Dynamics Business Central (NAV)
Experts:
Is Dynamics 365 Business Central really suitable for complex operations?
-
Is Dynamics 365 Business Central really suitable for complex operations?
Q: Is Dynamics 365 Business Central really suitable for complex operations, or does it require too many workarounds during implementation?
We’re concerned about whether Business Central can handle complex workflows without heavy customization .What are the most common mistakes companies make during a Business Central implementation? Has anyone faced functional gaps during implementation, and how did you overcome them?
-
1 Reply
-
Hi Mark,
This is a very subjective question so it’s a bit difficult to answer without more context. I’ll say this about BC:
1) It is a mid market ERP – so it won’t handle the level of complexity that SAP would (at a minimum of $10M for a project) and might run into trouble in more than the most simple customer where D365 F&SC would be required ($1M minimum project).
My largest customer who is happy with BC is a >300 employee aircraft manufacturer (they manufacture and sell private 1-5 seat aircraft). This is an incredibly complex business.
My smallest customer who is happy with BC is a 13 employee manufacturer who has one stamping press and makes aftermarket car parts for the classic car hobby market. This is an incredibly simple business.
That’s a broad range of complexity.
2) Compared to competitors, Microsoft leaves more of the peripheral functionality (Mobile WMS, Payroll, Credit Card processing, eCommerce, Finite Capacity Planning, MES) to 3rd party vendors on the AppSource.
Eg: some people look at BC vs Epicor (picking it as an example) and Epicor has a branded WMS, Payroll, Credit Card, EDI etc… “Out of the Box.” It might be called “Epicor EDI” but really it was a 3rd party that built an addon and Epicor has purchased it to add a “checkbox” to the sales teams PowerPoint. It might be good. It might be terrible. It is likely the only choice – but the VIBE is it’s more embedded.
It is a different license (costs more) and is implemented by a different team. Microsoft bypasses that and lets anyone who wants write an EDI addon. So you can choose SBS Commerce, TruCommerce, Lanham, Golden etc…
It is also a different license (costs more) and is implemented by a different team. But it doesn’t say “Microsoft” so it must be worse. Not the case. I’d be pretty comfortable with the largest EDI vendor on the planet implementing their EDI solution that’s published in the Microsoft certified AppSource list vs Epicor (no offence to the Epicor EDI folks, I know them and they’re good).
3) BC implementation market varied. It is sold by a massive variety of partners with different industry expertise, price points, capabilities etc. Microsoft benefits from many partners with many skills from anywhere. Microsoft suffers from many partners with many different levels of skills with many different approaches. Sometimes the challenges with BC are more with a partner that isn’t very strong in a particular industry vs the BC product.
If you can add more context to what you mean by “Complex” that would help as this is a pretty generic answer.
Log in to reply.
