We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering SAP, SAP, Oracle, and other competitors of Microsoft Dynamics AX. Updated: January 2022.
563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Microsoft Dynamics AX alternatives and competitors

Harry Paulison
VP of Operations at a manufacturing company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
Customizable with great integration capabilities and very good stability
Pros and Cons
  • "The ability to customize it to create custom fields that are reportable, and then to be able to write script behind it to automate other processes that might otherwise be manual is great."
  • "If you were to use standard costs, it doesn't handle standard costs well."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution to run our entire organization from beginning to end. We started with the CRM for opportunities and leads prospects. We also customized it with custom fields to make separate line items and then used that to spit out reports on calculations of gross margin expected based on those opportunities. 

We could have multiple line items underneath specific opportunities as the opportunity information's collected at the header level. We would generate sales orders based on approved quotations and a customer PO and we would put in a sales order. The way we configured it was just before we put the sales order in, we would enter all the item information. We would go into the item master, set it up with the associated vendor who was going to provide that material. That way, when you put the sales order in and you selected that item, and you completed and saved it, it would automatically generate the purchase orders without having to reenter all that information.

How has it helped my organization?

The product would see the sales order, understand the requirement, and it would generate demand, and then generate purchase orders. It could also generate work orders if it had a labor component associated with it. From the work order, you could generate POs. Basically, it saved a lot of redundant entries from that perspective. It saved us time and allowed for customizations that helped us with workflows.

In the sales orders, we were able to create custom fields so that we could measure our performance against promise dates. What we did was we created custom fields and there was some scripting behind that, which is one of the reasons we used NetSuite. We could put in the customer's original expected date, what our promise date was, and then measure against how we performed. 

If that date was missed, we could then, in a third data field, put in the new date and a reason code. We made that mandatory, so that this way if any dates changed, we knew why. We were able to measure vendor performance against those dates, customer changes against those dates, and our performance against those dates. It was very helpful from that perspective. Having good dates allowed us to also do better cash projections in terms of shipments and invoicing.

It saves paperwork down the line. The only purchase orders that had to be done by purchasing were those that were planned. We had ongoing projects, yet only the planned orders needed to be purchased. Rather than reduce headcount, we were able to take the buyer who was working on the planned or the non-planned purchases and retrain them as an inventory analyst, so that we could focus more on the planned purchases. 

It enabled us to really align the skillsets and the needs that we had as the business evolved as a result of the digital transformation. It really facilitated that ability without having to add headcount. We simply retrained. We didn't need to reduce headcount as all part of a growth strategy.

What I would also add is that it not only saves redundant entry there, but it saves redundant entry as it goes through to the fulfillment side on the logistics as all the information's already there. There's nothing to be reentered. When it comes to the invoicing, again, there's nothing to be reentered. It's all pulled from the sales order. In the end, you have a 360-degree view of all the related documents. Finding related records, POs, sales orders, invoices, fulfillment records was easy due to the fact that they were all connected.

What is most valuable?

It helped reduce redundancies in workflows by at least 25% or so.

It's easy to find records, POCs, sales orders, et cetera, as they are all connected.

We didn't have to add headcount or lose employees. We simply retrained them using this process.

The solution saves us a lot of time. It automates a lot of processes.

It allows us to track every aspect of an order to learn about if we are meeting deadlines and why/why not so we can further adjust our processes.

The solution is very good with integration. We were able to integrate DocuSign with NetSuite. That gave us another layer of automation that allowed us to get digital signatures. We did not have to take a lot of extra steps - such as printing, signing, scanning, reattaching, sending via email, et cetera. The system also allowed us to email automatically directly out of the system. We aren't constantly having to jump out of the system to do other processes. It was all contained and thus the communications stayed with those transactions. It really greases the skids all the way through.

We could work in multicurrency, which is what OneWorld allows you to do. It also allows you to have different setups for different city areas based on the company structure that you use. We were able to add and manage multiple virtual warehouses. You can have as many as you want. 

The reporting is user-friendly. You could create any kind of reports you wanted. 

The dashboards allow you to have all that information available to you as soon as you log in. For example, in accounting, once fulfillment is done, they know exactly what can be invoiced as it would show up in a saved search list and they knew exactly which ones they could invoice. If you set the dashboards up correctly, it provides that information at a glance along with financial reports and other things that it provides.

