50757_10491_06312_!QVM6MA0294C8TopTenRisks

8/12/2019 50757_10491_06312_!QVM6MA0294C8TopTenRisks

1/21

Unlock this document

Forgot your password?

Business e-mail address:

Password:

Need to Register?

Unlock this document by providing the business e-mail address and password youuse to access sites in the KnowledgeStorm network.

Note: In order to have an optimal experience, you should view this document using Adobe Acrobat 7.0 or later.Adobe Acrobat 7.0

Questions about this document?


2/21

Document Summary

Top Ten Risks to a Configuration Project and How to Avoid Themby Access Commerce

Published on: November 01, 2005

Type of content: Vendor White Paper

Format: Adobe Acrobat (.pdf)

Length: 18 Pages

Price: Free

Overview:

Implementing new configuration software and processes is similar in several

respects to implementing other information technology (IT) based projects, suchas enterprise resource planning (ERP) or product lifecycle management (PLM)systems. A few of these similarities include the strategic nature of the project;its broad scope - encompassing the extended enterprise of customers and

suppliers; the extensive cultural implications; and the necessity for formal

change management methods.

Nevertheless, in developing a feasible plan to implement configuration softwareand processes, there are some significant differences to consider. For instance,

ERP / PLM product definition capabilities are limited in their flexibility to createhighly configurable product representations for use by customers to create

unique products. This is because those systems focus on engineering andmanufacturing versions of product structures. Typically, their current product

structuring methods are grossly inadequate to meet sales and marketingrequirements for unique and accurate configurations - developed in a timely and

cost effective manner.

By creatively using configurator software, project teams now will have thecapabilities and flexibility to define product options and variations in any way

deemed necessary - for an effective customer-facing Lead-to-Order (LTO)process. (3) The implication is clear: To become more customer oriented by

offering highly configurable products, a company will need to dramatically shift

its perspective on how its products are defined and presented to themarketplace.

As with most IT-based system projects, to gain the considerable rewards mayinvite numerous risks. Thus, it takes prudent management to recognize these

risks and to develop viable actions to avoid or to mitigate them - by learning

from and taking advantage of the successful experience of others.

Purpose of this Executive Guide


3/21

Overview Continued:

The purpose of this Executive Guide is to help companies gain the intendedbenefits from implementing a configurability strategy, by:

- Identifying the top ten risks to a successful product configuration

implementation project, and- Describing numerous, proven actions to avoid or to mitigate them.

Although this guide presents the indispensable actions to avoid these risks in a

general sequence, a different sequence and/or emphasis may be appropriate forany individual company situation.


4/21

Top Ten Risks to a Configuration Project

and How to Avoid Them

Execut i ve Gu ide

Making

ComplexSelling

Simple

This document is locked.

You may unlock this document by returning to the first page.


5/21

Contents

Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Starting on the Right Track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Developing Effective Configurable Product Models. . . . . . . . 6

Staying on the Right Track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

The Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Notes and References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

About Access Commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Top Ten Risks

Copyright 2005 - Access Commerce - All rights reserved.




6/21

Preface

Companies producing and selling complex and configured products can achieve a

major competitive edge by successfully implementing product configurator software

as the core element of a configurability strategy - "toprovide more product

variations using less resources." (1)

Some companies, unfortunately, have painfully experienced the risks of

implementing new software and processes, though eventually gaining benefits.

Other companies may be overly cautious. They can be hesitant to undertake

"another new initiative," even when it is essential to compete in today's demanding

environment.

The promised benefits from implementing product configuration software are many

and may seem too good to be true. However, companies that have successfullyimplemented a configuration project confirm its many rewards. Surveys by industry

research firms further validate these claims. (2)

Purpose of this Executive Guide

The purpose of this Executive Guide is to help companies gain the intended benefits

from implementing a configurability strategy, by:

Identifying the top ten risks to a successful product configuration

implementation project, and

Describing numerous, proven actions to avoid or to mitigate them.

Although this guide presents the indispensable actions to avoid these risks in a

general sequence, a different sequence and/or emphasis may be appropriate for

any individual company situation.

