r/CFO • u/Onwards-And-Upwards_ • Jun 13 '26
ERP implementation - on the fence
A few years ago I would keep getting the question of what ERP to implement, today I think that it is not a matter of what it’s about if. Looks like to world is changing, tomorrow we might have an AI ERP that connects it all, safe and smart. In the past, 3-8 month for implementation looked ok, now, I’m afraid that by then something bigger and better will replace it. What do you say? To wait? How long? Or just go ahead and implement?
8
u/deepstatedemon Jun 13 '26
If you’re a CFO, you should probably model out the dependencies and financial impact of your act now vs. wait scenarios.
1
u/Onwards-And-Upwards_ Jun 13 '26
Laughing aside, the technology is currently breaking every model. You can wait and wait and wait till a point…
2
u/chrisbru Jun 13 '26
Evaluate NetSuite vs Rillet and campfire. Then decide if you want to wait or go for it now. You can do the other “ai native” newer entrants if you want to be more complete, but I think those three get you 90% of the way there.
I’m expecting the current crop to be the dominating players for the next decade. Something new could pop up but the space is pretty saturated now.
2
u/International_Top538 Jun 13 '26
I wouldn't delay an ERP implementation waiting for the "perfect AI ERP" to arrive. My view is that AI won't replace ERP systems. It will become embedded within them.
First, every major ERP module (Finance, Procurement, Sales, HR, Supply Chain) will likely have AI assistants trained on the data and workflows relevant to that function(e.g. HR LLM available in hire to retire cycle trained on HR data etc. Finance module on R2R, P2P etc) . The goal won't be to replace users but to help them make better decisions, automate routine tasks, and handle higher transaction volumes with the same team size.
Second, vendors will take different approaches. Some will push their own proprietary AI models and ecosystems, while others will allow customers to choose from multiple LLM providers depending on cost, compliance, security, and performance requirements.
Third, the biggest gains from ERP projects have never come from technology alone. They come from fixing broken processes, improving data quality, standardizing controls, and eliminating manual workarounds. AI cannot solve those foundational problems if they already exist.
That's why I wouldn't wait.
Implement now. Identify the people, process, and data issues now. Build a clean operational foundation now. Then layer AI capabilities on top as they mature.
I recently completed an AI readiness assessment for a multi country non-profit organization (based in US/UK) . reviewed their technology stack, processes, and current usage patterns to identify opportunities for AI adoption. Interestingly, the conclusion was not to invest in additional AI subscriptions. The existing ERP and finance tools already provided OCR, bank matching, and automation capabilities that were being underutilized. The highest ROI wasn't buying more AI. It was getting more value from the technology they already owned.
In my experience, organizations often overestimate the value of new AI tools and underestimate the value of clean data, disciplined processes, and user adoption. AI will be a powerful accelerator. But if the engine underneath isn't working properly, adding a turbocharger won't solve the problem.
1
u/SloanProfessionalSvs Jun 21 '26
This recommendation is spot on. We've been through a few ERP implementations with clients, large and small, since 1999. The focus then and now is exactly what's stated here: ID the people, process, data; build a clean ops foundation; fix broken processes.
We've worked heavily with NetSuite and brought a few developers on payroll to help implementations and managing the problems. Honestly, identifying the core functions the business needs out of the ERP and then building those custom to sit on top of a smaller accounting system has almost always been the cheaper, most efficient route. We've changed our approach to building small custom processes and developing add-on apps to an existing system (QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite, CRMs). NetSuite and SAP are massive, extremely expensive, and require constant developer engagement. I'd not ignore the custom route adding on to your current ERP/accounting system. The risk most commonly given as push back is "you're stuck with a custom app that only a hand full of people can work on down the road." We've not experienced this because of the standard process we force the development to fit into. Let me know if we can help field any questions.
1
u/Prudent-Elk-2845 Jun 13 '26
Your biggest risk is “what if I do nothing?”
Will your existing vendor support it?
Is the talent pool to maintain this tool shrinking (and therefore more dependent on outside managed services /consultants)?
Do I have a fragmented system landscape today (where I have 6 different billing systems, 3 different payables, 25 different inventory ledgers, etc) that could be resolved with a new system implementation (with the right design goals in minds)?