The ability to customize it to create custom fields that are reportable, and then to be able to write script behind it to automate other processes that might otherwise be manual is great. For example, we had a situation where there were certain fields that need to be updated as a result of other fields. What we did was we created custom fields so that if that field got updated, a script would run overnight. It got updated and it would go and populate the other field, which would normally have to be a manual process. Instead of having to compare and make updates, the system was doing it automatically, saving additional time. With all that time that we saved, we were able to redeploy to customer-facing activities, which were more important rather than maintenance of the system.

Its ability to maintain those customizations in that scripting, upgrades, and updates to the system notwithstanding, was phenomenal my experience previously was anytime you made customizations and there was an upgrade, things would get wonky. In NetSuite, that doesn't happen as they're upgrading the core functionality and you get that as a user, which they do twice a year. You never have to worry, however, as all your scripts and customizations are never touched. They're not impacted by those changes, which is really a great benefit to anybody who's been down that road.

What needs improvement?

There are different inventory evaluation methods that you can use with NetSuite. It natively does average costs all the time. It does that just fine, however, if you were to use standard costs, it doesn't handle standard costs well. It's not a very sophisticated process handling standard costs. That's one caution I would make. If you're using standard costs, you really have to be very aware of that. This is one of its weaknesses. It does it, but it doesn't do it well.

The other problem that we had, or the other challenge that we had, was some of the MRP functionality was cumbersome. In 2020, the update of NetSuite that took place in September, they addressed a lot of that through the supply chain control tower. That made it more automated. They added a number of automated supply chain features, which supposedly addressed that issue, however, how well it addressed it, I'm not clear.

For how long have I used the solution?

We migrated from a legacy system to NetSuite and we went live on it in my previous company in 2020. I used it for a year after implementing it.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I find it very stable. They come out with a lot of the upgrades on a twice a year basis, March and September, which really address issues that they know that they have. It's a product that continues to improve and get better. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's scalable and I find it to be pretty easy to work with. It's very intuitive, it's easy to navigate, and that helps on the training and adaptability side or adoptability, I should say, due to the fact that most users fight change.

However, when the change is made easy; they adopt it much faster. I would say that a good number of our employees had adopted it very, very quickly.

It's totally scalable. For small to medium-sized businesses, I would say that you can go into this product knowing that you can use it easily for the next five to seven years without issue unless your business model changes dramatically and requires something specialized. 

I'd say outside of that, you could easily get into this system and use it for a very, very long time, due to the fact that they just keep improving the product and the features and the benefits from those features are what everybody's looking for, which is probably why it's going in three to one to any other ERP system.

In the last environment I worked with we had about 60 users.

I'm considering using NetSuite in my current company. We have currently about 15 users, which may go to 18 or 19. That said, it's a product that we will never outgrow. No matter how much we grow, we won't outgrow it. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I would say technical support is very good. We didn't use it that much due to the fact that we used our integration consultants. We had a number of phases where we were optimizing the system. Therefore, a lot of our support came from them. It was rare when we had to go to NetSuite directly because of that.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did previously use a different solution. It was a legacy system that we migrated off of.

It was difficult to navigate. Information was hard to find and reports were done in Crystal. Unless you know how to write Crystal Reports, you constantly had to get a consultant to write reports for you. There were no dashboards. It was a client-server product being hosted in the cloud, so it didn't function really well as you also had to host a database. That setup gets clunky, which meant the performance was not great. As a result, trying to get information out, you're constantly having to do VLOOKUPs in Excel to get SQL information out and then massage and change it. It's was just very problematic. That legacy system really had to go. It was very labor-intensive doing any kind of entry. It was just sucking up a lot of time.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. Even the customizations that we made, we were able to identify some ahead of time and we incorporated them as part of our implementation right in the live system. I would say, in condensed timing, we were able to migrate from a legacy system and get NetSuite up and running at about seven months, which is outstanding.

Our deployment plan was basically to scrub our existing data. We made sure that we stuck to the scope of the project - the things that we had to have live such as the functionality, the movement of data from one place to the other, making sure that the setups and the reports were there, and that the training and the testing were done. We stuck pretty closely to our strategy and plan for a go-live. Just a couple of days after we moved all of our ending balances from one system into NetSuite, we tied them out as beginning and ending balances. We were able to then start to process. 

