financials

SAP Central Finance: a non-disruptive step towards system consolidation

Operating across a distributed environment has become a way of life for a large percentage of businesses today, even smaller ones. In fact 80% of all survey participants in the 2015 Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study had more than one operating location served by ERP (Figure 1). Even small companies (those with annual revenues lower than $25 million) average 2.87 operating locations, and that number grows steadily as revenues grow.

Figure 1: Environments Are More Distributed and Remote

Fig 1 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

This proliferation of operating locations often results in a proliferation of enterprise applications in general and ERP solutions in particular. In days gone by, these different operating sites were often left on their own to select the enterprise applications that would help them run their individual businesses. Yes there was a corporate accounting system, and financials needed to be rolled up. But those corporate financials were overkill at the divisional level, and often didn’t have all the functionality needed to manage operations, particularly in manufacturing sites.

As long as these different operating sites operated quite independently, this proliferation wasn’t too much of a problem. But today the likelihood of divisions operating completely autonomously has dramatically shrunk. Whether you are a services organization working on projects that span the globe or a manufacturer striving to manufacture closer to your customer, leaving each operating location to do their own thing just doesn’t cut it anymore. Standardized processes and corporate standards for the enterprise applications that support those processes have become the norm.

The majority (87%) of multi-location companies today have created standards that govern which enterprise applications are used across the enterprise (Figure 2). However, a fair number (14%) are still in the process of migrating to these standards, which means they are faced with the challenge of rationalizing existing solutions that are functioning today. Typically this means a long process of ripping and replacing solutions and many years before they see the benefits.

Figure 2: Have you established corporate standards for enterprise applications?

Fig 2 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

For SAP customers, SAP Central Finance might just be a shortcut to some of those benefits. It provides more than just the typical kind of consolidated reporting that is done at the aggregate level. Central Finance taps into the power of SAP HANA and replicates all journal entries in a Universal Ledger, while preserving the source of those entries, whether the source is an SAP ERP solution or not. Of course it takes a bit more effort to map the data from nonSAP solutions, but SAP has tools to help and it is quite do-able.

What this accomplishes immediately: Centralized reporting across the organization, beyond the typical financial reporting, and also the potential for more informed centralized strategic decision-making.

  • Reporting based on harmonized master data
  • Central journal for balance sheet and P&L reports
  • Central profitability analysis
  • Overarching views on customer and vendor accounts
  • Liquidity forecasts based on payables and receivables
  • Central overhead analysis
  • Reports for selected cost object categories

… All this without ripping or replacing anything. Of course, some might stop here, centralizing finance and leaving disparate ERP solutions in place, while others might move on to rationalize solutions. … or some combination of the two. Mint Jutras finds there are several different flavors of corporate standards (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Is this a single or multi-tier standard?

Fig 3 SAPSource: Mint Jutras 2015 Enterprise Solution Study

Although those all running a single ERP solution won’t need to rationalize solutions, they are still likely to need to consolidate financials, especially those that are multi-national. Central Finance could also be used to absorb a new acquisition, incorporating the new entity into corporate financials. Today Central Finance can be used for corporate reporting and planning, but as SAP continues executing on its planned roadmap, in the future, customers will be able to use it for central operational processing

To sum up both approaches….

Central Finance as a corporate reporting and planning platform:

  • Establishes central financial system as a single source of truth
  • Across entities and units
  • With harmonized master data
  • Using the flexible data model of Simple Finance (now called SAP S/4HANA Finance), with the possibility of adding new dimensions for reporting that might not even be available in source systems
  • With new reporting tools
  • And the speed of HAHA
  • Cross-entity insight with limitless detail. You can even click on a document ID in Central Finance to navigate back to the source system (think traceability). This is done automatically when the source system is an SAP product. Doing the same for nonSAP systems requires additional effort.

Central Finance for operational processing

  • Simplify and standardize processes
  • By centralizing financial processes
  • By standardizing, harmonizing processes across units
  • Move processes to central execution models while streamlining processes based on harmonized data
  • Possibly simplify work in shared service centers
  • Simplify your IT landscape

Whether you need to consolidate financials only, or entire ERP systems, if you are an SAP customer, you owe it to yourself to investigate how Central Finance could make your life easier.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

What are you running your business with? Is it ERP?

