How Many Resources Should Be Used?

The technical implementation typically takes place in close collaboration with the system vendor or an implementation partner. Core tasks include configuring the system to support the necessary business processes and data, migrating all relevant data into the system (data conversion), and developing any integrations, customizations, and print layouts not available as standard functionality.

Parts of the implementation work should usually be carried out by a vendor, consulting firm, or system integrator, as many companies choose not to maintain in-house expertise for managing large IT and business projects. In addition, companies often lack the skills required for configuration (parameter setup), as well as development and testing of a standard ERP solution. It is also difficult in most cases to free up the most qualified employees for a task as large as an ERP project — and to ensure that there is a suitable role for them once the project is completed.

As a rule of thumb, the ratio between external and internal resources should be 1:2, and at minimum 1:1.

However, companies must avoid becoming overly dependent on external resources. Despite good intentions to ensure proper knowledge transfer from consultants to employees during the project, this goal is rarely achieved in practice. As a result, the company is not prepared to assume ownership of the project or system operations once the consultants leave, leading to additional costs for continued external support. Internal ownership during the project is therefore essential.

Key employees must be dedicated to the implementation work — both to ensure internal anchoring and to build internal knowledge — but they cannot and should not carry out all tasks themselves. Naturally, they need support from external specialists who can make a real difference in the project.

Again: The rule of thumb for the ratio between external and internal resources is 1:2, and at minimum 1:1. The right approach is to find an appropriate blend of internal and external resources. External experts should not be assigned trivial project tasks but should support the client with advisory services and specialist expertise, helping to lead and guide the project through its critical phases. The benefits to the organization will far outweigh the costs. With support from external consultants, the company can avoid pitfalls and receive competent advice to help it make the right decisions throughout the project. Moreover, the company can better focus on embedding new processes and workflows in the organization rather than being overly consumed by technical system considerations.

In many cases, it can also be valuable to involve an independent advisor as a sparring partner. Such an advisor can act as a quality assurance resource and ensure that the supplier — and the customer — stay on track.

External support for governance and quality assurance can help speed up the project if necessary. The company should, however, be aware of the risks associated with allowing the IT supplier to deliver both the internal project management and all advisory services, as conflicting interests often exist or emerge during the project. Furthermore, there must be a clear plan for phasing out external assistance and transitioning to internal operational resources.