For the most part, it was good. It wasn't exactly seamless. Everybody says seamless, however, nothing's seamless. It went as well as you can possibly imagine as most of these migrations usually take a year or more. I've been involved in a number of them over the course of time and this was pretty quick. I would also say that our consultants or integrators were very, very good. They were like an extension of us, which was a critical factor.

What about the implementation team?

I handled the implementation of this solution. 

I was the VP of operations, so I was also the acting project manager internally. I used a consulting company as my migration folks. 

They were excellent and they really helped streamline the process so that we were able to roll out pretty fast. I'm already working with them again on another project. They work well with our team.

What was our ROI?

My previous company definitely saw benefits. Just to know our ability to be able to really change our processes and to establish some discipline within those workflows and all the other benefits made it worth the investment. There's tremendous value in it as a long-term investment. The more you use it, the more you leverage it, the more value you get out of it. That proposition never really ends, it all depends upon if the users and the company really make the most of that solution once they've invested in it. It's an ongoing process; it just doesn't end. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It's a bit pricey. It's probably at the higher end. I wouldn't say it's exorbitantly expensive, however, it's not inexpensive. It's certainly higher priced than Acumatica. We felt, for what we wanted to do, it was really the best solution and so we were okay with the cost.

They did work with us on price. We got some discounts and we worked through some additional things where we got some additional discounts. They did work with us to improve the cost value proposition. That said, it is still on the higher side of some of those other solutions.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did look at other solutions before choosing this product.

We looked at Acumatica, which at that time would have been 2019. We felt Acumatica wasn't quite there yet in terms of features and functionality. Although now, I would say that's changed a bit as they've been chasing NetSuite and they've improved a lot. We looked at some other systems such as Epicor, IQMS, we looked at Sage Intacct. We looked at Microsoft Dynamics, as well, however, it's a different kind of a partial solution. It wasn't really the kind of solution that we were looking for.

I'd say Acumatica and NetSuite are very much the same. Customization in Acumatica may be slightly more challenging. One uses the Oracle database, NetSuite, obviously versus Acumatica, which is just an SQL database, which, at the end of the day, makes no big difference. At this particular juncture, there are only very few differences between the Acumatica and NetSuite products. Although at the time, Acumatica wasn't quite there yet in terms of usability, their MRP and demand planning functionality was very cumbersome. The reporting also was not as robust as it is now. 

The Acumatica Cloud ERP and NetSuite were pro for the cloud; they were built for the internet. So they work really well because they're native to the cloud. And I think that's probably some of the key reasons as performance matters. People get impatient. It takes minutes to get things done versus seconds. That time matters. That's why the cloud is preferred.

What other advice do I have?

NetSuite by definition is a subscriber, full subscriber cloud product. You can't host it. It's not offered to be hosted on-premise.

I would say most of the users really, really like it. They felt it was a major improvement over what we had previously and the visibility that it provides you with really helps you understand exactly what's being processed in the workflows, which is critical.

I would advise other organizations to make sure it's a good match for your processes. For companies that already have a process that they need to stick with, they need to carefully review the way that the workflows in NetSuite work as they may have to change the way they work versus changing the system to work the way they want to. That's not going to be to everybody, however, a good first step is to really analyze and make sure that it works for you or you can adapt the system. For us, it was a very good match and we were able to make certain customizations that were not crazy, which really helped us a lot. And we wanted some of the discipline that came with a bit of the rigidity that NetSuite can be known for. 

If you're not going to use all those features, there are different ways that you can buy NetSuite. You can buy its core and you can bolt other products onto it. It's possible to integrate certain other applications that are specific to, let's say, an Expensify for travel and expense or DocuSign for digitally signing documents, those are all easy integrations. Those kinds of things make the product very attractive as they're not trying to lock out anything; they're actually facilitating it, which is great.

We've been extremely happy with the solution. 

I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Douglas Blumhardt
Managing Consultant at Business and Technology Consulting, LLC
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Highly customizable, no infrastructure needed, and very scalable
Pros and Cons
  • "I would say that the solution is highly configurable."
  • "In terms of the main improvement to NetSuite is the talent itself. It's grown so fast and there are about 25,000 companies running on it, and it's a relatively newer system compared to other competitors. It's growing so fast that the talent base in the partner organization (there's about 200 of them), is pretty thin."

