#️⃣Software Engineering: Mea Culpa (Part VII: A Look Forward)

Software Engineering Series

I worked for more than 20 years in various areas related to ERP systems - Data Migrations, Business Intelligence/Analytics, Data Warehousing, Data Management, Project Management, (data) integrations, Quality Assurance, and much more, having experience with IFS IV, Oracle e-Business Suite, MS Dynamics AX 2009 and during the past 3-7 years also with MS Dynamics 365 Finance, SCM & HR (in that order). Much earlier, I started to work with SQL Server (2000-2019), Oracle, and more recently with Azure Synapse and MS Fabric, writing over time more than 800 ad-hoc queries and reports for the various stakeholders, covering all the important areas, respectively many more queries for monitoring the various environments. 

In the areas where I couldn’t acquire experience on the job, I tried to address this by learning in my free time. I did it because I take seriously my profession, and I want to know how (some) things work. I put thus a lot of time into trying to keep actual with what’s happening in the MS Fabric world, from Power BI to KQL, Python, dataflows, SQL databases and much more. These technologies are Microsoft’s bet, though at least from German’s market perspective, all bets are off! Probably, many companies are circumspect or need more time to react to the political and economic impulses, or probably some companies are already in bad shape. 

Unfortunately, the political context has a broad impact on the economy, on what’s happening in the job market right now! However, the two aspects are not the only problem. Between candidates and jobs, the distance seems to grow, a dense wall of opinion being built, multiple layers based on presumptions filtering out voices that (still) matter! Does my experience matter or does it become obsolete like the technologies I used to work with? But I continued to learn, to keep actual… Or do I need to delete everything that reminds the old?

To succeed or at least be hired today one must fit a pattern that frankly doesn’t make sense! Yes, soft skills are important though not all of them are capable of compensating for the lack of technical skills! There seems to be a tendency to exaggerate some of the qualities associated with skills, or better said, of hiding behind big words. Sometimes it feels like a Shakespearian inaccurate adaptation of the stage on which we are merely players.

More likely, this lack of pragmatism will lead to suboptimal constructions that will tend to succumb under their own structure. All the inefficiencies need to be corrected, or somebody (or something) must be able to bear their weight. I saw this too often happening in ERP implementations! Big words don’t compensate for the lack of pragmatism, skills, knowledge, effort or management! For many organizations the answer to nowadays problems is more management, which occasionally might be the right approach, though this is not a universal solution for everything that crosses our path(s).

One of society’s answers to nowadays’ problem seems to be the refuge in AI. So, I wonder – where I’m going now? Jobless, without an acceptable perspective, with AI penetrating the markets and making probably many jobs obsolete. One must adapt, but adapt to what? AI is brainless even if it can mimic intelligence! Probably, it can do more in time to the degree that many more jobs will become obsolete (and I’m wondering what will happen to all those people). 

Conversely, to some trends there will be probably other trends against them, however it’s challenging to depict in clear terms the future yet in making. Society seems to be at a crossroad, more important than mine.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

🧮ERP: Implementations (Part XVII: Taming the Monsters)

ERP Implementations Series

 

Given their extensive scope, duration, investment and complexity, ERP implementations are probably one of the most complex endeavors pursued by organizations. Moreover, they are often a matter of endurance with many junctions, skirts, turns, shortcuts, ups and downs, a continuous carousel in which the various issues tend to misbehave like little monsters, many of them haunting one’s dreams unexpectedly during and long after implementations.

Probably, the main drivers are the scale and mass of such projects as they touch all or most important aspects of organizations. Just consider the typical project done for a single department and multiply its complexity by a constant number representing the number of departments in scope. And the more one goes into details, the higher the complexity. To move forward the parties need to compromise, and as no one wants to do that, the discussions are prolonged, the discussions get personal, issues are escalated, and probably more negative effects can be met.

Tensions can be rooted in politics, in the friction between different goals, in the need to prioritize requirements, postponing or leaving things out of scope, or by pushing an agenda other parties don't agree with. Besides the typical constraints of projects, there’s the complexity of performing a huge amount of work within a limited period, time during which the resources must be available, the quality must match the expectations, and there are so many aspects to be considered!