Perhaps you’ve heard me ask the question, “Is it ERP?” about various solutions on the market. Maybe you were thinking, “Does it matter?” The answer to that question is, “Yes and no.” “No,” in that ERP, like any software category, is just that. It’s a category, a label and you shouldn’t read too much into that. “Yes,” in that the category is often misused and maligned.

While the acronym itself (short for enterprise resource planning) can be somewhat misleading, I have always been very clear on my definition of ERP:

ERP is an integrated suite of modules that form the operational and transactional system of record of the business.

The rest of the world doesn’t see it quite this clearly. Of course my definition is intentionally quite broad, but it needs to be simply because the operational and transactional needs will vary quite significantly depending on the very nature of the business. You can’t run a service business like a manufacturing or distribution business. Retailers, government and non-profits all have their own unique requirements.

This situation is also clearly exasperated by the fact that the footprint of ERP has grown to the point where it is getting more and more difficult to determine where ERP ends and other applications begin. Functions like performance management, talent and human capital management, etc, that used to sit squarely outside of ERP, today might sit either inside or outside that boundary. While operational accounting has long been a core competency of ERP, more robust financial management can be an integral part of ERP, or a stand-alone solution. Likewise, the footprint of solutions that have traditionally been marketed as financial and accounting solutions have expanded as well. No wonder there is so much confusion out there.

As a result, I thought it would be a good idea this year to see what people actually think they are using to run their businesses. While I have been conducting an annual ERP survey since 2006, much of the data I collect is relevant to other solution providers as well, particularly those that focus primarily on finance and accounting, with perhaps some project management and/or human resource management included. So this year I changed the name of the study to the Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study and added a new question at the very beginning.

Question: Which of the following best describes the software you use to manage your business?

  • Primarily enterprise level finance and accounting solutions (might include project management and/or human capital management)
  • Integrated enterprise level finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational applications (e.g. inventory, warehouse management, etc.)
  • An integrated suite of modules that provides a full system of record of our business (often referred to as ERP)
  • Desktop solutions such as Quicken, QuickBooks, Peachtree, etc.
  • Mostly spreadsheets and/or some low-cost or free tools (Google apps, Zoho, etc.)
  • Don’t Know

While data collection is still underway, we have collected almost 300 responses thus far and the results are quite interesting.

Note that participants checking spreadsheets and “Don’t Know” were disqualified and therefore will not be represented in any results. While those running desktop solutions qualified, only 1 participant checked this option and therefore I will only include the first three listed above in our discussion here.

During the course of the survey, participants are asked to check off all the different accounting/ERP solutions they have implemented across their entire enterprises and then asked to select one of those and answer implementation and performance questions for that specific solution. While 84% of the participants selected a solution that is clearly marketed as ERP, only 33% of this segment selected the third option above, which is reflective of the Mint Jutras definition of ERP. So they have purchased an ERP solution, but by my definition, they aren’t running ERP.

The remaining 16% selected solutions that are generally marketed as finance and accounting solutions. And yet 21% of these participants described the solution they were running as an integrated suite that provides a complete system of record of their business (i.e. ERP). So it would appear the majority of those running full ERP solutions are not making the most of what they have. And at least one in five of those running solutions primarily marketed as accounting solutions seem to have all they need to run their businesses. The full breakdown of responses is summarized in Figure 1.

Figure 1: What runs your business?

Figure 1 Blog postSource: 2015 Mint Jutras Enterprise Solution Study

These (somewhat surprising) results caused me to dive a little deeper, looking for, if not an explanation, at least a pattern. This early sample represented a pretty diverse group with the largest representation from manufacturing (41%) and service related businesses (36%). Given ERP evolved from MRP (material requirements planning), one would expect a higher adoption rate and more mature ERP implementations in manufacturers. While very few manufacturers run the solutions marketed primarily as finance and accounting solutions, 41% indicated the software running the business was primarily a finance and accounting solution. Another 26% had integrated finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational solutions such as inventory and warehouse management, presumably purchased from another vendor or a partner of their ERP solution provider. Again, only 33% described their implementation as full ERP. So no, manufacturers are not ahead of the pack.