1

Top Ten Risks





7/21

Introduction

Implementing new configuration software and processes is similar in several

respects to implementing other information technology (IT) based projects, such as

enterprise resource planning (ERP) or product lifecycle management (PLM) systems.

A few of these similarities include the strategic nature of the project; its broad

scope - encompassing the extended enterprise of customers and suppliers; the

extensive cultural implications; and the necessity for formal change management

methods.

Nevertheless, in developing a feasible plan to implement configuration software and

processes, there are some significant differences to consider. For instance,

ERP / PLM product definition capabilities are limited in their flexibility to create highly

configurable product representations for use by customers to create unique

products. This is because those systems focus on engineering and manufacturingversions of product structures. Typically, their current product structuring methods

are grossly inadequate to meet sales and marketing requirements for unique and

accurate configurations - developed in a timely and cost effective manner.

By creatively using configurator software, project teams now will have the

capabilities and flexibility to define product options and variations in any way

deemed necessary - for an effective customer-facing Lead-to-Order (LTO)

process. (3) The implication is clear: To become more customer oriented by offering

highly configurable products, a company will need to dramatically shift its

perspective on how its products are defined and presented to the marketplace.

As with most IT-based system projects, to gain the considerable rewards may invite

numerous risks. Thus, it takes prudent management to recognize these risks and to

develop viable actions to avoid or to mitigate them - by learning from and taking

advantage of the successful experience of others.

2

Top Ten Risks





8/21

Starting on the Right Track

Risk Number 1: Not Managing the Implementation as a

Strategic Project

If the company does not address this risk directly in the first stages, the result could

be complete project failure - after spending the implementation budget fruitlessly.

Wide industry experience has clearly demonstrated that the most common cause of

this risk is because the organization does not fully understand the strategic nature

and value of the proposed configuration project.

Strategic, in this sense, means a project at the highest level of planning and

execution, fully endorsed and supported by top management to catalyze major

improvements in the company's competitive posture.

Develop a solid business case with a Return on

Investment (ROI) analysis to gain management's

initial commitment; sustain it by quickly showing

results and keeping management informed of

ongoing progress and challenges.

A complete ROI analysis has proven essential to gain management commitment. It

should identify tangible objectives and benefits, one-time implementation costs and

all ongoing costs of IT support.

First, as planning assumptions for developing the benefits side of the ROI equation,

the company's strategic vision may need to be defined or clarified; for instance, will

the company:

Target new market sectors?

Initiate new sales channels and processes?

Some project teams might contend that intangible benefits alone offer sufficient

justification to undertake a configuration project. For management, with an ROI

focus, intangible benefits lack the power to sustain commitment over an extended

period. For the users, however, the soft benefits can be a powerful motivator; for

example, engineers may be very frustrated with the time consuming problems of

developing one-time bills of material (BOMs) that dilute valuable engineering time for

innovative product development. (2)

Once the project team gains management commitment, the attitude might be "thank

heavens, we have management's support, now let's get on with the real job."

Nurturing and retaining management commitment is a real job and will be a

continuing challenge. It must be a top priority of the project team to accomplish this

by using formal project management techniques. These include: consistent status

reporting, means to identify and resolve outstanding project issues, and a

comprehensive communications approach. Project management software can only

provide a partial solution.

3

Top Ten Risks


The Spectrum of

ToOrder Products

Pick-to-Order (PTO) -productsusually shipped from

stock inventory, for example,

catalog items with optional

accessories shipped with the

catalog item.

Assemble-to-Order (ATO) -products with standard sets of

predefined features and options,

from which unique product

configurations are developed by

the customer selecting specific

features and options, for example,computers ordered over the

Internet.

Configure-to-Order (CTO) -products based on consultative

dialogue with the customer,

through Web interface, to address

specific requirements. The

products have been predesigned

in computer-aided-design (CAD)

models or parameterized

documents, but not predefined

with specific part numbers, for

example, products with

dimensional and spatial

requirements, such as hydraulicactuators, and windows and

doors.

