ERP implementation of the test of the wisdom of the implementation of the two sides
For various reasons, ERP implementation projects would face a crisis to bring harm to both A and B. Those who distrust the project ran aground Light in weight from uncompromising court, which is that both sides want to see results. How to make the project back to life and pull through, everywhere he is in a test of the implementation of both the wisdom and courage.

From the implementation point of view, the face of such a situation is very difficult. How to quickly and effectively open up the situation to rebuild confidence and hit the real disadvantages to solve the problem a priority.

I think we should immediately proceed to convene high-level meetings the project, restructuring the project team.

Project high-level meeting called A and B both sides have decision-making power to participate in senior leadership. The experiences and lessons of prior period items summarize analyze the reasons for the current crisis situation and put forward a solution acceptable to both sides to ensure that macro agreed. If the original project team have a negative impact on the implementation of work among the staff, should be mercilessly replaced. At the same time the discretion to increase the backbone to ensure that the project team unity, capable and efficient.

Second, the focus should start with analyzing the problem.

From the focal point of starting, you can quickly identify the problem grasp the key aspects of the principal contradiction or conflict. Issue-specific, it is recommended to check the actual situation in conjunction with enterprise root causes of problems, from the source to be solved. But not on the problem issues forest for the trees.

Root of the problem remodeling ideas.

This is the most critical and most easily overlooked aspect. The large number of consultants is more or less a technical complex. Found problems, they do everything possible to find ways from the technology. This seems logical but also caters to the user's taste. However, not long before more and more problems will find it increasingly difficult and, eventually, embarked on a dead end. Why is this? I think the project in dealing with the crisis, there is no correct idea, the technical triumph is only temporary.

Ideas determining factor, ideas rationale for its decision. The concept of correctness of our decision to be implemented play a role in the success or failure.

Many people think that concept of Void, ERP implementation is a very pragmatic work in here to talk about ideas is long puzzled thirst. I do not think so. ERP implementation of this is a vast, systematic project, if not the correct concept to guide the entire project as Night of the ship, the guidelines will be lost and disoriented lighthouse. When most people are complaining about can not meet the needs of the software functionality fails, we might calm down, dig dug the root of thinking, is not the final concept can be found in the shadow of failure. The ability to correct the erroneous notion that we resolve the crisis in the project to succeed the key to the road.

Recently received a case, the customer can not be met due to a number of demands the implementation of personnel with the B upside down, the final project stalled strong demand Party B to replace the implementation of consultants, or on the Court of First Instance. In this case, we replace the original implementation team to re-work. Lies in understanding the problem, I found that hidden behind these issues is the concept of a series of mistakes. These concepts are not clear, even if all the resolution of the current problems in the future will be difficult to implement. For example, customers regardless of their own characteristics, the construction of the quick success in the information; curing the original unreasonable traffic flow, resulting in the software process can not be implemented in accordance with their disorder; the clutching and hold down in minutia, while the neglect of the main issues to adjust. Intertwined with all kinds of wrong ideas, eventually leading to implementation of the project does not go on. With regard to such circumstances, I propose that Party A high-level decision-makers directly involved in the project meeting, at which we advocate the implementation of the full exchange of ideas with them. After several in-depth communication between the two sides finally reached a consensus to "restructuring of the organizational structure, optimize business processes, and encounter great step by step" strategic thinking as a whole, implementation of the project guidelines. In this guidance, a large number of unreasonable demands moved for collapse. The new implementation to proceed smoothly.

Finally, lock the focus and technical research.
Any good strategies should be strictly enforced at the tactical level to be meaningful. The technical breakthrough here is the tactical implementation. The project preparatory work had been done at this time also a matter of course technology.

Experienced a number of crisis management, I have found that implementation of the project if it is a technical problem ultimately will not be a problem, but the real problem are attributed to human factors, from the intertwined ideas, ideas collision.