What is our primary use case?

I have multiple pharmaceutical distributions. I'm currently doing two projects with companies that are what are called stevedoring companies. They're companies that load and unload these massive vessel ships that come into the ports all over the world. Containers and cruisers and things of that nature. I've also done a large 3PL shipping company. I've done a couple of manufacturing companies. I've done a couple of manufacturer distributor companies. It's a very versatile system. It can be used for a variety of businesses.

What is most valuable?

It's less about functionality today. Although the functionality is there, most systems are pretty competitive on things like financials. At that level, what makes a solution competitive is the architecture, and NetSuite has the most advanced system architecture in the market today. It was built for the cloud. It's a true cloud application. It's truly, purely web-based. 

There's no infrastructure required. It's fast licensed, it's multi-tenant for releases. 

I would say that the solution is highly configurable. 

The solution's data structure is very referential. You can easily customize new data in the system. It's a system that's built for enormous flexibility and customization.

The system itself, the reporting dashboards, integration, API, workflows, all that stuff's strong in NetSuite. The functionality is strong.

They've got people working deeply on it. They spend incredible amounts of money on R&D and their releases are very robust and they just keep moving forward with more.

What needs improvement?

There's always room for improvement in every system.  It's going to have some functional verticals that just aren't as competitive in the app, due to the fact that there are older systems that have been built for 20 years that are deep. For example, in manufacturing, there's something called process manufacturing, versus discrete manufacturing. There's a couple of systems that'll beat NetSuite on process manufacturing.

In terms of the main improvement to NetSuite is the talent itself. It's grown so fast and there are about 25,000 companies running on it, and it's a relatively newer system compared to other competitors. It's growing so fast that the talent base in the partner organization (there's about 200 of them), is pretty thin. 

There's a lot of bodies. There's a lot of kids there. I call them the kids because they're people in their twenties, maybe in their thirties. If you're under 40, you are still a kid to me. What it boils down to is that I've been doing assessments for 40 years. I have five grown sons between the age of 30 and 44. Not a single one of them, if they worked around the clock for the rest of their lives, could catch up with me on experience, because in today's market people get pigeonholed and specialized. They don't get a broad experience. People aren't building systems anymore, so you don't have that depth. What it boils down to is most of these people working in these ERP projects, in all the systems, are truly not systems people.

They're actually people that just know how to push buttons and settings and workflows and reports, and spit things out. They know how to configure a system, however, they don't really know much about how it would actually do what it does, or how it's built. Therefore, the weakness in that is that when you get into business models that require some real custom configuration, they don't really know how to do that. 

In today's market, young people aren't learning how to really learn a business. What's happening is a lot of systems focused work without first understanding the business that they're actually serving. That's prevalent in the NetSuite world and these newer systems, due to the fact that they've basically been staffed with and around young people who really don't have a lot of business experience. They may know a lot about that application, that system, but then not really know very much about the business. Business experience is an issue in this market today.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've worked on multiple systems, however, I've probably been engaging with NetSuite to some extent for the last seven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is highly reliable. I've got a client who's been running for four and a half years flawlessly, with no outages, no errors, no failings. Of course, part of that is the architecture and the system. Part of it is we did a world-class job of implementing it. However, the bottom line is you can really mess up a system if you don't know what you're doing. That said, NetSuite itself is a highly reliable system.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is pretty good. It's targeted. Oracle has its Oracle cloud product and some other junk products in between, but the two flagship products are Oracle Cloud (for tier one companies, over a billion dollars in revenue)m and then NetSuite, which is targeted for the half a billion-dollar or maybe up to billion-dollar revenue. We have four companies with over a billion dollars in revenue on NetSuite.

Up to that point, it's really very scalable. Even after that point, it's really not a matter of the system not being scalable. It's more the server and the data centers that they've sort of configured for that. You've got 25,000 companies, and 90 plus percent of them are probably in the hundred to $500 million range of revenue. Revenue is not always a good indicator, because some companies, like the company I'm in right now, is a half a billion-dollar revenue company. However, they function more like a hundred million dollar company because the invoicing they do is very large and very complex invoicing, but large-dollar transactions.

