I don't think most companies have an ERP problem.
I think many of them have a clarity problem that they are trying to solve with an ERP.
When an organisation starts growing, the symptoms are familiar.
Too many spreadsheets.
Different versions of the same information.
Approvals happening through email.
Departments using their own processes.
Management waiting for reports.
Nobody being completely sure which number is correct.
Eventually someone says:
"We need an ERP."
Sometimes they absolutely do.
But an ERP cannot create operational clarity that the organisation has never established.
Technology maturity and operational maturity are different
A company can have sophisticated software and still have immature processes.
It can also have relatively simple tools and very clear operations.
The second situation is often a much better starting point for a major system implementation.
Before implementing an ERP, I want to understand how the business actually works.
Who owns what?
How does information move?
Where do decisions happen?
Which processes are standard?
Where are the exceptions?
Which data is authoritative?
What does management actually need to see?
Those questions may not sound particularly technical.
They are some of the most important questions in the entire project.
An ERP will expose whatever you haven't decided
One of the things I find interesting about ERP projects is that software eventually forces decisions that organisations have been able to avoid for years.
What exactly is a customer?
What counts as an approved purchase?
Who can approve it?
Which department owns the data?
When is an order considered complete?
Which process takes priority when two departments have different requirements?
These questions existed before the ERP.
The ERP simply makes it impossible to keep avoiding them.
That is why I see ERP implementation as an operating-model project as much as a technology project.
I believe the digital foundation should come first
This is something I have become particularly conscious of through project work.
Before moving into a major enterprise system, there is a lot of value in creating a reliable digital foundation around the organisation.
That can include a structured Microsoft 365 environment, controlled documents, clear workflows, task ownership, operational lists, reporting and governance.
It gives the organisation an opportunity to understand and improve the way information moves before those processes become deeply embedded in a larger platform.
It also creates something very practical:
visibility.
You can start seeing where the real problems are.
And sometimes those problems are different from what management originally thought.
An ERP does not fix a messy process
Imagine that purchasing currently involves five people, three spreadsheets, several email approvals and a few informal decisions.
Putting that process into an ERP does not automatically make it a good process.
It just makes it a digital process.
Someone still needs to decide what should happen.
Maybe there should be fewer approvals.
Maybe one department should own the process.
Maybe some information should be captured earlier.
Maybe a manual step should disappear.
Maybe the exception process needs to be redesigned.
That work has to happen whether you have an ERP or not.
The software cannot make those decisions for you.
The temptation is to start with the software
It is understandable.
ERP vendors demonstrate features.
They show dashboards.
They show integrations.
They show how quickly information can move through the system.
It is impressive.
But the important question is not:
"What can the software do?"
It is:
"What does our organisation actually need it to do?"
Those are very different questions.
If you start with the software, the organisation can end up adapting its processes to the capabilities of the platform.
Sometimes that is necessary.
But it should be a conscious decision, not an accidental consequence of the implementation.
Digital transformation needs sequencing
I don't think transformation means continuously adding more technology.
ERP.
CRM.
BI.
AI.
Automation.
Another dashboard.
Another application.
That can easily become technology accumulation rather than transformation.
I prefer to think about it as a sequence:
Understand → Structure → Govern → Digitise → Integrate → Automate → Improve.
The exact sequence will depend on the organisation.
But the principle is important.
You should understand the process before automating it.
You should establish ownership before assigning responsibilities to systems.
And you should create enough visibility to know whether the technology is actually improving the business.
This doesn't mean ERP is unnecessary
ERP can be incredibly valuable.
For the right organisation, it can provide an integrated operational backbone that standalone tools cannot.
My concern is simply about timing.
The ERP should not be expected to be the thing that creates clarity.
It should be built on clarity.
That distinction can change the entire project.
Instead of asking:
"How do we implement the ERP?"
the better question becomes:
"What do we want the organisation to look like when the ERP is working?"
That question should come much earlier than the software selection.
The organisations that are most ready for major digital transformation are not necessarily the ones with the most technology.
They are the ones that understand their own operations.
They know where information lives.
They know who owns decisions.
They understand where processes break.
They can explain what they want to improve.
That foundation makes the technology much more useful.
An ERP can connect the business.
It cannot replace the work of understanding it.