Today the phrase Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) is what RDBMS or OOPs were a
couple of years ago. Every software vendor mouths the phrase, EDP
managers will respond to any mailer containing the term, and you
can make a fortune floating seminars on ERP.
However, its tough to pin down people on what exactly they
mean by the term ERP.
By definition, ERP should help you put the
resources of an organization to the best possible use. This
definition is too broad. The best way to define ERP
is to take a historical approach. The roots of ERP
lie in Material Requirements Planning (MRP) which evolved into
Manufacturing Resources Planning (MRPII). Demand for increased
functionality led to the current avatar ERP.

Understanding MRP is an essential
prerequisite to understanding ERP. So, Ill
devote the remainder of this column to discussing plain vanilla
MRP. MRP is a computerized approach to the planning of materials
acquisition for production.
It has traditionally been associated with discrete manufacturing
operations and in its pure form is not well suited to continuous
process industries. The MRP technique revolves around the Bill of
Materials (BOM) and the Master Production Schedule (MPS).
A BOM describes the parent/child relationship between an assembly
and its component parts or raw materials. For example, a stool
might be made up of four legs and a seat. The seat itself might
consist of a frame and a cushion, made up of cushion material.
Thus the BOM of the stool will contain two entrieslegs and
seatand would list out the quantity of each. The leg might
be purchased by the stool manufacturer from outside and hence
there would be no BOM for the leg. The seat might be manufactured
in house and the BOM of the seat would again consist of two
entriesthe frame and the cushion. Every product is exploded
into progressively lower levels until one comes across a raw
material or purchased component.
The MPS is a spreadsheet that projects the demand for each
product of the company over time. In its simplest from the MPS is
a matrix with time periods as columns and products as rows. The
essence of MRP lies in using a Bill of Materials Processor (BOMP)
to project the requirement of each component/material/assembly.
The algorithm starts out by exploding the bill of material of
each top level product using the MPS to get the requirements of
each subassembly. Different products might use common assemblies
and the algorithm would combine these requirements. It would then
calculate the net requirement of the assembly by subtracting the
projected inventory and receipts from the gross requirement.
The BOMP would then use its knowledge of lead times for each
sub-assembly to generate the requirements schedule for the
sub-assembly using a backwards scheduling process. The process is
repeated at the next lower level till one reached the lowest
level possible in the BOMs.
You have to adjust the projection at each stage to take into
account things like minimum lot sizes and economic order
quantities. The result would be a set of projected purchase and
production orders.
Events such as unforeseen orders, vendor failures, machine
breakdowns, etc also serve to invalidate the original material
requirements plan. For this MRP offers two approaches - top down
planning and bottom up replanning. Top down planning starts with
the modified MSP and drills down and has two approaches.
The regeneration approach uses brute force to start from the top
and re-explode the BOMs at every level. The net change approach
uses sophisticated algorithms to figure out just the net impact
of an event. Top down planning is not able to handle all
situationsfor example, it might generate a solution where
orders had to be placed before the current date.
In such cases one has to use bottom up replanning that allows the
user to interact with the
system at much lower levels of detail. This naturally requires
that the system has the
capability of disaggregating the net material requirement and
tracing back the demand of a lower level component to higher
level assemblies and products.
The bottom lineMRP is the first stage of ERP. Getting it right is essential for successful ERP implementation.
A few years back, ERP
was a distant concept, perceived as applicable for the most elite
of companies, with deep pockets, who are ready to experiment with
new ideas. Today, the scene has significantly changed and ERP
is considered as a desirable tool for most organizations, in the
medium and small sectors.
Entrepreneurs now seriously consider ERP as
panacea for all their present day ills and as an imperative to
retain their competitive edge. Some of the factors that have
catalyzed this process are globalization, competition, need for
faster response to the market place and the pressure to contain
costs and improve efficiencies.
While ERP implementation can be undertaken by a
well-run organization as a proactive
measure to be ahead in the race, the normal symptoms that would
suggest the need for ERP would be high levels of
inventory, mismatched stock, lack of coordinated activity,
excessive need for reconciliation, flouting of controls, poor
customer response levels and operations falling short of industry
benchmarks in terms of cost controls, and general efficiency.
ERP is often considered synonymous with
enterprise computerization, which significantly dilutes the
concept. It is really a business tool, which seamlessly
integrates the strategic initiatives and policies of the
organization with the operations, thus providing an effective
means of translating strategic business goals to real time
planning and control.
ERP, hence, means much more than computerizing
the existing operations and is really an integrated change
process, which encompasses all levels and elevates the total
organization to a higher level of information, expertise and
intelligence.
The SME segment is large and offers substantial potential to the ERP
vendor. However, this segment is also extremely price-sensitive
and is generally intolerant of high gestations on realizations
from investment.
Hence, this segment would be keen on an effective but low priced
solution, which can be speedily implemented and vendors have
realized the potential of this segment and are working out ways
to meet this requirement.
