Continuing from my previous post:
Standardization: Top Down vs. Bottom-up
There are a few more considerations to the standardization approach. Implementation of enterprise software has led to the motto “Common…and Global”. As a result, companies are adopting standards in definitions and processes for global implementation. A standard implementation refers to a set of guidelines which is better known as a template or a blueprint allowing minimal deviations during rollouts. At times, these monolithic implementations indirectly lead to a situation, where established and efficient local practices are abandoned or compromised to make way for standardization. This in turn has the potential to create large scale organizational change issues and productivity loss in the short-term.
Hence, the dilemma in establishing standardization in a global implementation is that a high degree of standardization – at the cost of limiting variations, could compromise effectiveness, acceptability and usability of the implemented system. On the other hand, a high degree of customization to accommodate a predominant local touch in a global implementation, could limit maintainability of the system. It is therefore critical to achieve the balance between global and local requirements while establishing the areas for process standardization, defining standard processes and monitoring the application of standards. It is extremely important to critically examine the current business processes and then evolve the right ‘standard’ process. There is one more factor that one needs to consider - the uniqueness of business processes that the company wants to retain to maintain its leading position. It may not make sense to standardize those processes which are unique and helps to give the business an edge in the market.
Will be continuing this in my next post. Feedback is welcome!
Comments
This is an interesting point. For many years, big ERP providers were focusing to establish global policies and IT environment for business. This is expected to have unified business processes (sometime referenced as best practices for business). Do you see another way?
Posted by: Oleg Shilovitsky | March 30, 2009 12:37 PM