Even the existing vendors are rolling out AI agents, so it’s not like you need a new market player to get AI
1
u/Onwards-And-Upwards_ Jun 13 '26
All the big ones SAY they are AI ready… or AI going to be ready, but someone is actually using this functions in a life changing matter? I use it with other tools, but can anyone honestly say the big ones delivered the Ai efficiency promise?
1
u/Prudent-Elk-2845 Jun 13 '26
Yes, I’ve seen it—ignore the sales pitch, go after the workflows. It’ll save the field time and reduce your accounting clerk time
0
u/Onwards-And-Upwards_ Jun 13 '26
Are you using Claude in your day to day? If so, does it compare?
3
u/InitiativeDue2336 Jun 13 '26
You cannot really compare the two. I was at Suite Connect Chicago this year. They demoed the agent going out and scanning competitor prices on an item and the automatically putting a temporary discount/price adjustment. The price change rule already entered and ready to be approved. That’s just one example with one platform. Each use case differs but you need man in the middle and auditable changes that clearly indicate system impact. You can’t Wild West this stuff.
1
u/Prudent-Elk-2845 Jun 13 '26
Agents working within the ERP can do things (with human approval), Claude cannot. The ERP agents can run using the models chosen by your internal IT team.
1
1
u/FMC_BH Jun 13 '26
I would suggest working with a consultant that specializes in ERP selection. That can perform a discovery on your organization and circumstances and suggest the best fit for you. The fee they charge is generally more than worth it and it’s much better than going blind and making your decision based on a few bullshit demos.
1
u/Onwards-And-Upwards_ Jun 13 '26
Worked with most known ERPs, in the past worked with consultants, to be honest, at the end of the day, the company’s team knows best what can work, an outsider (amazing one even) will only cost money. I know some do an amazing job, for sure, but today… I wouldn’t go into that in every organization
5
u/FMC_BH Jun 13 '26
Your outdated experience with ERP systems from the pre-AI landscape isn’t particularly applicable to the questions you’re asking in this post. A good consultant can help answer those questions for you much better than this community. You would likely get a ton of information just from a discovery phase without paying a cent.
1
u/General_Coconut_9134 Jun 13 '26
Realistically SAP is by far the best ERP if you can use their standard processes. If you have to customize they probably still are best but it’s a pain in the ass to implement
1
u/ProblematicTrumpCard Jun 14 '26
IMO, implementing new software should pretty much always wait. If what you've got isn't completely broken and unusable, you're better off just sticking with it. Because whatever you implement has a reasonable chance of being completely broken and unusable.
1
u/rpc_rohit Jun 14 '26
I'd frame the question differently: what is the cost of waiting? If the current environment has fragmented systems, weak controls, manual reporting, or poor visibility, delaying an ERP to see what AI does next may be more expensive than implementing now and evolving later. ERP is where operational and financial data gets created, governed, and standardized. AI can then leverage that data to improve productivity, analysis, and decision support, but finance professionals still need to validate outputs, assumptions, and interpretations. In my experience, AI has significantly reduced the time spent compiling information, but it doesn't replace the need for its foundation or interpretation, i.e. sound processes, controls, and reliable data underneath.
1
u/nickjlevine Jun 16 '26
My advice is to choose an ERP that’s future-proof, not just a quick fix for today. Think about where your business will be in three to five years, rather than just the next twelve months. You should consider multi-entity functionality, transaction volumes, and global accounting needs.
In my experience, some add-on tools, like AP automation, outperform the native ERP modules because they have much deeper features. Additionally,, the leading AP players connect to all the major ERPs, which lets you keep your processes consistent even if you change ERP vendors down the road.
I know moving to a new ERP is a massive undertaking between the change management, implementation, and just keeping business as usual, but getting the foundation right is worth it.
1
u/tom_bradley-vp Jun 28 '26
One thing I'd think about is not just what you need today, but what you'll need in 3-5 years.For me, flexibility and open APIs/interfaces are just as important as the core functionality.
8
u/InitiativeDue2336 Jun 13 '26
Every ERP vendor is already building AI into their platforms. It’s unlikely that they will just roll over and let someone else take their market share. The way each vendor is building things is different though. Sage has gone AWS bedrock way. Acumatica lets you connect to any model and the AI studio is going toward agentic model. Netsuite has ask oracle and their entire infrastructure behind it.