I also looked at individual solution providers where I had a sample of at least 20 responses for smaller vendors or 40+ for larger ones. What segments were most likely to be running an integrated suite that provides a full system of record? The answer: Those running solutions that specifically target small to mid-size businesses. Does this mean small and mid-size businesses were more likely to describe what they were running as ERP? Not necessarily. It depends a lot on the solution provider and the solution itself.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of those running Aptean’s solutions and 67% of those running SAP Business One described what they were running as ERP, per the definition above. Those running Acumatica’s cloud-based solution were also more likely to do so at 55%. And yet those running any of the four Microsoft Dynamics ERP solutions (AX, NAV, GP, SL), all of which target small to midsize enterprises (SMEs), were less likely, with only 28% indicating they were running a full ERP. Instead, they were more likely to report running integrated enterprise level finance and accounting solutions supplemented with other operational applications. My guess is that the partners that sold them the Dynamics solution (note: all Dynamics solutions are sold exclusively through partners) provide these other operational applications. Yet clearly these add-on’s are not so fully embedded and seamlessly integrated that they appear to simply be part of the ERP solution.

This is in stark contrast to solutions sold by Intacct partners, where I have noted previously that it is nearly impossible to distinguish where Intacct ends and the partner solution begins. As a result, 23% of Intacct customers indicated they were running an integrated suite that provides a full system of record, even though Intacct doesn’t portray its solution as ERP. It is one of those financial and accounting solution providers.

Another factor at play here is the whole concept of 2-tier ERP implementations. A full 85% of our survey respondents operate in more than one location and 69% are multi-national enterprises. This lends itself to the scenario where each operating location (division, subsidiary, business unit, etc.) may be run as a business all on its own. In fact if these units are in different countries they are also separate legal entities, requiring their own P&Ls. So you might have one system running at corporate headquarters (HQ) and other systems running the divisions.

The requirements at corporate HQ are largely financial, particularly if all orders are placed and fulfilled at the divisional level. This contributes to a larger percentage of respondents only running financials.

In days gone by these operating units might have been left to their own devices to find a solution to help them run their individual operations. Those days are long gone though. Today, 96% of our survey participants with multiple locations have established corporate standards and 64% of the time these are multi-tier standards, meaning a different ERP is used at the divisional level than at corporate. But even with a corporate financial solution in place, divisions still need some sort of finance and accounting in order to roll up to corporate. You can push the corporate financials down to the divisional level and then supplement them with other operational solutions. Or you can implement a full ERP at the divisional level and then integrate the divisional ERP with corporate financials.

This alone could be a very good reason why SAP Business One customers are more likely to be running a fully integrated suite. Of course if they are truly a small stand-alone business, they need a complete solution and probably don’t have the budget to be looking for disparate solutions that need to be integrated. Even if they are part of a large corporate enterprise, there is a pretty good chance corporate is running some version of SAP ERP. Because SAP Business One is pre-integrated with SAP ERP, the division has an integrated suite of modules providing a full system of record of the division’s business, that also happens to roll up to corporate financials.

With this as a likely scenario, you might think that the vast majority of SAP ERP customers are simply running integrated financials. They are not. Only 19% reported running primarily enterprise level finance and accounting, while 29% reported running integrated financials and other operational applications and a (relatively) impressive 52% reported running full ERP. Many assume SAP, being the 800-pound gorilla and therefore open to attack, is so complex and hard to implement that many never get beyond the basics of accounting. Yet in comparison to others, it is actually more likely to provide that full system of record.

This is not the case with Oracle, the other giant in the ERP industry. Almost half (46%) of Oracle users participating in the survey characterize their implementations as primarily accounting and only 28% describe them as ERP.

So while I would like to conclude that I found a distinct and recognizable pattern in all this data, the bottom line is that implementations vary quite significantly, particularly in comparing different solution providers. I am excited to have the beginnings of this new and extensive data set and look forward to sharing other insights as we move through the data collection and analysis phases.

Solution providers interested in collecting data from your own installed bases, feel free to contact me directly at cindy@mintjutras.com. There is still time but the window of opportunity will be closing soon!

