So I don’t actually subscribe to any of the advertising hype that says you’ll be significantly more profitable one way or another if you’re running SAP instead of Oracle instead of some other tier 1 applications. Basically I’d say that if you’re running any top ERP suite, the products are within 2% of each other for most functional and technical capabilities. Oracle leads in some, SAP in others.
However, SAP’s latest ad campaign has been saying that the best run companies run SAP. While I’m not a finance guru (ok, I’m not a finance anything), this new study seems to be showing that SAP customers are actually less profitable based on ROE (return on equity). There are actually many ways to measure profitability, ROE is just one of them. If you doubt any of this, go to Amazon and read How To Lie With Statistics.
Bottom line is this:
- Select a good vendor who fits your organization.
- Plan, design and implement well.
- Communicate and manage change with strength.
One response to “SAP Customers are More Profitable… or Not”
I would really encourage people to click through and take a look at the Nucleus Research paper underlying this post. It is a pretty impressive trul independent piece of thought leadership.
There is actually some power in the data. Industry specific cuts would be interesting and telling. I also think to the natural next step…look at the fortune 50 and compare systems side by side.
That being said, when I first heard the SAP ads I immediately questioned the core premise. So many variables impact profitability that I rejected the notion that you can make any conclusions about any ERP driving profitability.
Notwithstanding the Nucleus’ contention that:
“the scale and scope of many SAP projects can have a significant impact on company performance, particularly if the deployment stretches to many years and millions of dollars in costs.”
I still reject any implication of a cause and effect relationship.
Thanks for bringing this study to our attention, Dubs!