Phase-1

Time Period 1997 Oct to 1998 April

Targeted Functionality :


Finance and control
Production planning
Material management
Plant maintenance
Sales & Distribution
Quality management

What went wrong
First 4 months very little progress was made
Lack of availability of core team from business function caused the delay of
signoff of IS process definition
Lack of business expertise of PWHC consultants
AMLs extensive customization needs did not support process improvement
Action taken & Final outcome
Anuj Prasad as new CIO who has experience of project management
Progress was notice but major issue remained unresolved
Project plan extended for another 5 months

Phase- 2 (Oct 1998 Feb 1999)
Targeted functionality:
Marketing and customer service
Relationship management
Issues faced:
Non standard & inherently complex nature of AM sales and service
process
Customer rebate percentage variation
Multiple customer accounts
SAP CRM solution was not mature
Introduction of Accenture
Replacement of PWHC with Accenture for phase 2
nd
3
rd
& 4
th

Change management was still a dark area
Focus on training for user as part of change management
Formation of steering committee


Phase 3 & 4
Phase 3: Focus on supply chain management function
Continuous changing supply & demand data made existing SAP module
inefficient
R/3 was more of data repository, not an analysis tool
R/3s SOP and APO modules was the answer of SOP needs
Data migration caused the implementation of phase 3 only after phase 4

Phase 4: Focused on translation information collection into decision making
using data mining & ware house tools

Requirement : Historical error free data, digitization of text as well as non
text data which required undertaking of another project
Failure of phase 4 as new project on Knowledge Management system
(KMS) was undertaken
What went wrong (1/2)
1. Wrong selection of consultants: AM should have
consulted an independent management consultant
instead of a software consultant
2. Extensive feasibility analysis of various aspects (Project
management, change management, cost benefit
analysis etc.) should have been carried out
3. Involvement of core team from various business units
should have been there from the beginning
4. Best business practices should have been incorporated
and training should have been through SAP not on SAP

What went wrong (2/2)
5. ERP alone is not the solution because ERP caters the
need of individual business function. Industry specific
solution such as Manufacturing execution system and
project life cycle management should also have been
implemented
6. Change in lower management and operator level should
have been monitored from the beginning even though
top management made a successful transition to the
new organizational structure