SAP B1 blog

Classical approach

The classic process model has a clearly defined timeline. The individual phases of the implementation run in a linear fashion and allow at most a return to the previous phase. Well-known classic implementation strategies are, for example, the "On-Target" process model or the "ASAP" ("Accelerated SAP") process model developed for SAP integrations.

Example of a "classic" process ERP implementation:

1. Planning and preparing the launch
2. Analysis phase: evaluation of the current situation and implementation concept of the target state
3. Customisation of the ERP software and complete implementation of all individual extensions
4. Changeover to the new ERP system

Depending on the scope of the implementation, each of these phases contains a large number of tasks and risks. However, it is essential for the classic approach that the phases and their results follow one another in time and are therefore mutually dependent.

Pro:

The simple, comprehensible structure of the introduction and (initially) clear planning of the individual phases are advantageous.

Contra:

However, the ability to plan the phases precisely quickly becomes a disadvantage of the classic approach. This is because the adjustments and individual implementations required for the changeover must be determined right at the start of the introduction.

Particularly in the case of introductions in medium-sized companies, it is usually only during the implementation phase (i.e. 3rd-4th phase in the example) that it is recognised which implementation would actually be the best. The optimisation potential through the ERP software is only discovered at a late stage and it only then becomes clear what the finished system could look like.

Agile approach

Due to the difficulties with the inflexibility of the classic approach, a more flexible model has become established, particularly in smaller and medium-sized companies. In order to avoid the risks of a completely unstructured model, so-called agile procedures have been developed. The best known of these are "SCRUM" from the Scrum Alliance or the "Rational Unified Process" from IBM. These agile Process models have structured concepts for flexibly achieving the goal (the finished ERP system).
This flexibility is achieved by splitting analysis, customisation and conversion into several small phases. At the end of each phase, it is also tested whether the planned solution makes sense for the end goal (the ERP system). In this way, the software and business processes are improved with each phase.

Example of an "agile" ERP implementation process:

1.  Planning and preparing the launch
2. Analysis phase: rough evaluation of the current situation and implementation concept of the target state
3.  Planning the individual phases and their rough contents
4.  Rough plan of the target ERP
5. Phase 1 (ALWAYS partial consideration of the ERP):
   • Analysis of the actual situation
   • Target concept of the target system part
   • Test conversion to the new system
   • Analysis of user feedback
6.  Phase 2 (further system part) and all further phases
   (like phase 1)
7. Final changeover to the new ERP system

Contra:

Nevertheless, the phases and the ERP implementation can only be roughly planned. This approach therefore also harbours risks such as a chaotic approach and difficulty in planning the results.

Pro:

As a simply unplanned approach simply ends in chaos, the agile approach aims to define a clear but flexible process. The model includes, for example, the focus of the individual phases, the roles of those involved and the interim results. In this way, the process remains structured on the one hand, but can also be flexibly adapted and planned on the other in order to achieve the optimum ERP system.

A comparison of the approaches

The main difference between the classic and agile approach is the project process. Opposing methods are tried, but a similar result is achieved.

When comparing the two approaches, it becomes clear that the classic model is only suitable if all those involved can create a clear picture of the target ERP. In addition, the implementation phases must not become too complex. The more complicated the individual adjustments and changes in the phases, the more Implementations the more the optimal ERP solution will only emerge during the implementation process. In this case, the agile approach is the better option.

Especially if individual departments are to be converted separately or individual software parts are to be put into operation individually, the agile approach should always be used for a Implementation project can be selected.