not just what looks best based on a rigid set of scores.