So, How’s the Weather and Your Software Implementation Going?
My husband and I attended a fundraiser hosted at a friend’s home the other night where we did not know many people. After a few introductions and the exchange of pleasantries, inevitably, the topic of conversation came to what we do for a living. Since I was the only one with a background in IT and business development, to find a common thread, my new friends conspiratorially shared their experiences being involved in their company’s large-scale software implementation. “It’s a disaster,” one said. “No one even spoke to my department before they picked the software,” said the other. I internally cringed when the conversation pivoted in this direction because I have unfortunately heard similar accounts before. It does not matter if I am speaking to a junior accountant, seasoned IT professional or corporate executive, their tales of woe are the same: cost overrun, scope creep, lack of communication and poor planning.
One would think these would be long ago resolved problems. There are certifications and entire companies built around project management services. It is even common practice now for software companies to offer consulting services solely for the purpose of implementing their product. Large organizations may even have a project management office and on staff project leaders. But much like building a house, difficulties encountered during software implementations are widely accepted as a necessary evil. In my experience, that doesn’t have to be the case. The following are what I see as the primary culprits for why implementations go off course:
1. The Right People Aren’t Included Early On: Much like a high performing team, a high performing business is a collection of people within departments working skillfully towards a common goal. Ideally, software that supports these activities will efficiently facilitate the communication and flow of information between these groups. Therefore, when a company undertakes a software implementation that impacts the entire organization, every department is a stakeholder in the project’s successful outcome.
Critical design elements can easily be left out if key subject matter experts are not included in the initial requirements gathering phase. Common mistakes I have witnessed are not including IT until it is time for product installation or (even worse) the data integration stage. Another misstep occurs when the first department to implement determines system setup criteria and other departments do not weigh in until later. To ensure the software is configured correctly AND the organization can handle the demands of the system, at least one knowledgeable representative from every department should have a seat at the selection and requirements gathering table.
2. Unchecked Business Processes Dictate System Setup: Whether you take the time to do an assessment or not, business processes are the foundation of any software implementation. Ideally, your processes are efficient and clear to every person in your organization. By this point, most of us have heard the old adages warning against using automation to make bad processes faster. The same holds true with system implementations. Warning bells should be going off if the plan is to “replicate the current processes” in the new system or if there is a laundry list of customizations needed to make software work “your way”.
I get it. Process assessments are time consuming and a pain. However, if performed properly, they can save you thousands, if not millions, down the line. Understanding how information flows from one department to the next and identifying inefficiencies BEFORE your software selection efforts begin will ensure that your system is built upon a solid foundation. In my experience, the most effective assessments are system agnostic, meaning processes are mapped based on how the business should run, regardless of the software used. This exercise will allow the project team to use the desired “future” process maps as a barometer for new system selection.
3. Not Enough Time is Spent on Requirements Gathering: Hard questions should be asked before vendors are invited in to present their dog and pony shows. Plain and simple, when vendors come in, they are there to sell you a product. Some software demos are so impressive you may leave wondering if the capabilities could even extend to mowing your lawn. Joking aside, the sales staff, while knowledgeable within the confines of their presented material, will not always know how their product relates directly to your business.
To critically evaluate a system, you must clearly understand what your requirements are. For instance, what are your needs for base functionality and what is a “nice to have”? Also, what comes “out of the box”, what is an add-on module and what is a feature obtained through customization? Consideration must be made for technical requirements, as well. Is your business prepared to move their financial processing to the cloud, for example? Each department should have distinct, detailed requirements based on their business process needs. The vendors’ responses to these requirements will allow you to make an informed software selection.
4. Lack of Executive Support and Oversight: In a perfect world, issues like internal politics and ingrained preferences for the “old way of doing things” would not exist. However, companies are filled with people. Whether it be out of fear or personal preferences, not everyone acts in the best interest of their company. Furthermore, even the most seamlessly executed enterprise implementations are notoriously expensive. To use the home construction analogy again, you would not build a house and only check in with the builder when construction completes. The same should hold true for your software implementation.
The most successful implementations have executive leadership presence and involvement from the onset. Backing from the top sets the tone that the project is not only important, but everyone’s support and participation is expected. Asking a chief executive to sponsor the project, speak at the kick-off meeting and chair the steering committee are effective ways to keep everyone engaged and on board throughout the effort.
5. Project Scope and Plans are Fluid: In my prior role, I led the budgeting process for my company. It was tedious work that involved stakeholders from every department to estimate projected spend for the following year. It took months, several iterations and board approval to arrive at a final answer. At the end of the process, the official budget was the yardstick in which we measured ourselves for the new year.
Project plans and project scope for enterprise-wide implementations should be treated with the same reverence.
Do plans and requirements sometimes need to change? Absolutely.
Do unexpected issues arise that legitimately delay timelines? Without a doubt.
Both your project scope and plan are as sacred to determining the success of your project as a corporate budget is in gauging company performance. No changes in the timeline or scope should be made without justification and oversight approval.
6. Project Status and Issues are Communicated on a “Need to Know” Basis: If issues are protected like a state secret or if status updates are infrequent, too technical or filled with jargon, your project communication strategy is broken. I have heard on many occasions project team members express frustration over the lack of information flow from project leaders. Granted, there may be issues that arise that should be for steering team discussions only. For the most part, however, as stakeholders, everyone involved in the project should know where it stands.
An effective communication strategy is paramount in leading a successful implementation. Project team members need to know what their role is, what their deadlines are and what the issues are. A few ways I recommend improving communication is to keep project documentation centralized and accessible by all involved, hold regular project meetings, maintain meeting minutes and widely distribute weekly status reports that clearly convey how the project is progressing in relation to the project plan.
Obviously, this is not an exhaustive list. Fundamentally, however, each of these issues can occur regardless of the size of your company or scale of the project. Including the right people at the right time, performing a comprehensive internal needs evaluation and creating a thorough communication plan will create the basis for a successful implementation.