So they'll do a $25-$50,000 invoice as well. That rolls up to half a billion pretty fast. That said, the volumes aren't really there. They don't have any more volume than a retail business, or a distribution business might have with a tenth their size. You can't use revenues and bills as a total indicator every time. 

I would say NetSuite would struggle to scale beyond a billion dollars if it were a retail business. That's just in terms of how it's built. It's built for the mid-market, and some limitations are there that you wouldn't hit then until you get to a billion. It's still a great system and there is a provision for buying up to more tiered levels of processing capacity. That way, very large companies can run on NetSuite.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is very weak. That's because, once again, they've hired a bunch of kids. They've got kids behind the scenes doing the work and they don't necessarily retain much deep talent on the inside at NetSuite. 

They mostly have a great software development group, however, their support group tends to be very young people who basically don't know much. They know the system, again, however they don't necessarily know how to interact with the business. 

The best way to get systems support is really from the network of qualified partners. That's where the talent goes and that's where the money is. That's where people can make the most money. Whenever any of these people get any talent, they tend to jump ship from NetSuite and go out to work for one of the partner companies.

How was the initial setup?

Everything's complex today. It's all complex. Any system is complex. However, NetSuite's setup, what makes it easier, is there's not a lot of complexity in the actual customization. That's easier. Any system, even Microsoft's Dynamics, is going to take 30% or 40% more labor to do the same things. 

NetSuite's highly configurable and it's also very structured for settings, presetting, roles, permissions, personalization, etc. If the partner that's selected is skilled, if they know the system, then the configuration works actually in a pretty straightforward manner. 

There may be a lot of variabilities or a lot of complexity, mainly because clients are complex. Nobody does things the same way. If they did, they'd run out of business pretty quick due to the fact that you always have to have something that differentiates you from your competitor. All those differentiations have to be thought of and incorporated into the implementation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Licensing costs are all over the place. It really depends a lot on the business model. How many seats, what modules they're getting, and what kind of discount you can negotiate all will adjust the cost structure in different ways. 

The discounting can range, depending on what's compelling to that model. For example, I bought these two stevedoring companies and they're old companies, they're longshoremen. They've been doing longshoremen work since clipper ships. The systems tend to be old. Nobody had ever really put a stevedoring company on NetSuite before. When I went to NetSuite to negotiate for them, I was able to get okay pricing. There's a pretty broad opportunity if we get one or two of these done. NetSuite was willing to get me a very deep discount in that case. It depends on the deal. The numbers are all over the place.

What other advice do I have?

We're not a reseller, we're a selection company. We represent the client.

The inherent weakness where you might be disappointed is not functional, because functionality can be built out. It's like buying new furniture in a house. The house is a big cost, the furniture you just need more of. More functionality can be built out readily if the architecture is good. NetSuite's architecture is so phenomenal that you can almost not even imagine. I have one subsystem that my client has, but it's an old premise-based proprietary application that no one else has. It's unique to their business, but it's about ready to fall over. I looked at it and we're going to build it into NetSuite, because NetSuite is capable of absorbing more functionality. So, it's really about architecture. And architecture and NetSuite, I couldn't even imagine what it's going to ask for there. It's really very good.

Ironically, NetSuite's kind of killing our business, because if you're doing mid market, it's going to be NetSuite or Microsoft dynamics. Everything else is not really worth the attention. Where we do selection work we don't get shared revenue. We don't get kickbacks or anything from anything we do. Our work is to help companies pick the right solution, pick the right partner, and get the implementation done. Our work has shifted much more to helping oversee the projects. We do a business assessment work, we do system selection work, we do solution, basically formulating the solution for the client. Then we negotiate for the right licensing, the right contracts, service agreements and we oversee it.

We're like a general contractor for a commercial building. What's happening is that the clients no longer have people like us inside. Basically, systems have become commoditized over the last 20 years to the point where if they've got insight IT people they're really server people. Servers, networks, virus, security, phone systems. These people don't know anything about applications. 