Of course, not all implementations are like this, though each such project is a real exam of maturity for the people involved in it. Sometimes, it’s better to have people who care about the decisions made. On the opposite side, there are organizations that go almost blindly with the solutions suggested to them, with all the effects resulting from this. Probably, the middle way between these two extremes is more indicated, though it’s hard to find such a path through all complexity.

An ERP implementation is highly dependent on the initial conditions under which the project has started, the commitment made by the various parties involved in the project, the way resources are made available, on what’s considered in plan, on the communication that takes place, the planning done and its enforcement, etc. Of course, some topics can be addressed also later, though delays tend to create more delays that can have a ripple effect through the project. Under normal circumstances the backlog and other aspects can be manageable, though it’s enough for a few issues to gather momentum so that their cumulative impact can have an exponential impact.

Certain sensitive project topics can easily lead to crises and abnormal behavior, though such situations are usually exceptions (until they are not). It’s important to have in place the processes and procedures that can be used to address this kind of situation, and, not less important, have them communicated to the team. Moreover, it’s not necessary to reinvent the wheel - the processes defined in IT and project methodologies can be used and adapted for this purpose.

It's important to have in place all the processes, procedures and checkpoints needed to support the project. The people participating in a project should have some hands-on experience with them, including the exceptions (e.g. escalation procedures). It’s useful to have a mentor or some experienced person who can help with advice and even attend meetings and provide constructive feedback. Just having some awareness sessions with no feedback can be as dangerous as not having any training at all! It’s suboptimal to use the implementation itself as an environment for learning though in extremis this approach may work as well.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

🧮ERP: Implementations (Part XVI: It’s All About Politics)

ERP Implementations Series

An ERP implementation takes place within a political context and politics can make or break implementations. Politics occurs whenever individuals or organization groups interact to make decisions that affect parts or the whole organization. Besides decision-making there are further components that revolve around the various types of resources allocation and management, resulting in power dynamics that shape and pull organizations in politically charged directions.

Given the deep implications of ERP systems, probably in no other type of projects the political aspects are that visible and stringent to all employees to the degree that they pull decisions in one direction independently of the actual requirements. It may seem incredible, though there are cases in which ERP systems were selected just because the organization’s CEO played golf with the vendor’s CEO. In the end, the gaps between systems should be minimal nowadays, at least in theory, isn’t it?

Of course, just because one meets certain strange behaviors, it doesn’t mean that this is common practice! There are higher chances of selecting an inadequate system just because the sales representative did a good job and convinced the audience that the system can do anything they want. It probably does if coins are used for each missing feature, and in the long term it can be a lot of coins. Conversely, even if a system satisfies nowadays’ requirements, it doesn’t mean it will continue to do the same with future requirements. Only the future can tell whether the choice of a system over the others was a good one.

The bigger the gaps between the various interests, the more difficult it becomes to pull the project in the right direction. Probably the best way to demonstrate why one system is better than another is by bringing facts and focusing on the main requirements of the organization. This supposes the existence of an explicit list of requirements with a high-level description of how they can be addressed by the future system. This might not be enough, though it’s a good start, a good basis for discussion, for making people aware of the implications. However, doing this exercise for 2-3 or more systems is not cost effective, as such analysis can become time-consuming and expensive.

One way to address political resistance is by discussing openly with the stakeholders and addressing their concerns, arguing why the system is a good choice, what can be done to address the gaps, and so on. It will not always be enough, though it’s important to establish common ground for further discussions. Further on, it’s important to keep the same openness and disposition for communication given that the further the project progresses, the higher the likelihood of other concerns to appear. It’s a never-ending story if there are gaps between needs and what the system provides.

It's important to establish clear and honest communication with the stakeholders, informing them proactively about the challenges faced, independently in which area they are faced. Conversely, too much communication can be disruptive and can create other challenges. One way to cope with this is by identifying the communication needs of each stakeholder and trying to identify what’s the volume of information, respectively the communication needs of each of them. That’s project management 1:1.

The Project Manager and his team should ideally anticipate and address the potential conflicts timely, before they propagate and reach a broader audience. It’s questionable how much can be achieved proactively, especially when the project keeps everybody busy. The tendency is to answer politics with politics, though brainstorming sessions, open communication and a few other approaches can reach deeper where politics can’t.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post