Engineer-to-Order (ETO) themost complex products that

during configuring must interface

with product development

activities and tools, such as CAD

software, design rules and other

expert IT systems that can

support development of

configuration, pricing, and

complete documentation over a

typically iterative proposal cycle;

for example, electrical distribution

systems.

Action




9/21

In addition, the project team must seriously consider the value of an early success,

such as a "rapid prototype," to sustain enthusiasm for achieving the project's

intended benefits. In a similar vein, another viable approach is the tactic of "self-funding" later stages of an implementation through the benefits gained from its initial

successes.

Risk Number 2: Not Having the "Right" People on the

Project

Without the "right" people on the project team, two major risks will almost certainly

appear:

The configurable product model will not meet the requirements of all

organizational functions, including customers and suppliers

The eventual users may not fully accept the newly developed configurableproduct models and the supporting processes

The critical question is, therefore, who are the "right" people?

Recognize the required makeup of the project

team: multi-disciplined with in-depth product

knowledgeable people - and led by the business

and not by IT personnel.

"Right" is . . . those product experts that are integral to the current day-to-day

operations and who supposedly "cannot be spared." These people have the

expertise and perspective to design product models that meet the needs of the

enterprise. Clearly, providing personnel who "cannot be spared" depends on the

strength of management's commitment to the configuration project.

Furthermore, project leadership should be in the hands of those responsible for the

future, on-going operation of the system - the sales, marketing and/or engineering

personnel.

To bring together and forge an effective project team, the qualifications and

capabilities of the "right" prospective team members must be evaluated:

Will they be willing participants?

Will they be able to stay motivated in the face of occasional setbacks during

the progress of the project?

Will they resist being distracted by their "real" jobs?

Can they function effectively at two different thought levels: conceptual and

the detail of product modeling?

Can they make decisions to facilitate conflict resolution?

4

Top Ten Risks


Action




10/21

Define the "right" tasks for the "right" people

to accomplish the project's objectives.

The project team's prime responsibilities are to develop a feasible project budget

and schedule, paying special attention to the product modeling effort; and to design,

test and implement configurable product models and related processes that meet

the company's strategic vision. Moreover, acting as proactive change agents and

maintaining open, two-way communications with the rest of the organization are

particularly important with respect to the cultural risks, described next.

Risk Number 3: Not Fully Understanding the Cultural Issues

Experienced companies frequently refer to cultural risks as one of the foremost

reasons for project failures. Technical reasons have rarely been the cause.

The risks here are often subtle; like an iceberg. The obvious, formal policies andprocesses exist above the waterline. Beneath it may be the informal - attitudes,

values, norms and fears - that endanger the project. For example, a company may

have relied on a certain department and/or individual to know the subtleties of

generating a customer's unique product configuration. Thus, these users may

perceive a change in roles and responsibilities - using the new configurability

processes - as a loss of status and power.

Clearly identify the cultural issues that might

endanger the project.

A fundamental truism here is that management commitment, by itself, does not

solve cultural resistance to accepting new processes. Accordingly, the project team

cannot be passive, hoping that time will cure the resistance risks, or that momentum

will sweep along any dissenters. It will take a proactive approach by the project

team to gain user acceptance of new processes and responsibilities.

In fact, the project team must relentlessly work to eliminate any potential

organizational potholes and landmines that can undermine expected project

benefits. Additional actions:

Maintain constant contact with all affected users through both formal

communication means and informal methods

Conduct orientation and educational sessions, perhaps some conducted by

outsiders who can bring fresh perspective to the effort

Hire a change management consultant versed and experienced in cultural

issues and how to resolve them

Accept constructive conflict as a healthy situation and destructive conflict as

unacceptable

5

Top Ten Risks


Action

Action




11/21

Developing Effective Configurable Product Models

Risk Number 4: Not Completing a Valid Product Model and

Process Design

An attitude of "let's get on with the solution, we all know the problems" can lead to

undesirable risks in the early phases of the project. It is a natural posture: some

project teams may be too eager to start playing with the new software before they

initiate a purposeful design process. This is a dangerous attitude that could lead to

false starts and costly project course corrections.