In NetSuite's environment, there's no versioning. It's actually a release strategy. It is in the cloud, so it's multi-tenant and the releases come in and go. Obviously, they have some release numbers on each of them, however, the client really doesn't have to worry about that.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Enterprise Consultant
Maggie Van Wyk
Chief Financial and Operating Officer at Aicrem Square
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
User-friendly, flexible and easy to customize, and offers good support for different industries
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature is the user experience, where you can create your own queries, it sends you alerts, and it's very flexible."
  • "I would like to see the HR features enhanced with respect to localization for South Africa and other countries."

What is our primary use case?

We are a consultancy and we use this solution to provide services for our customers.

Over time, I have used JD Edwards for a variety of use cases. One of the very recent ones was converting from strong discrete costing to actual costing in a manufacturing setting. Some other examples are capital asset management and AP automation.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the user experience, where you can create your own queries, it sends you alerts, and it's very flexible.

The interface is very user-friendly. As long as you apply logic, it is easy to do the technical stuff. It is structured well so you don't always have to depend on technical people to do things like create reports.

It has the latest features in terms of embedded mobility and orchestration.

The integration with other products is easy to do.

Customization is easy to do, as long as you stick to their rules. It can be customized in a cloud-based deployment, as well.

There are tools in place that allow users to update the system themselves, without any technical support.

Support for developers is easy because they have their own toolset. They have options for using SQL, RPG, and different languages, depending on the hardware that you're using.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see the HR features enhanced with respect to localization for South Africa and other countries. They have perhaps 12 localizations but I think that for countries like South Africa, where the payroll system is unique, they should start investing more heavily.

I would like to see more training documentation, or alternatively, training that you can do without having to go offsite. Unfortunately, when training with Oracle, it is quite expensive. Also, the instructors come from India and the dialect is very difficult for people from South Africa to understand. Consequently, a lot of people feel that it's a waste. It could have been very good but they didn't understand what the trainer was saying. This is a big thing that I would like to see more with. The documentation that they have is good, but it's very expensive so people would rather not buy it.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with JD Edwards EnterpriseOne for about 20 years, since 2000. Prior to that, I had been using JD Edwards World since 1991.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

EnterpriseOne is used on a daily basis and the actual solution is very stable, whether deployed on-premises in on the cloud. Stability will depend on who did the setup, as with any system. When you try to take short cuts then you end up short anyway.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is absolutely easy to scale this product. We have about ten users in the company.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have a little bit of experience with similar products from several vendors, including Microsoft Dynamics and SAP. I have found that the user experience is much nicer within JD Edwards, compared to anything else that I have seen. It is not rigid and allows you to change or customize things within the framework that is provided.

NetSuite is a little bit cheaper than JD Edwards, although they are catering more to smaller enterprises rather than medium-sized organizations. They compromise certain functionality or applications. A lot of the applications out there are good for startups, but the moment that you start diversifying, you have to start looking either at add-ons or re-implementing different ERPs. The trend lately is not to just replace everything. Rather, have additional or complementary products that suit your needs

With JD Edwards, it is a fully integrated system so you can run just certain modules, but it's optimized if you use the full ERP system. For example, if you need procurement, work orders, and financials, then there is a benefit to moving everything into one system.

How was the initial setup?

Provided you understand the framework, it is quite easy to install and set up. After this, it is easy to maintain and manage. The length of time required for deployment depends on whether you have a proper blueprint because all of the processes are embedded. With all of the blueprints available, for a new installation, it can take between six and nine months.

The deployment will also depend on the state of your data. It may already be clean, or it maybe needs to be pre-processed before migrating. I would say that every situation is unique. You can do the majority of the setup offsite, just by getting all of the business processes in advance. Then, when you start UAT and other testing, you go onsite and go live. It's not that complex. I came from a financial background and moved into the IT sphere, which was not that difficult to do.

The maintenance is done with our in-house team. Normally, you have one person for every module. However, on the technical side, you only need one person because everything has been automated and is orchestrated to do a lot of the work for you. It just pops out some reports and alerts as it monitors the system for you.

What about the implementation team?

In some cases, we used assistance from the vendor during the implementation, although we have also deployed it ourselves. These days, a lot of the migration, upgrades, or updates are done internally.

When it comes to supporting our customers, we are able to do functionality support because we've got in-house business analysts who do the actual applications. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing is for mid-market businesses, where it is cheaper than Oracle Cloud, EBS, or SAP. It is very much on part with Dynamics, although Dynamics can become quite pricey in the end.

