Total Software Solution

When evaluating the total solution, the software systems used by the companies includes additional software on top of AX. AX is therefore not considered to be a complete solution by itself in these ETO companies. From the case study it seems that the software needs assistance in areas such as project management, quotation, and product information/visualization (engineering and design). This is mostly due to lack of functionality and flexibility in AX required by the complex ETO strategy.

5.1.2.1 Customization of AX

Furthermore, all companies chose to customize the ERP software to some extent. Both TTS and Kongsberg Maritime made it clear that the customization was imperative to make the solution work in their business environment. Among others, changes were made to the shipment module, service module, and the project management module. Along with customization, there are new modules to satisfy industry specific requirements. This was the installation register.

105 5.1.2.1 Integration with support systems

Regarding the integration between the software that was present in the different systems there were both similar and contrasting methods for solving the coupling. The integration that was the same for all cases was between the PLM software and AX. The PLM software has a one-way integration with AX, where a one-way integration lets only one of the two software use

information from the other. In other words, in the case of the PLM system Teamcenter; AX can gather information from Teamcenter, but Teamcenter cannot access information in AX. The way the companies have solved the use of the PLM software is that the PLM system is the master of the product information data. AX then gets information from the PLM system on BOM and other documentation/specifications on products.

A different integration was between Primavera and AX in OneSubsea’s solution. This integration is also only one-way, as with the PLM software and AX. This implies that changes in AX

information does not propagate to Primavera. As OneSubsea have solved the software

implementation, Primavera is not dependent on AX and its information because it is the only and main project management tool. As the PLM system works as the master of the BOM, Primavera here becomes the master of the project information.

The other two cases used MS Project as their project management software in the total solution, but in two very different ways. It is only Kongsberg Maritime that has implemented integration with AX, while TTS uses MS Project as an “island solution” without any connection to AX and other software. Kongsberg Maritime also uses a two-way integration between the project management software and AX. When not having the programs integrated, one will miss the benefits described in chapter 3.4.4.2 Integration with Microsoft Project about the AX and MS Project integration. The integration allows for flow of information and flexibility. For example, the “actual hours” functionality shows how the integration can be used in an optimal manner to keep a real-time and up-to-date overview of project progress. Also both budgeted and actual costs for hour and expense transactions and the revenue can be viewed in MS Project, and transfer the project work for billing and revenue back into projects that are maintained in AX (Microsoft, 2013a).

106

The lack of integration in TTS is evaluated as not optimal because the systems have information that would benefit the ETO processes if they were shared, like the WBS and resource planning.

TTS solves the lack of integration by making two copies of the WBS. It takes both more time and resources to make two, identical WBSs, as well as keeping them both updated. In reality they are doing the same job twice. However, the fact that AX, and also MS Project allows for the use of templates makes the duplication easier, but there is always information that is specific for each project that has to be recorded.

Below, Table 9 illustrates the business processes and the software used in each company to satisfy the process is presented.

Table 9 - Business Processes and Software Used

107 5.1.2.2 Satisfaction of Criteria

OneSubsea

From the survey it is clear that the total software solution of OneSubsea has implemented satisfies all but two criteria from the Project Paper for an ETO strategy. The first criterion that is not satisfied is the functionality for warning users to update information in AX when changes have been updated from Teamcenter or Primavera. To be more specific, once AX has updated dependent variables from e.g. Teamcenter, there are extended, additional variables in AX that are dependent on the information. An example is if a component’s BOM is changed in Teamcenter, then the changes are updated in the BOM in AX. A problem would occur if there existed a procurement order on that specific component, because the order also needs to know that the BOM changed. The second criterion that was not satisfied was the support of flexible production and routing in AX.

Among the critical functionality for ETO that the solution satisfies is support for project management and quotation, integration and sharing of information, as well as the software supporting production beginning before the design is complete. Another important factor of this solution is that OneSubsea chose to replace all other software with this solution. A benefit of one joint system is removing redundant information because the information is based on one source, as well as it decreases the chance of out-of-date information.

TTS

TTS’s solution does not satisfy all criteria wanted from an ETO ERP system, and it is missing important functionality such as integration between execution and planning, and functionality for quotation within or integrated with the ERP system.

TTS does not have an installation register or a service and maintenance module. This is because after the delivery of the project a sister company does the service that is involved. However, an installation register could still be useful since there exists a “grey area” of two years where TTS are responsible for the warranty of the products.

Another functionality that is missing is support for shipment of the finished products; this is handled outside the solution. TTS does have a shipment module, but it is designed for use other

108

than final shipment. The shipment module is customized to keep track, status, and documentation of components around the world during production.

This case is the company that satisfies the least amount of criteria in the survey. However, the special shipment module is very interesting. This module/functionality might be something to consider during the generic software evaluation because ETO production does use a lot of outsourcing and may need support for keeping status and location of components all over the world.

Kongsberg Maritime

Kongsberg Maritime also did not satisfy all criteria. The total software solution is missing functionality for change management in the same way OneSubsea did. Kongsberg Maritime also does offer service and maintenance, but they do not have a proper service and maintenance module. To have a service and maintenance module and integrate it with the installation register similar to the one OneSubsea has could be a possible solution. Lastly, Kongsberg Maritime lacks integration between quotation and the rest of the solution.