What's the Right Microsoft ERP Product for Your Business?

 

As some of my readers may recall I posted an article to this Blog on October 12, 2009 entitled Microsoft Buys Core Technology to Boost Its ERP Offering. The article mainly commented on Microsoft’s most recent purchasing strategy to boost its Dynamic ERP product offerings. After reading my article, Houston Neal, Website Content Manager for Software Advice for Manufacturing contacted me and asked me to read and comment on his article entitled Microsoft Dynamics for Manufacturing – Understanding the Difference Between GP, NAV, SL and AX. Neal’s take on the current situation is that although Microsoft has tried to establish itself as a player in the ERP market space, enterprises may still be confused as to what product(s) would be suitable to which industry.

I have read Neal’s article and was quite impressed. I’m a person that likes to understand the history behind the product and/or company. Neal does a nice job of detailing the 8 year evolution of Microsoft’s foray into the ERP industry. He starts off with a sort of Gantt Chart that breaks down the different target markets for each of the Microsoft Dynamic products.  From the enterprise size, based on number of employees, it looks as though Microsoft has taken a comprehensive approach to the SME market space and taken aim on competing directly with SAP and Oracle in this space.

I particularly liked the section where Neal describes Microsoft’s initial purchases and the making of the Dynamics portfolio of products. First there was the Great Plains acquisition in 2001 which netted the Great Plains accounting application and the Solomon business management applications. Then there was the Navision purchase in 2002 which garnered not only the human resources and CRM applications, but also the Axapta product line from a recent acquisition by Navision.

So what is Microsoft to do with four different enterprise products (Great Plains, Solomon, Navision, Axapta) each written in a different language, running in different development environments, and using different databases? Neal takes us on a tour of the daunting task that Microsoft laid out for itself to convert all four products to a single code base, Project Green.

Neal includes an evolutionary chart of which Dynamic products have become the product of choice for which industry. He reminds us that over 9000 ISV’s are out there providing customization services and support for these products. He concludes his article by stating that growth in the Dynamic Product line appears evident.

 

Microsoft and Nokia: An Alliance

 

Stuart J. Johnston reports in his article in Internetnews.com for August 12, 2009 entitled Microsoft, Nokia Team to Make Office Mobile that these mobile operating system competitors have signed an alliance whereby Microsoft’s Office Mobile applications will run on Nokia’s Symbian operating system. The Microsoft Office Mobile applications will be ported over to the Nokia Eseries Enterprise devices. The plan begins with porting Office Mobile to the Nokia devices, which then will lead to allowing access to Microsoft enterprise products such as SharePoint and Office Communicator. Next year Microsoft will bundle other apps onto the Symbian operating system such as Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. As RIM’s Blackberry hold’s the lead in the enterprise market-space, the Microsoft/Nokia alliance could provide some significant inroads into that market. With Nokia’s market share for smartphones worldwide at 45%, it is easy to understand Microsoft’s willingness to join forces, at least in this arena.

For some more interesting reading which could help lay a foundation to understanding an alliance such as discussed above see the April 30, 2009 posting in this Blog entitled The Mobile Revolution Is Upon Us.

SaaS: Will the Large Enterprises Accept it?

 

Richard Adhikari reports on a recent summit of SaaS executives in his article Are Changes Coming in the SaaS World?  The direction the industry should take was discussed but with little consensus.  It seems that those assembled see the huge potential in acceptance of SaaS by the large global enterprises, but no one can quite figure out how to break through the barriers.  Adhikari has done an excellent job of presenting the plethora of diverging views on why or why not the SaaS vendors should target the large enterprise market and how to go about doing it.  I am not privy to their marketing research nor have I suffered the trials and tribulations that some of the participants relate.  It just seems to me that sometimes it might be best to let the sleeping giants sleep.  Will these large enterprises come on board sooner or later?  Adhikari cites Maynard Webb, CEO of virtual call center company LiveOps who states:


It's a vicious circle: SaaS vendors can't sell to the enterprise because they haven't solved many of the concerns IT has with on demand software, so they don't try.  Most SaaS vendors target the SMB market, while the rest aim "at niches in the enterprise such as human resources"


What becomes apparent when reading Adhikari’s article is that there isn’t just one reason for the reticence of large enterprises to accept the SaaS model.


In my research in this area I have come across varied opinions and insight into just what exactly SaaS is and who should take advantage of it.  In my February 10, 2008 posting to this Blog SaaS is the Future software developers were scrambling to meet the demands of their market.  At that point their market was the SMB enterprise.


A further explanation as to the non-universal acceptance of SaaS can be gleaned from an insightful comment by Sybase CEO John Chen:


“ … But the reality is that every new technology and every new method will have its audience – but it won’t wipe out the previous ones.”  For the full story and an interesting perspective see my May 1, 2008 posting What Customers Want from their Software Vendors.


Of course there also is the other side of the coin.  The SaaS software developers themselves have their own internal hurdles to surmount.  In my June 1, 2008 posting Growing Pains of OnDemand I highlight one of the problems of managing a subscription business:


“Simply put, the business processes needed to run a subscription business do not yet exist, and when these new business processes do come on line, they will be incompatible with the existing business processes for a large enterprise software company.”


Perhaps it is best summed up in Adhikari’s article by Lisa Lambert, managing director of the software & solutions group at Intel Capital:


Intel's Lambert thinks the notion of selling to the enterprise is a red herring.  "I don't think it's a question of enterprises not being ready to buy SaaS, it's that it makes more sense for small businesses to buy SaaS.  The value proposition of SaaS really appeals to small businesses, which were excluded from being able to buy legitimate software infrastructure that's enterprise ready because they couldn't afford it, it was too expensive and complex, and had long implementation cycles."