The cost of licensing depends on the modules that are being used. It varies because some of them are user-based, whereas others are employee-based. 

There is a lite license and a normal license. People who use it full time, like in procurement or for someone doing purchase orders, use a normal license. On the other hand, when you get people that only do approvals, for instance, then they can get a lite license and it's a little bit cheaper.

What other advice do I have?

Most of my experience is with on-premises deployments, although I have also worked in an environment where we hosted it on the cloud. If you have a cloud-based deployment then it's managed and maintained by the vendor, although you can still have your own customizations that are unique to the business.

The vendor continuously improves this product, basing their changes according to the feedback provided by customers. At this point in time, it is difficult to asks for specific features because they're very compatible with any other system in the market.

They are very strong in the manufacturing, construction, and engineering industries.

My advice for anybody who is implementing JD Edwards is to make sure that all of your processes are stabilized and standardized. Follow the best practices. Make sure that the processes are not coming from somebody who had good ideas 60 years ago but in reality, are no longer effective.

The best thing to do is make sure that the data is clean and you have the blueprints for the business processes according to best practices.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
AndriiBelinskyi
Head of IT at New Products
Real User
Top 20
MRP functions help manage the entire supply chain
Pros and Cons
  • "For us, the most useful feature of Business One is Material Requirements Planning (MRP)."
  • "We bought all licenses for the whole package in the very beginning, and now we're just paying for 404 licensed maintenance. It's a standard fee. Of course, we still pay partners for implementation."
  • "Business One doesn't have a proper master data management function."

What is our primary use case?

We are a beverage manufacturer in the fast-moving consumer goods sector that uses Business One throughout our whole supply chain. We start with forecasting, which is not calibrated well currently, and then we download the sales plan into SAP. Based on the sales plan, we provide plans for production via MRP algorithms. The primary function of Business One is to handle all this data we are getting about purchase orders, raw materials, packaging, etc. We also plan to acquire a production module for MRP II functionality, but we haven't acquired it yet and have not decided on the production model. Right now, upwards of 230 people using it, including salespeople, accountants, warehouse workers, production workers, purchase servers, and people who handle procurement. At the moment, it's all.

What is most valuable?

For us, the most useful feature of Business One is Material Requirements Planning (MRP). 

What needs improvement?

First of all, Business One doesn't have a proper master data management function. So, with any implementation, we had to select the work provider and determine who is responsible for which category of data. We also have to set the data format of the master data, especially an SKU, which should be formatted as an SKU. This is a vast amount of work that involves all departments. Second, I would consider the supply chain. Each function is highly dependent on another function. We still have a 1C:Accounting system, but it's not a system at all. With Business One, you have too much spare functionality. It doesn't create value for the business, but it creates a higher workload for employees in terms of payer processes, administration, development, etc. It's not easy. Because of how mature the organization is, there is less readiness for change. I would not consider this satisfactory. 

After working with Business One for a while, we are becoming more effective. However, we still have some issues involving business experts and even having a category of users like business process owners. We use almost all of Business One's functionality except maybe CRM. We don't yet use CRM. Also, we don't use forecasting because forecasting is internal in B1 forecasting. It only has two algorithms, which might not be enough for us. But it would be great to have more advanced forecasting functionality.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Business One for maybe two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of Business One is pretty nice. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability has been pretty good so far. We haven't had any serious mishaps yet. If you satisfy the hardware requirements, it's completely okay.

How are customer service and support?

I have not had any direct contact with SAP technical support. Our support is provided by the partners. 

How was the initial setup?

We used a partner to set Business One up and we still use one. We are just customers. As far as maintenance goes, we have 10 people maintaining the solution counting only key users. There are about 10 more consultants and developers on top of that. We are still in the implementation phase. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We bought all licenses for the whole package in the very beginning, and now we're just paying for 404 licensed maintenance. It's a standard fee. Of course, we still pay partners for implementation.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We also considered Microsoft Dynamics 365 as well as 1C, which is a domestic solution. It's an accounting system. 1C is a little bit different. It's a four-on-two for forecasting. The 1C accounting system is widely used in Ukraine and Russia. If you compare Business One to, for example, S/4HANA, the price is much, much better. And the consultants are not so specialized if you compare it with S/4HANA, for example.

