viktor lesiv | celenia gary fox| tribridge don’t let too many cooks spoil the broth
TRANSCRIPT
Viktor Lesiv | CeleniaGary Fox| Tribridge
DON’T LET TOO MANY COOKS SPOIL THE BROTH
• Session Overview• Introductions• Roles and challenges• Case studies• Questions and Answers
Agenda
• Session Overview
• Introductions• Roles and challenges• Case studies• Questions and Answers
Agenda
• Celenia Software N.A. Inc.• "Dynamics AX Technical Expert Series" for DPC
Viktor Lesiv
• Solution Architect for Tribridge, Inc.• Worked on AX since 2.5• Numerous ‘multi-partner’ projects across 11 years
AX consulting
Gary Fox
• No experience• Single project with multiple partners• Many multi-partner Experiences• Few partners• Many partners
• Most common experience
Survey - Experiences
• Setting them• Communicating them• Managing them
Theme - EXPECTATIONS
• Session Overview• Introductions
• Roles and challenges• Case studies• Questions and Answers
Agenda
• Sales• PM• SA/Functional• Technical• Executive• Customer?
Survey - Roles
• Pre Sale– Timing/Schedule– Demo Flow– Limited Discovery
• Licensing– % on AX licensing– Fixed by module
Sales
• Resources– Time Line– Budget
• Billing– Bill Through– Direct– Client
Project Manager
• New Features– Learning curve– Limited/poor documentation
• Overlap of features– Conflicts and replacement of standard
Solution Architect/ Functional
• CODE BASE– Multi- model/layer and merge– Documentation / code commenting– Best practices/ poor technical design
• SECURITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE– Hosting– Add-ons– performance
Technical
• Customer satisfaction– Credits/ Disputes
• Escalation – Control– Ability to hold partner accountable
Director/ Executive
• Confusion on areas of Ownership• Communication channels• Understanding ISV is AX not separate• Maintenance/Support• Issue resolution (process/extra time)
Customer
• Solution not as advertised/ expected– Immature– Bugs/ instable– Standard features removed
• Resource issues– Timing– Knowledge– Language/ Cultural/ Hygiene
Survey – Common Partner Challenges
• Other Challenges faced– Role– Challenge– Cause
Audience Experiences
• Session Overview• Introductions• Roles and challenges
• Case studies• Questions and Answers
Agenda
• 3rd Party system– With existing AX
connector– Without AX
• AX ISV• Services
– Hosting– Development– Informational/Advisory
Survey – Partner / Relationship Types • VAR Partner (by
Oppt)• VAR Preferred
Partner agreement (reseller)
• Sub-Contractor• Customer - Existing• Customer - Selected
• 6+ Partners
• 70% Outside Developer
• 20%+ new interfaces
• 40% Customer demanded
My Last 10 projects statistics
• Process– Library / Formal process (Survey)– Informal– Pre Sales/ Post Sales
• Considerations– Relationship Type/ History– Value add/ Cost / Margin
Partner Selection
• Clarity of Ownership• Development Standards (BC/WEB)• Work Management Process• Estimation• Language, Locality and Culture
Development Partner Considerations
• Rapidly Growing
• Numerous pre-existing Partner
• Fiesta Budget, Ferrari expectation
Case Studies
• Client overview (Industry, size, partners)
• Main challenge• How solved• Lessons learned
Format
Client Overview• Multisite Distributor• 300 Emp, 200 Users• Replace Legacy ERP
– 3 Existing Partners (no con)
– 2 VARS (ISV)– +4 additional ISV– 1 client Dev Subcontrator
Rapidly Growing Customer
Challenges• Software sold not as
designed (limited use)• Acquisitions (delay +
scope change)• Updated Versions/
Resources• Phased Cut-Over of
LE/Sites
• Software sold not as designed (limited use)– ISV used license and Configurations keys so features were disabled
• Acquisitions (delay + scope change)– Project scaled back, resources reassigned. NEW project plan developed upon
reengagement and revisited repeatedly as needs evolved• Updated Versions/ Resources
– Remerge, lessoned learnt to order ISV’s better• Phased Cut-Over of LE/Sites
– Solid plan required, that was revisited weekly and as adjusted
Solution and Lessons Learned
Client Overview• Process Manufacturing• 1200 Emp, 150 Users• Bailout from VAR
– 7 Existing – 1 VAR MX (TB)– 1 ISV 3P+Con
Numerous Pre-Existing Partners
• Challenges– Finance Advisory
Partner– Internal Project
Organization – Internal dev team– Information Silos
• Internal Project Organization – Assign a fulltime PM, who managed both theirs and ours and produced weekly
status reports• Internal development team
– Reviewed and reconfigured a branched TFS, provided deployment process and methodology with controls
• Information Silos / lack of documentation– Established MOSS site per our methodology– Email distribution list, Strict meeting management including minutes of meetings
circulated beyond though attended, weekly status report meeting• Finance Advisory Partners
– Partnership approach taken with open communication. Clear work ownership with timeline
Solution and Lessons Learned
Client Overview• Automotive Manufacturer• 60 Empl, 30 Users• Replace Legacy ERP
– 4 ISV– 1 Hosting– 1 3P NEW
Fiesta Budget, Ferrari Expectations
• Challenges– Controlling CFO, VC
leverage– GP vs AX– Parallel competing
Projects– Hosted environment– Unfamiliar LC ISV
• Controlling CFO, VC leverage– Strict PM methodology enforced, meeting continued but daily review of key
points/decision– Sr Executive sponsor assigned to project
• GP vs AX– Conversation was had with Sales to get background and put it to rest
• Parallel competing Projects– Weekly cross project meeting, open communication– Agile interface design process by SA leveraging assumptions until design known
• Hosted environment– 2012 was new, installation documentation wasn’t complete
• Unfamiliar LC ISV– Study of ISV documents and ISV resource contact was leveraged for advise and
review
Solution and Lessons Learned
• Multiple Partners add challenges• Clear planning and setting of expectations
are needed• Issues will arise, maintain open
communication, be flexible and solve as a team
SUMMARY RECAP
• Integration into project timeline/plan• Overlap of functionality / code• Language/ Cultural
SUMMARY RECAP
OPEN Q & A
THANK YOUPlease fill out your evaluation