Optimization and standardization of a common ERP - system
Does your ERP system cover the needs and requirements of your business or does it need renewal?
R2 Group Holding consists of 7 companies, with R2 Agro as the largest operating company. The project was therefore anchored in R2Agro. All 7 companies each had their own ERP system. This presented challenges in terms of both overview, strategy and annual accounts. It can be a large task to join and standardize ERP systems when dealing with several different companies that have an overall vision and direction - and who have to share common accounts - it may require a new solution to be implemented everywhere. kaastrup|andersen helped R2Agro identify needs, set requirements, select suppliers, develop the solution, implement and commission Navision 2018.
"kaastrup|andersen helped ensure the right balance between project work and daily operations. Without it, the project would not have could not succeeded."
R2 Group Holding is a company that has grown through acquisitions and now consists of a number of companies that were using different ERP systems: Navision 4, Navision 2013 and e-conomic. The variety of systems meant that it was difficult and time consuming to maintain a management overview of the activities of the company - and create a sound business geared for further growth. An new ERP platform would ensure efficient work by common processes with a common thread across the group, as well as the possibility of easily producing consolidated annual accounts.
R2Agro had already decided that their new ERP system would be Navision 2018. The aim was also to implement a standard solution with as few modifications as possible in order to future-proof the solution with regards to future versions and upgrades, minimal operational s support and enhanced safety. The overall group solution also needed to accommodate the business variations between the respective companies. At the same time, group wanted to use Navision Power BI to generate reports from both Navision and other external sources. There was an expectation of a significant reduction in the use of manually generated Excel reports that were formerly employed as guidelines for management decisions.
The first step before the actual initiation of the project was to establish the right project team. Competencies and allocation needed to be in place, and it was also essential that the team was prepared to work closely together in an agile project setup. The agile approach was chosen to ensure a project process with a continuous, visible and tangible momentum, where changes could be handled quickly and efficiently along the way.
The project started by drawing up a traditional as-is analysis, which ensured that the project team had in-depth knowledge of the starting point. Subsequently, the team prepared a gap analysis to identify the wishes and requirements for the future solution. The last step was a requirement specification which would form the basis for the selection of supplier. The requirements specification laid out an agile process for the development and implementation of the system, so when the supplier was chosen, the requirements specification was transformed into a 'product backlog '. The project was initiated as an agile project and the product backlog was continually re-prioritized as the project gained experience and some of the priorities from the business changed.
The backlog was handled in a Scrum setup, with sprints of about 3 weeks duration. After each sprint, the project, along with the business, assessed what the next sprint should contain. It ensured the that the most relevant and obvious areas were completed and could undergo tests and adjustments. The agile work method enabled the 7 involved companies to constantly test that their specific requirements and needs were included in the solution - and the repeated prioritization of topics in backlog provided the opportunity to adjust the solution along the way.
The ongoing prioritization also made it possible to constantly work with a Minimum Viable Product – i.e. the smallest acceptable solution. This meant that the project could constantly navigate with a fixed budget and fixed time.
The agile approach led to good progress and the ongoing prioritization and planning created a unique overview of what the business could expect. The progress was continuously documented with burndown graphs and a traditional reporting on the economy.
As expected, the new system is running according to plan. Now after more than one year of operation, R2Agro finds great advantages in the overall system, in particular with respect to the continuous management reporting. And company has experienced a great relief when preparing the latest annual accounts.
kaastrup|andersen was responsible for project management throughout the process, from team setup and analysis to solution design, implementation and deployment.
|Facts about the project|
|Scope||56 users in 7 companies|