If the project team does not have a clear focus on project objectives, other risks can

surface during the remaining phases of the project:

Incomplete model and process design

Rework of processes required later in the project

Heavy reliance on peoples memory and tribal knowledge

Personnel turnover

Politics gain the upper hand resulting in individual or functional needs

becoming more important than the overall enterprise needs

Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the

Current State methods and processes related to

the configurability strategy; then develop the

desired Future State. (4)

Current State review

Selectivity is essential - too much documented detail is not necessary. The Current

State of product variability, such as available options and combinations, however,

does deserve a high degree of attention and detail. Understanding the current

demographics will help to accurately estimate and to facilitate the product modeling

effort, for instance, the number of features, the logic controlling the relationships,

and the interoperability of options. Structured design methodologies that use visual

aids are useful here. Moreover, the project team should recognize informal sources

of product information, for example, Post-it notes and tribal knowledge.

Additionally, the company must avoid the myth of "We have to make our current

systems work first." Time is too valuable to waste trying to improve poor systems on

a piecemeal basis. Companies can avoid this risk by developing and following thestrategic direction provided by a Future State design.

6

Top Ten Risks


Action




12/21

Future State design

The goal of this action is to create a comprehensive design for product models and

processes. To accomplish this:

Identify the metrics of configurability success, for instance, the accuracy of

configured quotes and orders

Define the affected processes at a general objectives and policies level only;

procedural detail can come later

Clarify planning assumptions that influence or constrain the design to avoid

the painful hindsight, "Oh, but I thought . . ."

Make use of a comprehensive design methodology to avoid missteps

Draw on best practice checklists as prompters

Recognize factors that should be resolved before a configurator can be fully

used, for example, an effective product change management process

Share the evolving design continuously with management and users and

solicit feedback before final approval

This last noted action is one of the best-known tactics to determine if the design is

complete - not stopping short at the 80% completion state.

The overall design of the Future State processes and the user experience with them

must be intuitive and perceived as a natural part of their interaction, not an added

burden to be endured. In addition, there are critical considerations in developing

valid product families and models, described in the next section.

Risk Number 5: Not Attaining the "Right" Perspective when

Designing Product Families and Models

One of the key tasks awaiting the project team is to develop a fresh perspective on

the definition of product families and models by taking advantage of the capabilities

in the configurator software. Gaining perspective means to abstract or visualize new

groupings of product families and models to achieve more effective configuring of

complex, unique products. Often, though, Current State engineering and

manufacturing product structures do not lend themselves to accurate and timely

configuring of products in a revitalized LTO process.

Failing to address the concepts of the "right" perspective may result in unusable

configurable product models and these undesirable consequences - at two levels:

1. Operational unduly complex, time consuming and costly on-going model

revision and maintenance, and

2. Strategic eroding the customers confidence, and even losing business, if the

customers view the new product configuration and LTO process as unwieldy

7

Top Ten Risks





13/21

Unfortunately, there is no "magic bullet" to absolutely avoid the risks - do not waste

time searching for it. At best, the company must strive to mitigate them during the

tasks, described next.

Plan and carry out a comprehensive design

process and conduct periodic reviews with users

and top management - so that the results

conform to the company's strategic vision.

The goal is to achieve the "right" perspective in new product family definition - by

balancing conflicting factors, including the usability of configurable product models

versus flexibility and the cost of family and model maintenance. This goal also

means that the following organizational functions must be wholehearted participants

in the decision process: marketing and sales - to ensure usability of the configurable

product models by customers in a revised LTO process; engineering - to signify

what can be produced; and manufacturing - to indicate what is optimal to produce.

Typically, a project team will carry out a whole series of interrelated tasks to reach

the goal of the "right" perspective. In a general sequence:

1. Understand the strategic vision regarding target markets and customer

characteristics. Developing answers to some questions may catalyze a fresh

definition of product families. Among them:

What sector of the "To-Order" spectrum will the company tackle?

To what degree are customers sophisticated and knowledgeable about what

they need in a customized product?

What will be most effective for customers using the configurator software:

feature/option selection? - a needs analysis approach? - or combinations ofboth? - in a guided selling mode?

What are the customers delivery expectations?

2. Define and decide on the important factors in product family and model

development, considering the customer level of product knowledge/expertise,

product complexity and anticipated levels of maintenance; then set priorities and

balance the trade-off decisions.

3. Visualize and evaluate the possible new or revised product family groupings. The

two extremes in product family definitions too few high-level product families or

too many product families will both result in unnecessary maintenance time and

cost.

8

Top Ten Risks


Action




14/21

4. Do not let product configuration exceptions rule. This can distort the design effort

and be time consuming.

5. Recognize that there will be an inflection point (where the value is still increasing,

but at a reduced rate); for example, increasing flexibility in future model maintenance

is a desirable capability. On the other hand, too much flexibility will complicate

maintenance.

6. Review the evolving perspectives and recommended choices of proposed new

product families with users and top management to gain approval before expending

additional design effort and incurring costs.

7. Create new product families; prototype one or two to test for customer usability

and maintenance considerations.

The project team must accept the reality that attaining the "right" level of

perspective for new product families and configuration processes is not a oncethrough process; expect some iteration of some or all of the above actions.

Certainly, anticipate some rousing debates during this phase.

Risk Number 6: Mis-estimating the Modeling Workload

Product modeling will be a major part of the project budget and schedule. When

developing the project plan, there are two undesirable possibilities to be avoided:

underestimating or overestimating the modeling effort. Either can trigger common

risks - detrimental to project success:

Diluting management commitment due to loss of confidence in the project

team

Deteriorating team members commitment to the modeling effort

Transferring team members - who cannot be spared - off the project

Losing project momentum

Underestimating the product modeling effort and subsequently requesting additional

budget and time from the executive steering committee will directly lead to the

aforementioned risks. Be aware of potential root causes, such as not understanding

the process, or the presence of highly motivated, but overly optimistic, team

members.

Overestimating the product modeling effort also has additional downside.

Management and users may react negatively to initial schedules that are perceived

to take too much time before showing results. Here, root causes may include a lack

of understanding, or poorly motivated, overly pessimistic team members who might

be inclined to "pad" estimates for protection.

Understand and evaluate the product complexity

factors and the effort required to develop

product models - on time and within budget

limits.

9

Top Ten Risks


Action




15/21

Because only the project team - no others - will be accountable for the accuracy of

the product modeling estimates, it is imperative they have the requisite

understanding of product modeling before they commit to a schedule. There is nomagic Excel spreadsheet to develop the estimates. Thus, it will be a highly

judgmental exercise demanding a high degree of attention to both product

complexity and team member capabilities.

Product Factors

In the Current State review phase, the project team will have identified a number of

product variability factors. These are statistical and qualitative descriptors defining

the complexity of the products - that are needed to develop an accurate modeling

estimate.

A company's products may span the range of Assemble-to-Order (ATO), Configure-

to-Order (CTO) and Engineering- to-Order (ETO). As a rule, the more complex the

product, e.g., CTO and ETO, the greater the product modeling effort. Therefore, the

following factors need to be carefully evaluated:

Where do the products fall in the range of ATO, CTO and ETO?

Number of product families?

Number of characteristics per product family as engines in automobile

models?

Number of possible choices for each characteristic as engine horsepower

selections?

Number of parts needed to make a unique product configuration?

What configuration relationships currently exist that will need to be accountedfor in the new product models: complex pricing strategies, sub- level

configurable BOMs, integration with CAD software, and rules for dimensional

and parametric calculations?

People Factors

At this time, a key question is . . . do the project team members have the requisite

understanding of the product modeling effort to develop accurate estimates?

Greater understanding of the future modeling effort should result from collaborating

with the software vendor - with their experience - to leverage the project team's

knowledge of the product. One distinct possibility is to co-develop a prototype

product model with the software vendor. This approach also provides active

software-specific training. However, the project team must retain the eventual, on-

going modeling responsibilities that should not be defaulted to the software vendor.

Now is also a good time to maintain active dialogue with experienced configurator

implementers - in complex product companies with similar characteristics - to gain

a better understanding of the scope and intensity of the product modeling effort.

10

Top Ten Risks





16/21

Furthermore, it may be necessary to initiate appropriate actions to improve the

project team's effectiveness, by reconfirming the project objectives and rationale;

regenerating motivation with fresh management direction; and reaffirming roles andresponsibilities, such as the power to make decisions to resolve conflicts.

Risk Number 7: Not Selecting the Appropriate Product

Family to Start Product Modeling

Most companies will have a choice of which product family to select for the initial

product modeling effort. There are often two extremes to evaluate, simple or

complex - each with attendant risks. Starting with a complex family that promises

greater benefits may be tempting, because of the desire to gain the greatest

immediate benefits with improved product configurability. Nevertheless, starting with

a too complex product line may prove self-defeating. The project team may not

have the experience level required for a successful outcome. An unfavorable,demoralizing result could cause a loss of confidence.

There is an advantage to consider in starting with a simple product line: it shows

results quickly. Conversely, the project team may not gain the requisite experience

to later tackle the more difficult product lines.

Consequently, neither extreme - too complex or too simple - is an appropriate tactic.

Select the appropriate product family to model.

Designating the appropriate product family to start the modeling effort is properly a

top management decision. Accordingly, the project team must identify the selection

criteria before choosing and submitting a recommendation to the steering

committee. Not all decision criteria will be compatible, thus, forcing an intelligentchoice after considering:

The substantial business impact, such as potential to increase market share,

that will help to gain and sustain organizational momentum

The degree of product complexity and the learning experience to be gained

for the remaining modeling efforts

The readiness of the users

A prudent approach is to choose the first product family to model that gains

significant business impact, yet is not too complex. Moreover, all users outside the

project team should be able to fully understand the evolving configuration model.

In addition, continuing success would maintain the confidence of the management

steering committee, as well as the eventual users.

11

Top Ten Risks


Action




17/21

Risk Number 8: Inadequate Testing of the Configurable

Product ModelOne of the worst possible risks is to have customers find errors in the product

models as the models "go live." One cause of this risk could be lack of valid input

from knowledgeable personnel during earlier phases of the project, resulting in an

inadequate configurable product model. Superficial model testing may not identify

faulty configurable logic.

Preempt the risk with a comprehensive testing

plan comprised of these elements:

Develop comprehensive validation methods, based on structured input, to test

all possible combinations of configuration logic and error messages

Start testing early and do it often dont wait until the model is complete

Establish acceptance (buyoff) criteria, for instance, the ability to handle all

structured input created to test the model logic, to produce error messages,

and to develop an accurate configuration

Bring in prospective users from outside the project team to assist in early and

continuous testing, such as those from sales, channel partners and selected

customers

Recheck the adequacy of product modeling training

Avoiding the risks of inadequate testing exemplifies the integral relationship with

previously identified actions, particularly assigning the "right" people to the project

team.

Staying on the Right Track

Risk Number 9: Not Adequately Defining New Processes for

Maintaining and Publishing of Models

In complex product companies facing blistering competition, constant change is

expected, usually at lightning speed, driven by customer demands. Without

adequate processes for updating product models in a timely and efficient manner, a

number of risks can surface:

At an operational level - increasing maintenance costs and extended time toimplement new models leads to the highest level of risk, that is . . .

At the strategic level - losing market opportunities, revenue and even

customers. . . perhaps the most painful of all risks

An underlying cause of this risk might be that the project team mistakenly views the

next actions as those to tackle just before "going live" with the new product models.

Worse yet is that the project team did not exercise the discipline to take the

following actions in earlier planning phases.

12

Top Ten Risks


Action




18/21

Identify, define and test all processes associated

with the timely revision of the product models

well before "going live."