Most customers are alive to the
fact that an ERP solution, however
comprehensive, cannot really be a shrink wrapped plug-and-play
package and customization and implementation chores are necessary
evils to reach their destination.
Notwithstanding this realization, the customer is rarely prepared
to accept that these add-on services could cost twice as much as
the cost of the package, or even higher. The total cost of
implementation, including hardware, networking, database and all
add-on services could range anywhere from Rs. 20 lakh to Rs. 50
lakh, depending on the size of the organization and the
customization desired.
The benefits of ERP
implementation, though tangible, can only be defined in generic
terms and guarantees are difficult to come by. International
studies have estimated that ERP implementation
has reduced inventories anywhere from 15 to 35 percent.
The incidence of stockouts are also found to have significantly
reduced and even such incidences are largely due to extraneous
delays, rather than planning inaccuracies. Diversion of manpower
from routine activities to more profitable ones can be tangibly
projected, though assessment of the gains derived therefrom would
still be subjective.
There are other intangible gains, such as executive times
becoming available for better and more productive causes,
elimination of unproductive reconciliation efforts on various
counts, improved decision making due to availability of timely
and appropriate information, improved process times and the
feasibility of administering pre facto control on the operations.
In conclusion, ERP implementation allows myriad
benefits, both tangible and intangible and the payback period
could be as low as a year, if the exercise is undertaken with
commitment and purpose.
ERP
implementation is a re-engineering of sorts, though not the
classical re-engineering invented by Mike Hammer, which calls for
throwing out the old and ringing in the new while promising
dramatic improvements in process cycle times.
The re-engineering is more in terms of business process-wise
integration of activities and formalization of a number of
operating parameters such as bill of materials, process routes,
planning methodology, etc, all of which will now require
detailing out and committing to paper.
There is often a debate on the desirability of conducting a
Business Process Re - engineering (BPR) exercise prior to ERP
implementation--one school of thought is ERP
implementation without BPR would be tantamount to computerizing
all existing inefficiencies.
The ERP system could then serve as the bedrock system, based on
which the BPR exercise could thereafter be conducted more
effectively.
ERP--The change process
With ERP
implementation, the system and the centralized database becomes
the basis for decision making and time honored power pockets,
evolved organically by self appointed custodians of information
and expertise lose relevance.
Most of the routine functions, such as statutory compliance, book
keeping etc are taken over by the system and retraining and
redeployment is a necessary part of the change process.
Managing the change calls for effective communication of the
advantages of ERP implementation and emphasis on
the organizational and individual gains by undertaking the
exercise.
Implementation realities
As in any change process, the consultant's role in ERP
implementation is limited to providing the technical inputs and
guidance and the responsibility for implementation has to be
indigenously vested.
The normal procedure is to form a core group, which is dedicated
to the implementation process. The core group member profile
essentially calls for intimate knowledge of the business
processes in the organization, adequate level of seniority to
wield the necessary clout and a deep conviction in the change
process.
A steering committee is additionally constituted to oversee the
implementation and provide management support to overcome hurdles
encountered. The committee should comprise senior members of the
management team who meet on a periodic basis to formally review
the progress.
The core group besides being operationally responsible for
implementation has to serve as effective arbiters, in the event
of conflicts arising between the consultant and the user groups
or even between user groups.
The issues involved generally pertain to role clarity, the levels
of customization and changes in specifications after freezing.
The core group has to play a pivotal role in the implementation
and it is imperative that the management communicate this
responsibility in no uncertain terms to the members of this
group.
Vendor selection criteria
Selection of the vendor and the package is crucial to the success
of the implementation. Essentially the vendor should have a track
record of previous implementations and should be in a position to
provide guidance in the implementation and the change process, as
also be able to translate user requirements into efficient
systems.
Very often, aspiring ERP entrants offer
unrealistically low prices, with the avowed objective of using
the implementation to build a package of their own.
This could be disastrous for the user and would result in a
serious setback to the whole process as the attitude of the user
groups to ERP concept would be rendered cynical
and reversing the situation would be difficult.
On the other hand, if tying up with an international ERP
major is considered a feasible proposition, serious consideration
should be given to retention of the implementation personnel, as
there is a continuous paucity of personnel exposed to such
implementation and they are immediate candidates for overseas
employment.
Website:http://www.kwaliteg.co.za
Home
Profile
Products
Resources
Contact
| computer aided manufacturing processes, metal forming industry, milling machine tools, cnc, capital intensive automation, automated process capability, plant maintenance, lath, ergonomical work station, MRP I, MRP II, ERP, Materials requirements planning, Manufacturing Resources Planning, Enterprise Resources Planning, parts inventory, quality control assets, batch production capacity, productivity, cad drawings, cam, cae, computer aided engineering, computer aided design, safety hazard, mechanical engineering drawing, components, motor construction, engine power failure reworks, flexible manufacturing system robotics, robot manufacture, ergonomics, caliper, pneumatic, machinery power transmission, mass production, drilling, cutting, hydraulic bending, primary shaping, joining, coating, casting, mechanics, welding, JIT, just in time |