A few weeks ago many of you participated in a survey about deployments. We asked for your experiences around successes and failures of EDI implementations. We segmented the survey into three main categories so that we could better understand the results based on the role you play in the supply chain: Supplier, Customer, or Technology Provider. As we expected, there were differences in the results based on the point of view. But what we didn't expect was the extent to which all three segments agreed on the primary reasons for success and failure. First the things that were successful.
It seems that across the board, setup and installation are the easy parts. Suppliers, Buyers, and Software providers all agreed that getting the applications installed and running properly worked pretty much as planned. The software providers rated their installation, setup and configurations as their easiest and most successful tasks, but that's probably because that's their primary job. However, both Suppliers and Buyers rated those three tasks among their most successful accomplishments, with the configuration of the apps being slightly less successful than what the software providers reported.
Software Provider Organizations
The other most successful item was one that we didn't see coming. More than 50% of both Suppliers and Buyers rated the testing of documents as successful. And equally interesting, Software suppliers indicated less satisfaction with document testing.
But when it came time to go live with the implementations, the disparity became more clear. 51% of Software providers indicated their go live functions were successful, while a lesser number (47%) of Suppliers were happy with their go live results. And only 43% of Buyer organizations were satisfied with their go live results.
Issues that didn't go so well.
All three organization types pointed to issues that are at the heart of an EDI implementation. These are the issues that make document translation what they are. One common issue all organization types found problems with was adherence to specifications. nearly 35% of Suppliers and Software providers indicated that specifications were not followed, while nearly 52% of Buyer organizations pointed to lack of following specifications as a reason for difficulties. This makes sense because the Buyer organizations are generally the parties that develop the specifications for the documents they want implemented. And this is where the real issues begin to surface as far as determining the source of the problems we see in implementations.
For all organization types, Cooperation with their counterparts ranked in the 50% range. There seems to be equal dissatisfaction across the board, with problems attributed equally to Buyer organizations, Suppliers, and Software providers.
Software Provider Problems
Buyer Organization Problems
Vendor/Supplier Problems
In addition to the check box responses, we asked for your written opinions on a number of topics as well. Here are some of the most frequent responses.
Comments from Suppliers
What should be changed to make implementations more successful?
- Better/more thorough testing*
- More frequent communication with trading partner*
- More cooperation
- More staff
- More time
- Conform to standards
Pet peeves from Suppliers
- The process is Buyer centric
- Improper use of EDI data segments
- Inexperienced solutions providers
- For the arena of customer deployments, the short notice of testing and implementation deadlines are the biggest frustration. In order to adequately project our resource availability we've now included a phantom project in order to have the extra time for these last-minute communicated customer projects.
- Usually the customer has not communicated their specific requirements. We then find this out during the testing phase.
- Trying to have us change business processes to fit their specific situations.
- Some are very poor at communicating. Partner specifications are sometimes vague which causes delays.
- Customers who use EDI fields or segments incorrectly by making up their own, new definition for an existing code in the standards...or by making up their own codes instead of using the ones provided in the standards.
What should be changed to make implementations more successful?
- More cooperation
- Better communication
- Standards compliance
- Testing is not the real world
- Software provider not experienced
- Some I cannot seem to get responses from. I will send a test EDI segment and never hear back.
- Not paying attention to specifications
- More focused effort from all parties to keep implementations on track.
- I think our specifications need to be clearer, and we need to make sure our mapping/translation exactly matches those specifications and kicks out anything that doesn't comply.
- Seem to take too long to get set up and did not receive clear communication
Comments from Software Suppliers
- Cooperation from suppliers
- Cooperation from buyer
- Adherence to specs
- Testing
Pet Peeves
- Uncooperative trading partners
- Accounts not ready for the implementation process to begin.
- Complexity of organizations.
- No/slow responsiveness
- Delegating EDI to IT as if it were an IT only function
Comments
- I wish that my retailer accounts were prepared to continue to live EDI. They understand the value add but they seldom see past the implementation. It is often a shock to them that there needs to be ongoing focus on vendor compliance and they often fail to communicate the exact requirements of compliance to customers. Even those retailers that I work with who in action are better at collaborating with the suppliers, often fail to notice those high level efforts, like a vendor compliance guide are the most helpful to their partners.
- Some buyers also demand odd mappings (like pre-packs that are really loose items, or store numbers and PO numbers that need to be changed for outgoing documents) that often don't show up in testing.
- Frequently, the top-level (C-level) management has been told that EDI implementations automate everything. There can be some explaining necessary when they learn that cross-references (customer and product) need to be maintained.
- It would be really nice if trading partners updated their EDI specifications *after* they've implemented a few trading partners. All of us who do this work have encountered "undocumented requirements" at some point.
And to wrap up the survey, we received one particularly cogent analysis from one of the Software Providers in answer to this question:
What ONE thing do you concentrate on most, in regard to making implementations go more smoothly?
One of the services my company offers is custom integration with a retailer's back-end system coupled with a formal vendor outreach to engage suppliers for EDI program that we have designed with the retailer based on their business needs. It is my position to bring those accounts into production and handle any questions or escalations after that point. That being said, the difference between successful programs and those that have been the most pained are two-fold.
Firstly, the partners' expectations can be a game changer. I have experienced partners in the same industry working with the same program and the same suppliers have completely different outcomes. Those who came in with the expectation that there would be issues and were actively engaged in working with those from the beginning were able to dynamically handle those issues and quickly progress.
On the other hand, those partners who expected a perfect solution out of the box struggled at each point. Regardless of personally, it has been my strategy to ensure that we have regular contact times scheduled well into production. Even though we can converse between these status calls regarding escalations and quickly answered questions, I think that these check in points have offered us a forum to keep track of those longer term changes/fixes. This ongoing commitment to check in at regular intervals allows us to play with ideas of vendor compliance and one-off-solutions in such a way that we are able to look at all of the nuances of a problem.
What does all this tell us
An EDI implementation is a technical task that is fraught with minute details and technical challenges. The good part is that most all indications are that those tasked with getting the job done are at least equal to the tasks. So, the issues are generally not related to ability or insurmountable problems.
The main problems lie in the willingness and ability to cooperate and communicate with the people in the organizations that are at the other end of the wire. Certainly everyone is busy with their own job, and many times the deadlines imposed to get data flowing between companies can bring all participants to a point of frustration. But as you have collectively indicated in the results of this survey, the problems are well within your own reach, and largely depend on communicating regularly and frequently with your counterparts.