In configuration management terms, the goal is to ensure the revision integrity of the

product models. A recognized best practice is to conduct a continuous and

comprehensive conference room pilot using the evolving product models to

generate these mandatory outcomes:

Identify all rules for change management of the product models

Validate all interfaces to related systems, such as ERP and PLM

Define/clarify all policies and responsibilities for the ongoing operation of the

new processes

Accomplish any final education and training requirements before the nextactivity

Risk Number 10: Not Planning for User Acceptance of the

New Product Configuration Processes

Waiting until late in the implementation cycle to plan user acceptance will only

exacerbate the risks, already cited above. Scrambling at the last minute in reaction

to user sensitive problems may trigger even more resistance: fear of excessive work

pressure and loss of control at the time of "going live." The possible rewards of the

new processes may no longer appear adequate or satisfying.

Work proactively to develop a user acceptance

plan.

The approach to avoid this risk starts at the time of gaining management

commitment. While stated in this risk category, the project team must accomplish

most of the following actions throughout earlier phases of the project:

Establish an active communications methodology beginning as soon as

management has authorized the project

Create a sense of "ownership" of the configurable product models and the

related new processes

Provide a feedback mechanism to the project team for additional

improvements

Incorporate a mix of motivational methods, both positive (carrot), and as

necessary, negative (stick)

Essentially, the project team needs to execute a marketing strategy for creating

enthusiastic user acceptance, not foot dragging resistance.

13

Top Ten Risks


Action

Action




19/21

Conclusion

For complex product companies immersed in the "To-Order" market, a configuration

project is not an option - it is an absolute necessity to survive and thrive.

Forward thinking companies do not tolerate excuses for inaction, as . . . "Oh, but we

are not ready." This is because in today's environment of blistering competition,

doing nothing is one of the greatest risks of all.

Take purposeful, preemptive actions to avoid the potential risks to a configuration

project - by catalyzing the next steps: review . . rate . . and tailor the actions

outlined in this guide. Then, aggressively pursue them by closing any gaps between

the company's current reality and the actions needed to be successful. This will help

to ensure the maximum rewards from a configuration project - leading to major

competitive advantages.

The Author

Richard W. Bourke is a principal consultant with extensive experience in systems

planning and implementation. His clients have ranged from Fortune 100 companies

to small manufacturing firms. For other publications, visit

www.bourkeconsulting.com.

Contributing Author

Andrew Tubbs is the Vice President, Professional Services for Access Commerce in

North America. He has more than 13 years experience implementing product

configuration software solutions and has led more than 100 successful projects,

including deployment of the first web-based configurator for the world's largest

automotive OEM.

Notes and References

1. Access Commerce, "Configurability: A Competitive Advantage," 2005.

www.access-commerce.com.

2. AMR Research, "Configuration is the Heart of Customer Fulfillment for Complex

Product Manufacturers," 2003.

3. Access Commerce, "Optimizing the Lead-to-Order Process," 2004.

4. The Lean community differentiates the two conditions of processes as Current

State (sometimes known as "As-Is") and Future State ("To-Be").

5. Access Commerce, Cameleon Model Designer methodology, 2000-2005.

14

Top Ten Risks





20/21

About Access Commerce

Access Commerce is the developer of Cameleon Advanced Selling and Product

Configuration Solutions. Cameleon optimizes core selling activities by intelligently

automating key business functions across sales channels: lead management,

guided selling, product configuration, pricing optimization, quote and proposal

generation, order management and manufacturing data generation.

Access Commerce was founded in 1987 in Toulouse, France and today has more

than 250 customers in 15 countries. The company is listed on the Euronext Stock

Exchange (Euronext: 7424).

For further information, email to [email protected] or contact us at:

North American Headquarters

1419 Lake Cook Road

Deerfield, Illinois 60015

(847) 236-9061

European Headquarters

Rue Galile BP 87270

31672 LABEGE Cedex France

+33 5 61 39 78 78

www.access-commerce.com

15

Top Ten Risks





21/21

www.accesscommerce.com



Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	sugarhola
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

50757_10491_06312_!QVM6MA0294C8TopTenRisks

Documents