![]() However it’s important to point out that an ERP implementation strategy doesn’t have to be limited to these two options. Temporary interfaces between the new system and legacy systems can also increase the cost of a phased approach.īoth approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. The additional time and cost has to be balanced against some of the main arguments used against the big bang approach, such as the ability of the business to cope with a huge level of change happening all at once as well as the increased risk of failure. Which costs more – big bang or phased? Phased implementations typically take longer to fully complete this generally means more time from both the ERP vendor and the project team and therefore increased costs.The scope of a big bang implementation can also mean that full end-to-end system testing is difficult to achieve, and it’s only when the system goes live that all of the interdependencies are fully tested. This is because the integrated nature of ERP systems means that a failure in one part of the system can have knock-on effects elsewhere. What level of risk is acceptable? The generally held view is that big bang implementations have an inherently higher level of risk. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |