Requirements vs. solution driven implementation approach and their impact.
The most typical system implementations have traditionally followed the approach of understanding current state systems and processes, defining the target state systems and processes, doing a detailed fit/gap analysis, followed by developing and executing a detailed plan to move from the current state to the target state. Here the client dictates what they want and forms the basis for a requirement driven system implementation approach.
The solution driven approach on the other hand rallies around the concept of using a pre-built solution based on the modern best practices and adopting it for operational use. The focus here shifts to guiding clients towards adoption and embracing these modern business processes inherent in the pre-built system.
Cloud ERP systems have traditionally compelled a solution driven implementation approach with constraints around doing customizations and elaborate extensions. The 2nd generation Cloud ERP systems like Oracle Cloud have pushed that envelope by offering more robust choices for custom built extensions (using services like PaaS) and integrations to their public Cloud ERP systems.
So, there isn’t a right or a wrong way between the two and the choice is dependent on the client’s situation, where they want to go and what they are trying to optimize. But what is set is that those choices aligning with where they are on that spectrum drives project costs, timeline and risks.
When one hears about Cloud implementations taking significantly less cost and time to implement, there is an implied message that a solution driven implementation is followed, utilizing rapid implementation options and seeded configurations.
