Share your experience using CMiC ERP

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is a cloud-based product that differs from GP in several ways. One of the major differences is that in GP, general ledger account numbers consist of a string of segments that represent dimensions or ways to categorize data, such as departments or regions. These segments must be strung together to create one long account string. However, in Business Central, these segments work independently, and users do not have to create a long account string. Instead, they define specific codes for each dimension, making it more dynamic and easier to manage. Although new users may take some time to adjust to this change, they will quickly see the benefits of the system.

Business Central can be used for managing payables, vendors, customer sales, receivables, inventory purchase orders, and financial reporting, just like GP. However, it is more connected to other systems because it is cloud-based and developed with the latest programming language. As a result, it can easily connect with other systems, and other developers can create interfaces for Business Central. The system is much easier to use, even for simple tasks like managing a checkbook, as it allows users to connect their checking accounts and have all their bank transactions automatically flow into the program.

Business Central is also capable of receiving data from other cloud solutions, making it easier to manage data and focus on reporting. Unlike GP, where data entry was a manual process and importing data was time-consuming, Business Central allows for data to be automatically imported into the system. This enables users to focus on how the data is stored and reported, rather than spending time on data entry.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central constantly improves and automatically rolls out upgrades to users without requiring any action from them. The upgrades are released at scheduled times, and users are not obligated to initiate or perform any tasks related to the upgrades. In contrast, with GP, where users have the option to upgrade, consultants must download and install the upgrade on the server and workstations, which can be a lengthy and tedious process. However, Microsoft has taken over this process with cloud-based upgrades. Business Central is a top-rated ERP system that competes with SAP for mid-sized companies, while Microsoft's F and O solution competes with Fortune 500 companies. If improvements are needed, users can configure modifications themselves or find third-party add-ons through the App Store to achieve the desired functionality.

Having dynamic dimensions definitely makes managing much easier. For example, when I was a financial systems manager for a publicly traded company using GP, creating a new expense account required about four hours of work because we had to create the account string for every department, line of business, and region. This resulted in over 800 unique account strings. In Business Central, creating a new expense account is much simpler and independent of other dimensions. When coding transactions, we select the main account number, line of business, call center, and region separately. This is a huge benefit and Business Central is also device agnostic, allowing it to be operated on any device. GP is a Windows-based program that requires a laptop or PC to operate and a VPN to connect to the database from home, making it slower outside of the office. Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is better suited for the new workplace environment where many people work from home.

The configuration packages can be somewhat tiresome at times, and they can be slow when loading data. However, I have discovered a way to increase their speed by reducing the number of columns included in the imported data. Perhaps Microsoft could enhance its configuration packages in this regard.

I have been using Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central for years.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is extremely stable as it does not rely on our in-house servers. Additionally, we are able to back up instances and all other data. Thus far, I have not experienced any issues with the system's stability.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is highly scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. Microsoft provides an automated setup wizard that enables even those with minimal experience to complete all necessary setups simply by following the prompts.

The deployment time can vary depending on the company. However, it's possible for a company to deploy within a couple of weeks by inputting and beginning balances and providing training. Although, typically, most companies take at least two to three months because they need to migrate data and undergo training. Nonetheless, the deployment time is still considered relatively fast.

We implement the solution for our clients.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is a more cost-effective option for entry-level users. Firstly, there is no need to purchase user licenses, unlike GP which costs around $3,000 per user. Instead, Business Central charges a monthly fee of $70 to $100 per user. Although the recurring cost may add up over time, it is not a substantial up front expense like GP.

I give Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central nine out of ten.

I have not required technical support as there is an abundance of documentation available for almost anything we need. Moreover, if any issue arises, it is often due to our inadequate understanding of the instructions, and there is no necessity for Microsoft to fix it. Essentially, everything functions as intended. Therefore, if the outcome is not satisfactory, it is often due to our own lack of diligence.

We use it for the FICO {Financial Accounting (FI), Management Accounting (CO)}, SD, and MM modules.

We don't face any problems with the modules, but we have a problem with the web solution. The web access sometimes has difficulties with logging in.

The support should be improved. Every time we submit tickets to SAP, the process takes a long time.

Also, improved performance, reliability, and stability would be beneficial.

In my current company, we migrated to SAP S/4HANA last year in January. It means we started using it in January 2023.

It is not really stable. 

Based on the SAP support we currently use, the users access SAP through the web. In the web interface, we have a lot of connection issues. 

Although SAP claims they are addressing these problems, they have not taken any concrete action. Instead, they try to shift the responsibility back to the customer.

According to our agreement, these tasks should be handled by SAP. However, the support team consistently insists that these issues fall under their scope. This is the challenge we are currently facing.

It is scalable enough. We have over a hundred end users using it. There are around five administrators for this product.

When we want to raise a ticket on the SAP portal, the process takes a longer time, and there are many selections that confuse the user. SAP should simplify the way tickets are submitted. This is what we hope they will improve.

They need to improve the solution and streamline the process. We want to bring the issue in more clearly so we can know which option to select.  

Neutral

The pricing is okay. It is higher. It is expensive. 

We encountered an issue when we implemented SAP S/4HANA. It wasn't properly implemented with disaster recovery. The disaster recovery was an additional feature that required a separate payment to implement a disaster recovery plan.

Overall, I would rate the product an eight out of ten because the support is very bad.