After working with AX for a couple of months and after
attending a boot camp training on AX in Fargo, ND I thought it was time to
reflect on the overall differences between AX and other ERP systems that I have
been working with over time.
First of all I have to state that all of the ERP systems I
have been working with were smaller than AX, both in functionality, breadth and
complexity so I will sometimes compare apples and oranges here but this is part
of the experience as well.
Targeted markets
Dynamics AX is Microsoft’s ERP flagship and is positioned with the likes of SAP and Oracle. And that’s the market, Microsoft is targeting: medium to large size businesses with multiple locations, multiple legal entities, dealing with multiple currencies and governments.
This in itself differentiates AX from previous ERP that I worked with. Most of them claimed to be multi-company and multi-currency but they really were not. The software packages were initially written for a specific vertical for small to mid-sized businesses and they grew with the companies that initially bought it. So all the features feel like they were tagged onto the solution and never really as integral part of it. AX on the other hand was designed from the ground up to handle these environments and transactions. So I found it especially easy to handle these things in AX whereas in other ERP solutions you had to jump through several hoops to get it working for the client.
Basic Accounting Functionality
This has been especially apparent in the basic accounting functionality offered in these products. AX comes with the ability to handle separate GL structures and fiscal periods for each legal entity or share it across some of them. Inter company transaction within AX follow normal accounting rules.
This is in stark contrast with the product I was working with before my switch. It only supported one GL structure and one fiscal period structure that had to be shared across all entities in the database. And this was a constant issue when implementing it in larger firms. Just think about the additional work that had to be done if this firm acquired another company with completely different sets of GL and fiscal definitions. We were forced to basically cut off all existing fiscal information of this firm and then force the new GL into accounting. Not very many clients were happy about these limitations.
Another thing that I am really impressed with is the ease of use of dimensions in AX. There is no limit to the level of dimensions I can introduce and I can have different dimensions for different parts of my GL. Looking back, this functionality alone would have saved me weeks and months in implementation time with other ERP systems.
Out-Of-The-Box versus Framework
The biggest difference between AX and other, more vertical focused ERP systems, is the fact that AX presents itself more like a framework than a ready to use system. Don’t get me wrong, most of the standard functionality of an ERP system simply work and you are able to configure most of it on the fly if necessary but Microsoft never sells it as a complete end-to-end solution for all of your problems. Everyone will tell you that this is just a starting point and you can add anything you can dream of (…and pay for…) to this solution.
Other, more vertical focused solutions do not offer you the flexibility. They were built for a specific set of problems and solve them just fine. But if you do things just a little bit different, you are usually hooped.
This has its good and bad sides. I was able to implement a complete solution in less than 4 weeks on my own, including installation, configuration and training. In AX, this is always a team approach (because you simply cannot know every little thing about AX) and it can take anywhere from 6 to 24 months or longer, depending on the complexity of your customizations; the upside here is no limit to what you can do with the system.
Conclusion
I love the flexibility that AX offers. It is a daunting beast of a software but you can always be sure to never run into a total dead end. Even if the functionality is not supported out of the box, there’s either an ISV solution out there somewhere or you can build it on your own.
I will miss the days were I was able to implement an ERP on my own though.
Targeted markets
Dynamics AX is Microsoft’s ERP flagship and is positioned with the likes of SAP and Oracle. And that’s the market, Microsoft is targeting: medium to large size businesses with multiple locations, multiple legal entities, dealing with multiple currencies and governments.
This in itself differentiates AX from previous ERP that I worked with. Most of them claimed to be multi-company and multi-currency but they really were not. The software packages were initially written for a specific vertical for small to mid-sized businesses and they grew with the companies that initially bought it. So all the features feel like they were tagged onto the solution and never really as integral part of it. AX on the other hand was designed from the ground up to handle these environments and transactions. So I found it especially easy to handle these things in AX whereas in other ERP solutions you had to jump through several hoops to get it working for the client.
Basic Accounting Functionality
This has been especially apparent in the basic accounting functionality offered in these products. AX comes with the ability to handle separate GL structures and fiscal periods for each legal entity or share it across some of them. Inter company transaction within AX follow normal accounting rules.
This is in stark contrast with the product I was working with before my switch. It only supported one GL structure and one fiscal period structure that had to be shared across all entities in the database. And this was a constant issue when implementing it in larger firms. Just think about the additional work that had to be done if this firm acquired another company with completely different sets of GL and fiscal definitions. We were forced to basically cut off all existing fiscal information of this firm and then force the new GL into accounting. Not very many clients were happy about these limitations.
Another thing that I am really impressed with is the ease of use of dimensions in AX. There is no limit to the level of dimensions I can introduce and I can have different dimensions for different parts of my GL. Looking back, this functionality alone would have saved me weeks and months in implementation time with other ERP systems.
Out-Of-The-Box versus Framework
The biggest difference between AX and other, more vertical focused ERP systems, is the fact that AX presents itself more like a framework than a ready to use system. Don’t get me wrong, most of the standard functionality of an ERP system simply work and you are able to configure most of it on the fly if necessary but Microsoft never sells it as a complete end-to-end solution for all of your problems. Everyone will tell you that this is just a starting point and you can add anything you can dream of (…and pay for…) to this solution.
Other, more vertical focused solutions do not offer you the flexibility. They were built for a specific set of problems and solve them just fine. But if you do things just a little bit different, you are usually hooped.
This has its good and bad sides. I was able to implement a complete solution in less than 4 weeks on my own, including installation, configuration and training. In AX, this is always a team approach (because you simply cannot know every little thing about AX) and it can take anywhere from 6 to 24 months or longer, depending on the complexity of your customizations; the upside here is no limit to what you can do with the system.
Conclusion
I love the flexibility that AX offers. It is a daunting beast of a software but you can always be sure to never run into a total dead end. Even if the functionality is not supported out of the box, there’s either an ISV solution out there somewhere or you can build it on your own.
I will miss the days were I was able to implement an ERP on my own though.
0 comments:
Post a Comment