|
Business Accent
Bridging the Gap
The evaluation and implementation of an ERP application is separated by
an all-important intermediary step known as Gap-Analysis.

Ipshita Basu Guha
|
People do a lot of discussion and brain-storming on evaluation
and implementation of an ERP application. But not many are aware of a crucial
step that exists between these two phases. This intermediate step is called
Gap-Analysis. The output of the analysis is generally a document which elucidates
the the As-Is and To-Be factors, the gap between the two and how it can be bridged.
It is all encompassing and not restricted to few areas of an organisation.
An ERP application is generic in nature and is opted for
when an organisation does not want custo mised application to suit its needs.
It is an application which can be implemented in other organisations of the
same domain and in case of Tier-1 application in diverse domains. The size of
the organisation is not as important as the business. There are applications
which can be implemented for a $1 million organisation as well as a $100 million
one too. The processes incorporated in these applications are standardised and
based on industry best practices. Organisations will have to go in for a detailed
Gap-Analysis prior to commencement of the implementation phase since there is
bound to be considerable gap between the present and the desired future conditions.
As-Is
As-Is as the term suggests is basically the present condition of an organisation
and its systems, strategies and processes. Documenting the As-Is state helps
in clearing all doubts about how things are functioning presently in each and
every area of the business. The implementation of ERP is not done by all the
employees. It is akin to a play in which there are few central characters who
are involved in the entire plot and supporting characters who come and go during
various phases. The core team comprises representative members of all the functions.
These representative members may or may not know all the intra- or inter-department
processes. Hence there is a need for the As-Is document.
To-Be
To-Be is the state of affairs in an organisation after the implementation of
an ERP application. These applications have specific processes for various functions.
These might or might not be similar to your existing processes. There are additional
issues like access control which come into place where people can view data
only on the basis of their roles. Generally these things are not in place during
the pre-ERP days. The To-Be document details how the processes and systems should
and will be. It acts as a navigator for your implementation phase. The implementers
can verify whether the system is being configured as desired or not.
What is Gap-Analysis?
There is always a difference between the As-Is and To-Be
states of an organisation from the strategy, structure and systems points
of view. Gap-Analysis pertains to identification of the gaps and preferably
segregating them in terms of their criticality. This is followed by analysis
of the extent of the gaps and the methodology to bridge the same. Gaps can be
identified through developing test cases or building scenarios to study the
To-Be system. Business Process Modelling and Simulation can also be done to
have a walk-through type feel of the processes. It is similar to say a flight
simulator.
Extent of analysis
How do you define how much analysis is adequate? Some people have the habit
of overdoing things and in the process might just go too deep into preparing
the As-Is and To-Be documents. Time is a crucial factor in business and most
things are best left optimised than maximised. The ERP project manager and his
core team should first dwell upon identifying the Critical Success Factors of
the project. Garnering top management support, user training and so on is critical
for any projects success. The important processes of the business which
are typical and unique in nature should be identified and analysed. In most
companies purchase, accounts and human resource are more or less standardised
systems since they are governed by similar laws of the land. There is not much
scope of deviation since statutory requirements will have to be complied with.
Hence it is pointless to try extensive business process re-engineering or modelling
for these modules. Any business should focus on the processes which are critical
to the business.
The important areas are production, operation, warehouse
and logistics which can give competitive advantage to any company. This is true
in case of manufacturing companies. Similar parallels can be drawn from service
industries too. How will you reduce the circuitous route of existing processes
to simple and efficient ones? How will you handle scenarios which are not supported
by your ERP application? Will you incorporate plugins, third-party software
or modify your processes so that the deficiency is taken care of? These are
some of the questions for which one needs to seek answers. The focus of the
analysis should be on the factors which are important from the angle of strategic
and competitive advantage.
Write or draw?
System analysis and design can be done by a character-based process or graphics
or in a combination of both. It is said that a picture speaks a thousand words.
The problem with having only written documentation is that the person who writes
may not be able to clearly explain what he actually wants to say. Similarly,
the person who reads the document may not understand it in the way it has been
presented to him or intended to be comprehended. These are sure-shot causes
of confusion and opacity. The gap that we are trying to bridge might just get
widened. Hence, there is a serious need to incorporate symbols, pictures and
flow charts to put across the points. A variety of tools can be employed based
on the size, complexity and budget of the organisation. There are various tools
available in the market to do this type of analysis. The simplest one is to
use Microsoft Word to create text documents, workflows and process charts. An
analyst does not need to have advanced computer skills to do so. The basic idea
of auto-shapes, connectors, lines, arrows and shapes can see you through the
task of creating a process flow document in Word.
Another option is to use advanced tools like Visio. I recall reading on one
Web site that people normally do not use Visio because they do not know what
to use it for. Visio can be used to draw process charts, organisation charts
and module interactions. There are lot of in-built shapes in Microsoft Word
which can be used with little difficulty. Organisations can also develop their
own in-house templates for this purpose. Unified Modelling Language (UML) is
also used for preparation of specification and documentation of business systems.
It uses lot of graphical representation. The architecture of UML is independent
and not related to any type of application. One of the most common UML design
tools is Rational Rose. Rational Software came into existence in 1980-81 and
was founded by Paul Levy and Mike Devlin. It was bought by IBM in 2003 and is
featured along with Tivoli and WebSphere.
While modelling a system we have to show the interaction of human beings with
each other to facilitate better comprehension of the system. Let us take a regular
purchase process. We can simply document that a person raises a requisition
in the organisation which is forwarded to a purchase function which then generates
a purchase order after due vetting of various vendors and releases the same.
Compare this to a diagram which says clearly who are the persons
who can raise what type of requisitions, and when and
how do they actually forward it to the purchase function. Do they
directly send it by hand, or get an authorisation of their superiors and then
send, or there is an automated workflow where the system should identify the
generator of the requisition and send it to the higher authority for authorisation
and confirmation that the purchase should be done.
Similarly, who receives these requisitions in the purchase
function and creates the purchase order should be defined in the model. In some
cases rate contracts are in place so there is no need for request for
quotation. These exceptions should also be documented. Organisations also
have rules like a certain level of personnel can order items of specified value
only. This information and validation should appear in the process diagram in
order to verify compliance with the same at a later stage. The methodology and
choice of tools vary with organisations. This modelling and documentation exercise
also helps gain clarity of the implementation methodology that will be most
effective. Finally we know where we are, where we want to be and how we intend
to do so. The question that arises now is how do we tackle the implementation
phase?
ERP implementation has various flavours like comprehensive, middle-road and
vanilla (Parr and Shanks, 2000). Which one is suitable for you? That is a topic
for another discussion. Let us leave it for some other day.
The author works with a pharma company as Business Systems
Analyst. The views expressed here are her own and not necessarily those of her
employer. She may be reached at ipbasu@rediffmail.com
|