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

NetSuite Takes Omni-Channel Commerce to the Great Outdoors

What do camping gear, nutrition bars, portable ultraviolet water purification systems and surfboards have in common?

  1. All are consumer products, consumed by outdoor enthusiasts
  2. All are sold by national retailers like REI, Bass Pro Shops and Eastern Mountain sports
  3. All are also sold online
  4. All are manufactured by companies that once ran QuickBooks but today use NetSuite to manage their businesses

These companies were among 33 exhibitors at the Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2013 show in Salt Lake City, Utah that run NetSuite cloud-based solutions. NetSuite of course capitalized on this event to highlight its recent wins in the outdoor industry. Featured prominently in NetSuite’s press release was the concept of omni-channel commerce. Omni-channel is all the rage amongst retailers, but if you don’t follow retail closely, you might be asking, “what’s that?” In short, omni-channel retailing “is a seamless approach to the consumer experience through all available shopping channels.” And what are these different channels? Stores you visit in person, catalogues you get in the mail, 800 numbers you call after seeing an advertisement on television, websites you visit from your computer or your mobile device.

Have you ever bought something online and wanted to expedite delivery by picking it up at a nearby store? Or maybe when it arrived it didn’t fit and you wanted to save the shipping cost and just bring it back to the store? How about when you go to the store to make a purchase and the item is out of stock? Maybe you’d like it shipped directly to you from a regional warehouse or directly from the manufacturer. As a consumer, these all sound like logical alternatives and perhaps you get annoyed when you can’t “mix and match” your channels. If you can’t, then it is probably because manufacturing, distribution and each of those retail outlets are all running separate systems that don’t (or can’t) “talk” to each other.

So if you think omni-channel commerce is just a retail issue, think again. It also impacts wholesale distribution and even manufacturing. While many struggle with this even today, others have made the leap to fully integrated solutions that support the omni-channel experience.

NEMO Equipment, for example, is a designer of innovative tents, sleeping bags and pads and other camping gear. Its products are sold both online through its own custom-built web storefront, as well as through about 300 retailers including REI and Eastern Mountain Sports in North America, and internationally in Europe and Asia. Up until recently (January 2013) it was trying to piece all this together with QuickBooks, but today uses NetSuite for financials, inventory and order management, CRM and PCI-compliant credit-card processing. Consolidated inventory management allows NEMO to also compartmentalize inventory, virtually segmenting direct-to-consumer, B2B and US military sales channels while cutting pick, pack and ship time in half.

Liberty Bottleworks is another example. The company prides itself in making the only metal bottle on the market that is entirely made in America. Therefore it can’t rely on off-shoring or other low-cost country means of reducing costs. It relies instead on operational efficiencies to create a strong bottom line. It uses NetSuite financials, manufacturing, inventory, order management, CRM and eCommerce, with a direct-to-consumer website powered by NetSuite SuiteCommerce to manage its business end-to-end while also expanding its retail network to about 1,400 including REI, Whole Foods and L.L. Bean. But its omni-channel commerce has a bit of a unique twist.

In addition to its B2C online sale of standard metal bottles and its distribution through regular retail outlets, Liberty Bottleworks also offers custom bottles. Want your logo and company name on a bottle? No problem. Liberty Bottleworks can do that for you. In fact it does just that for corporate customers like Coca-Cola, the Seattle Seahawks and even NetSuite itself. While the company expected this to be about 10% of sales, this part of the business has recently exploded, which has added a level of complexity that would be unmanageable without an integrated solution to support it. NetSuite supports Liberty Bottleworks in managing up to one million components (who would have thought?), including recycled materials.

These are just a couple examples of companies manufacturing consumer products that face a level of complexity added to a business that once might have been relatively simple. As consumers expect and demand more choice, merchants, distributors and manufacturers require an added level of seamless integration that is impossible to achieve with spreadsheets and desktop-bound solutions.  In order to manage the relationships between consumers, retailers, distributors and manufacturers, you need seamless integration of financials, ERP, CRM and eCommerce. Yes, it’s a tall order, but consumers demand it. And with the right solutions, the opportunity for companies like Liberty Bottleworks and NEMO Equipment is as big as the great outdoors.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,