持久构建与持续变革并行——企业应用价值速度新范式

A new paradigm for speed to value with enterprise applications Yet, those old systems can be part of a finance and HRapplication implementation that once required a largeinvestment of time over multiple years. So, companies areafraid to move away from those systems — and they’re afraidto start that process again. In dynamic business markets, companies need to boost theirspeed to value — the pace at which they move from ideato revenue. Speed to value depends on many systems andprocesses. In many organizations, those systems and processesare limited by old inefficiencies. “I’ve done a lot of solution implementations where a company’sexisting finance and HR back office systems were 20 or 30years old,” said Grant Thornton Technology ModernizationAdvisory Services Principal Greg Davis. “Since that point, theirbusiness has grown or diversified — but the original systemsare too inflexible to accommodate the new operating model.And you don’t even have to have been around that long forit to be an issue. You see the same problem at smaller, newercompanies which are evolving so fast they outgrow their backoffice infrastructure in a matter of a few years.” “Companies have to startby understanding wherethey are, and how they arechanging as they grow.” Greg Davis The gap between dated systems and the way the businessworks today gives rise to a growing inefficiency as manualprocesses and patches are deployed to address themisalignment. This inefficiency becomes increasingly expensiveand difficult to maintain as the current state continues todiverge from the baseline. Change is the only constant.“Companies have to start by understanding where they are,and how they are changing as they grow,” Davis said. Mindset of yesterday There’s a reason that traditional ERP and HR implementationsrequired a large investment, and today’s companies risk failureif they apply the same mindset to new implementations. When new systems are designed to replicate old systems, theend result is a lingering delta between the new system andthe way the business actually operates today. Transformationis not achieved in this scenario. “What you need to do iseliminate that delta,” Davis said. “That's how you mitigate thatrisk. Design your back office system to grow with you. Take amethodical approach to modernizing your technologies andestablishing a platform that can support growth.” “They used to say, ‘Design to last’ when implementing an ERP,”said Davis. “As that’s what ERPs and the associated HR andpayroll tools were intended to do, stand the test of time. So,organizations would sit down for months and attempt to gatherup all the requirements of today as well as everything they’dever think they’d need in the future [good luck] – and don’tleave anything out, because we’re going to etch this all in stonewhen you’re done. There was no going back and changing itonce you were done, because tools were so inflexible.” The key is targeted and efficient preparation. “If you don'tdo the right preparation before your implementation, thenyou'll perpetually be addressing preparation issues as youimplement your software,” Davis said. “And you will alwayshave a delta between your target operating model and thetools that support your business. That is a big reason whycompanies always blame their systems for being a hindranceor a constraint. It's because there's a difference between theiroperating model, or target operating model, and theirtoolset capability.” Today, technology capabilities have improved and businesspriorities have changed, too, now emphasizing the agility thatcompanies require in dynamic business environments. Modernapplication platforms are open, making integration easy, andare architected to provide the flexibility to change and growas needs arise. “If your system is only built to last, it becomesimmediately outdated when there's disruption in the economyor your operating model. If change is a constant, then yoursystem has to be designed to evolve.” This difference drags down a company’s agility — and it cancrush a company’s innovation. “Many companies are stuckin a rut, perpetually just trying to address issues. They findthemselves being expediters rather than visionaries,” Davis said. Now, many companies recognize the shortcomings of theircurrent solutions, but few are excited at the prospect of aswitch. Envisioning a protracted and expensive undertaking,they are frequently resigned to ‘better the devil we know.’Business leaders tasked with driving growth and profitabilityappreciate the need to address back office technologies, butthey don’t want it to take years and cost a fortune. As a result,even when embarking on change, they often take an approachto the new implementation which undercuts value. In an effortto de-risk and accelerate what they expect to be a long andexpensive project, they opt to replicate or enhance existingmechanisms. The unintended consequence is, of course,bringing along many of the inefficiencies of the ol