Hi all, We are installing Navision 4.0 and need to import at least one years of history (everything from sales orders, purchase orders, payments and receipts,…) and we have been told that it is very dificult to do in Navision as the system requires that posting of these transactions are required so that the information can be used throughout the system. We have been told that we could enter starting balances and that will work in most cases, but we need to have the details as we use the detail to manage our business - everything from Inventory management to Credit approval. My question therefore is what have you done to get history into Navision at a detailed level. Would appriciate any advise or stories about things were done and failed or succeeded. Thanks
[:(!] [:(!] [:(!] OK, sometimes I get andgry at NSCs, and I get my share of return abuse for this, but this is unacceptable. tknonstant wat you are asking for is standard in 99% of Navision implementations, in fact it is a key selling poiint in many. Your NSC is wrong big time here, and you need to tell them so. Yes its complex, and yes it will cost money, but no its not impossible. Now if I have missunderstood, and the real issue, is that you don’t want to pay for this conversion, then that’s another matter, but cost and time are the only real issues here. Personally I normally recommns clinets to import 1 year of active history, adn an additional 2 years of inactive history.
Davis is right, it is very important for all business in the world to make decisions on experience. To put Experience into ERP terms means historical data. There is not much difference in importing 1 year, 5 years or a week of data. Work is more or less the same. Only the validation of the data quality delivered by you might take more time, especially if items do not exist anymore or customers as another example. depending of the amount of data you generate per year, I would say to definitely import not more than 2Gig of data into Navision for 5 years.
recently did a conversion that involved the import of about 12 Gig of data, it was big, job, and was not cheap, but ther ewas no other way the business could continue without the data needed to make busines decisions. Thoma, thanks for the support/
David, I can only agree with you on the importance of that information and technical feasibility, but from a sales standpoint the customer often forgets that this kind of migration is not just loading a huge Excel sheet of data and that’s it - this is at least my experience. It may include new vendor/customer/item codes, in depth analysis of field equivalence, what kind of information to migrate, data cleaning, review the uploaded data, and so on and so on… I think in your case, tkonstant, the NSC is just crying to be able to charge a lot for this work - and as David points out this can really be a costly job, or can be done with a couple of dataports… Saludos Nils
Hi Nils, thats why I put the disclaimer at the bottom o thepost about the client not wanting to pay. [:D] I have done dataconversions that take a week, and datacnversions that take 6 months, every one is different, and everyone needs it own level of analysis. But in this case, tkonstant implies that teir business can not runwithout the data. Reading between the lines, I can hear a Sales Rep saying “Dataconversion, well that’s easy, we already did it for one customer, and will be able to reuse the dataports.” I will say though that a major cost factor in doing a very large dataconversion is how long you are able to shut down for. If your client needs to work through till Saturday afternoon, shut down , then have the data converted for testing Sunday afternoon, and be live 8.00am Monday morning, then it will cost a lot lot more than a client that can shut down on Thursday afternoon, and be live Tuesday Morning. In the first case it has to be fully automated, and you need to run 3-5 go-live tests, each of which will cost as much as the actual go-live. And that all means a lot of preparation work. Having said that, I still have heard too many cases of the Sales Rep saying one thing about dataconvesion, and the project manager saying something else.
Having said that, I still have heard too many cases of the Sales Rep saying one thing about dataconversion, and the project manager saying something else.
That is true, and this is precisely due to the complexity of this conversion issue, that needs to take into consideration a lot of details, like the available time window to do this conversion that you mention for example. And missing some technical expertise the sales rep simply says “Impossible” or “Very, very difficult” for not being blamed later on… which takes us back to the issue of knowledge, information sharing and so on in the NSC to deliver high quality implementations and taking full advantage of all the cool and nice stuff that you can achieve with Navision. Saludos Nils
There are some very valid points made in this thread, and I don’t want to take anything away from anybody, but I want to get something off my chest. I resent the ‘crying because we just want to charge’ remark. True we’re in it for the money, but we don’t deliberately go out and “trick” companies to do business with us. Service to our customer IS important to us believe it or not. There are so many variables in a situation like this. One scenario: A sales person misunderstanding the complexity of a data migration, an IT person at the customer underestimating the effort. It’s one thing to say ‘doable but costly and time consuming’, but the IT dude may THINK “PFT costly, I’ve done hundreds of them” and absolutely ignore the data migration. Then the project manager comes in and finds out that the IT dude used to work with a homegrown Access app and imported years of data with a simple spreadsheet, and thought ‘shouldn’t be any different’. Then they have to educate the customer and the doodoo starts hitting the fan. because there are big $ implications, and guess who is perceived as the bad guy here? You think the IT dude will take the blame for that one? You think the sales person will take the commission hit? You think anybody will be willing to say ‘you know I completely misunderstood that, my bad’ and move on? Who says this person’s NSC actually said it wasn’t possible? Did they really say that or did they interpret it that way? Maybe the person who said that knew the budget and said it in context. There, I’ve said my piece. [Sigh…]
Nils, couldn’t agree more/ Tkonstant maybe the NSC is just trying to phase you into the fact that it is going to be a big job, but really they should have discussed this before you signed up. ANyway, one of the things about Navision, is that it is possible to bring over just about anything, and often clients go “history mad” and just wnat everything. Please sit with your NSC, and find out if they are trying to just slowly introduce you to the fact that this is coing to cost money, and not that they just say that it cant be done. Maybe I am being harsh on them. But I have just seen this too often.
Daniel, your comments refer exactly to the difficulty of this situation, and to customers that might think that migration might be a piece of cake, or any other person implicated that subestimates the effort. Of course the NSC must charge for this service, we all agree on this point - we, as Navision developers and implementors must make a living aswell - I was rather thinking about the “a lot”… As any requirement that the sales rep might not be able to answer in detail, it would be helpful to bring in a developer and realize a preliminar analysis to study the feasibility and costs involved - this will prove a profesional approach from the NSC and help to adjust biased customer expectations… Saludos Nils
I am a bit concerend here that our konstant friend has disapeared. Daniel it looks like we both posted at the same time. My initial reaction was probably too fast, and maybe it needed more information first. My assumption is that knostant has purchased Navision, their NSC told them that “Dataconversion” is no problem at sales time, but now are backing out since it looks like a much bigger job, and they are now tryign to say that they only meant opening balances. I am making this assumption since I have seen that happen a lot. Too many times in fact. Of course it could be that konstatnt has not even bough navision yet, and they he/she is backing out because the cost is now too high. The issue is though that no matter what, most businesses can not move to a new ERP implementation without their history being brought accross, and NSCs MUST explain this in detail BEFORE the contract is signed. Daniel, you are correct, that most of the Dataconversion issues do source from the customer just not being able to grasp the reasons for the high cost of conversion, but that is what the implmentation process is about, i.e expectation management. Konstant, more information would be helpfull here.
I may be a wee bit defensive abot this subject, on account of the treadmarks across my back from being thrown in front of a bus about this subject :). I have asked our sales people why they trivialize this process, and the answer is if they don’t they won’t sell anything, and everybody does it (i.e. the SAP peole, the BAAN people, the JD Edwards people, the Peoplesoft guys, etc.). Then they go into the old bit that ‘I did not lie, I just did not “emphasize” specific complexities’. It’s like only putting your strengths on your resume. While it is true that yes we have done this hundreds of times, it remains a very complicated and time consuming job, and for some reason that part of the conversation always gets forgotten.
Sadly you can normally tell if a Navision implementation will be a success or not just by reading the contract. [B)]