So in the case of S/4HANA, you should have a team of maybe at least five or six consultants dedicated to particular modules. In the case of Business One, you only need one or two — perhaps one is enough. It has competence in the whole chain, starting from procurement, production, and sales.

The functionality is much lighter than the big SAP, so you can have just one brain covering the whole process. It's easier to build and implement something as well as to improve it and communicate with different functions.

What other advice do I have?

I rate SAP Business One eight out of 10. If you are considering implementing this solution, I recommend you start with the master data. Pay as much attention as possible to the master data and establish a dedicated function.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
ArifKundi
Chief Executive Officer at Biz Tech Resources
Real User
It's relatively stable, but it still needs time to mature
Pros and Cons
  • "S4HANA is relatively stable."
  • "We found that the implementing partners themselves are struggling with S4HANA's features. It's not an exact translation of the older ECC, so SAP has taken a new route to do things with S4HANA. Maybe it's a good product, but the implementing partners also like to have an in-depth understanding of the full feature set the product offers."

What is our primary use case?

We are consultants who help supervise our customers' implementation projects. Two of our customers use S4HANA. The older ones are on the ECC platform.

What needs improvement?

We found that the implementing partners themselves are struggling with S4HANA's features. It's not an exact translation of the older ECC, so SAP has taken a new route to do things with S4HANA. Maybe it's a good product, but the implementing partners also like to have an in-depth understanding of the full feature set the product offers. There are areas where even the implementer has to go back to set, which takes time, so that's one of our major concerns.

The older implementations were cloud-based, but one is happening now in one of the larger utilities, which sells services to around 4 million consumers. That's an ongoing project that hasn't gone live yet. This will be the real test. In a year, we'll know, and we can give more feedback.

Another complaint I have is that the screen source is disjointed. When I say this, I'm speaking from a user experience perspective. I don't know the S4HANA database, so I can't say if it's good or bad. I am sure that S4HANA would have certain limitations compared to Oracle, which is the gold standard for databases. Maybe there are some challenges in the backend, but I don't dwell on those because I'm not a technician. But the graphical interface requires improvement, and its flow should be very smooth. 

Also, the Fiori app is very basic. They need to become richer because people tend to use Fiori to access the S4HANA application to save on license costs. Fiori gives you access because it's a web client, and they market it as an app. It's not really a full-fledged app, but the roadmap has to be cleared from SAP. And when its capabilities improve, it gives a native app experience when people use Fiori.

For how long have I used the solution?

I haven't been using S4HANA for long. It's been two years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

S4HANA is relatively stable, but it's not as stable as ECC was. ECC had a long time to mature, so S4HANA still has a few years to go before it can achieve the level of stability that we've come to expect from SAP.

How are customer service and support?

We've primarily relied on the local implementers for support, and there are challenges whenever they need to refer back to SAP's own technical support. It usually takes longer than expected in many cases. Sometimes they're pretty fast, but they're usually not, which is a serious concern.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We've worked with three of the biggest products in the ERP segment: S4HANA, Oracle EBS, and Microsoft Dynamics AXMicrosoft Dynamics is pretty straightforward. It's not as complex and offers a good user experience, whereas SAP through Fiori gives a certain level of user experience, but that's not as good as what Microsoft offers. But the rich line where you go through the desktop license — that user interface is still cumbersome. It's not as user-friendly I must say. On the other hand, Oracle is the middle of the two. I won't say that it's as good as Microsoft's user experience. However, while it is a bit more complex than Microsoft, it's not as complex as SAP. 

What other advice do I have?

I would currently rate S4HANA seven out of 10. We tell our clients that SAP's roadmap shows us that S4HANA will mature in time. It won't happen tomorrow. They have to make an informed decision whether they want to live with certain delays in getting certain fixes or go with another solution. SAP is such a big name, so half the time, people are willing to live with those delays with the expectation that things will get better in a year or two. SAP is a trusted name, and I'm sure they must be doing something now to get S4HANA up to speed. I hope they understand that.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Get our free report covering SAP, SAP, Oracle, and other competitors of Microsoft Dynamics AX. Updated: January 2022.
563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.