risk of second supplier

Hello to all Here is my question; we are implementing AXPATA in several counties. We are not happy of our current supplier and we plan to find an alternative for new countries Of course the original supplier treats us that it compromises data integrity. What’s the real risk while new countries will work is their own environment?

Surely not, if you use separate servers per country. If centralized server for all the countries, probably no problem, but I’m only 99.99 % sure.

It’s a centralized server I think like you, because if I understand good, if a new company is set, it has not impact on the others. that’s one reason why we use test companies and live companies since years in ERP world Isn’t it so?

That was also my rationale

There are certainly no problems having multiple companies in Axapta. What your partner may have been referring to is potential difficulties with country specific functionality if you are rolling out a centralised, single instance of Axapta to several countries. For example, think about how the system would cater for the individual legal requirements of each country. This sort of thing can be done, and has been done before, but it is not necessarily straightforward to achieve. Service Pack 2 for version 3.0 of Axapta introduced some functionality that helps. What version and Service Pack are you on, and in what countries are you planning to implement Axapta?

Hello. I have been in just that situation a few times, as an consultant. There could be som problem when it comes to developing in the system. One supplier does this, and another supplier does that. After some time, no one has control of what development that has been done. That’s my experience. Peter Karlsson

I agree with Peter, but it can be managed. I am in that situation myself. We started out using the same dealer in the country the dealer existed (not all out countries). And I can confirm that it IS a problem when different ppl do changes in the same central solution, when they have little or no communication with. The point is just that we experienced exactly this using the same dealer in the different countries. [:(!] So, since we also were quite unpleased in general with this dealer, we swithced to different dealers in a coulple of countries. The situation hasn’t become any worse now. The only solution we found, is that whichever dealer or person that does changes, he/she have to communicate with me before and after. I have to keep a very strict control with which objects they intend to change, and to “cross inform” other implicated developers if changes occour that affects something else. And now it works pretty well. What I really mean to say is: do not underestimate the need for this “controller function” to synchronize what’s being done. It’s absolutely necessary. If you as the customer do it yourself, or if a hired consultant has this role, isn’t that important I think (even though I do it myself), as long as somebody fills that role. What’s important is that this person has a pretty good understanding of your installation and what different processes that makes it tick. If your current dealer is unwilling to supply this role/you don’t trust you current dealer for this role, and you don’t think any of your own ppl is up to the job; switch dealer - find somebody who will! And make sure that person is competent! Then inform everybody that ALL changes in the system has to be synchronized with this person. You will need this arrangement if you use the same dealer or not [;)] , atleast that’s my experience.