ERP programmes approved as software projects routinely deliver the platform and miss the outcome: processes unchanged, master data unreconciled, benefits deferred. Four failure sites account for most of this record, and none of them are in the software.

The four failure sites

  • Standardisation by decree. “One platform, one process” announced without a mechanism for deciding whose process wins; the conflict moves into configuration debates and the change backlog.
  • Master data by folklore. Each unit holds its own customer, supplier and item records; migration is treated as a cutover-week task instead of a governed programme with golden sources and named owners.
  • Benefits without authority. The business case depends on decisions — facility closures, role changes, pricing standardisation — that no one with authority has taken.
  • Cutover by optimism. Go-live planned as an event without a dress rehearsal against production data; edge cases surface in production at month-end.

The decisions that prevent them

  • Arbitrate processes before selecting the platform — on cost, control and customer consequence — with the winning unit chairing adoption.
  • Stand up master data governance before migration: golden sources defined, owners named, cleansing by domain.
  • Fund the business decisions the case depends on, or amend the case.
  • Rehearse each cutover against production data, including month-end where ledgers are involved.
  • Sequence unit go-lives by readiness, not by internal politics.

Engagement evidence

In a four-unit manufacturing consolidation, three of the four units had at least one of their processes adopted as the group standard, and each adoption was chaired by the winning unit. The fourth unit, which won no adoptions, stalled in adoption. Arbitration holds where every participating unit can win something.

Four questions at approval time

  • Who arbitrates process conflicts, and do the losing units stay committed?
  • Where does master data truth live today, and who owns it on day one?
  • Which business decisions does the benefits case depend on, and who has authorised them?
  • When is the cutover rehearsed against production data, including month-end?