business case_erp

8/10/2019 Business Case_ERP

1/26


2/26

Business Case on ERP Implementation

ERP implementation in Sun Energy 1

Contents

1. Introduction2

1.1Project Name.2

1.2Project Team....2

1.3Project Description...22. Background.....3

2.1The industry...3

2.2The Current Scenario...3

2.3Problem Definition.3

2.4Need for ERP Implementation..4

3. Measurable Organizational Value (MOV). 6

3.1Financial and Strategic Benefits... 6

3.2Operational Benefits....7

3.3Customer benefits.. 7

3.4Quantifying MOV.... 73.5Framework for Evaluating Implementation... 8

4. Analysis of Alternatives....11

4.1Total Cost of Ownership... 11

4.2Total benefits of ownership.....11

4.3Financial Analysis Used..12

4.4SAP HANA SAP BI reporting suite ....12

4.4.1 Economic Analysis..12

4.4.2 Cash Flow Summary Analysis...... 13

4.4.3 Total Cost of Ownership....14

4.4.4 Total Benefits of Ownership... 164.5Comparison with Other Alternatives...16

4.5.1 Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise 8.8 and 8.9..... 16

4.5.2 Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012... 17

4.5.3 Comparison of Market Shares...... 20

4.5.4 Comparison of Various ERP Packages... 20

5. Risk involved in ERP Implementation... 22

6. Recommendation...23

7. References...26


3/26



1. Introduction

1.1 Project Name: Scope of ERP implementation in SUN Energy Ltd.

1.2 Project Team: The team consists of basically

a. Steering committee:The members of this particular committee include project sponsor& the project manager.

b. Consultants

c. Technical members/ Software Programmers

d. Change managers and security persons

e. Operations team which include people like inventory manager

f. Financial Consultant

1.3 Project Description:The project is all about scope of implementing ERP package in SUNEnergy Ltd., an Australia based integrated energy company, focused on power

generation, gas production and energy retailing. The project covers various aspects like

integrating the various functions across the organization in to a single system that can

serve all the purpose of the functions specific needs.


4/26



2. Background

2.1 The Industry:

SUN Energy Limited (SUN) is one of Australia's largest integrated energy companies,

focused on power generation, gas production and energy retailing. It is also one of thelargest private owners, operators and developers of renewable generation assets in

Australia. The company is engaged in the purchase and sale of gas and electricity. It is

also engaged in the construction and operation of power generation and energy

processing infrastructure; and development of natural gas production facilities. The

company is headquartered in North Sydney, with offices and operating sites around

Australia.

2.2 The Current Scenario:

The Australian energy industry is barely recognizable from that which operated in the

1990s. Regulatory barriers to interstate trade have been removed. There are regimes for

third party access to the services of energy infrastructure. The old public monopolies have

been split up. Where a single government-owned business used to generate, transport

and sell electricity, there are now competing generators and retailers. Specialist

businesses run the transmission (long distance) and distribution (local area) networks that

transport electricity to customers.

The states of Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland have privatized

some or all of their electricity supply. The gas industry has undergone similar restructuring

and is mostly now in private hands. These changes have allowed competitive energy

markets with a more national focus to develop.

The Electricity Industry in Australia embarked on a major change primarily due to the

rollout of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) followed by implementation of the

National Smart Metering Standards. This resulted in the rollout of the smart meters

replacing the existing basic meters in the state of Victoria.

2.3 Problem definition:

SUN is a large energy company in Australia wants to implement the SAP IS-U and CRM

system to support the business processes and utility services of the company. However,

the company is worried about the inadequate User Acceptance Testing (UAT) beingperformed on the changes that are continuously being rolled out. This is in part due to the

limited bandwidth of the companys Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), and also because of

the lack of a standard testing process. Documentation is insufficient and defect

management and reuse of test assets is weak.


5/26



SUN, like most utility companies has a high dependency on quality and timely information

to be delivered, distributed and processed by its key information systems. The operational

performance, availability and integrity of these information systems are vital in ensuring

continued commercial viability of SUN. With all the opportunities and benefits Smart Grids

and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) provides, it also comes at a significant cost

and introduces substantial risk as well; the most critical of these risks is the impact ofmanaging large data volume. It is important to note that over 95% of SUN s customer

base had basic meters i.e. meters that are manually read or estimated every quarter; with

AMI, these customer meters will be automatically read every 30 minutes and the meter

reads transmitted daily. This will result to 17,520 reads per year and 4,400 times more

data to store and process.

Some of the problems the organization is facing currently include:

a. No proper integration between the different functional units.

b. Lack of proper asset management, book closures, accounts payable and receivable.

c. Issue regarding proper activity based costing and product costing.

d. Efficient management of human resources which includes payroll, training, leaves,

career management etc.

e. Regarding Planning, execution, inspection and certificates.

f. Master scheduling, capacity planning etc.

g. Better data handling

So the organization is looking for a better enterprise application which will cater the

demand of the organization and give a good ROI.

2.4 The need of ERP implementation:

An independent assurance model for SUN needs to be implemented, establishing a

dedicated team that would be responsible for the overall quality certification of all changes

rolled out into production. The teams initial responsibilities would begin with providing

UAT, and later evolve to support a shared services function across the SUN business

units, addressing the testing needs of the various units and covering both SAP and non-

SAP applications.

The main highlights of the solution include:

Phase-wise roll-out of the initial pilot for RFS in the SAP CRM and SAP IS-Utilities

modules, followed by the extension to other portfolios.

Coverage of the following testing responsibilities

Test preparation - understanding requirements, preparing test scenarios and test

cases, all under collaboration with SUN business users


6/26


7/26



It helps in the planning for optimizing and scheduling of production.

It not only provides a user-friendly environment can be tailored to the needs of companies

both large and small, but also progressively expanded, both in the ` horizontal` sense to

embrace additional organizational functions, as well as `vertically to integrate other stages

of the production process.

ERP enables accountability, accuracy, and transparency without breaking the existing workflow.

In addition, other time-series data needs to be captured so the processing impact will be much

higher than just the customer consumption readings. It is imperative that a scalable and

sustainable IT environment be provided to support AGLs business operations.


8/26



3. Measurable Organization Value (MOV)

3.1 Financial and Strategic Benefits:

By implementing an ERP application, the organization wants to integrate all functionsacross the organization in to a single system that can serve all the purpose of the

functions specific needs. Now breaking down the benefits of implementing an ERP

package will give the following benefits:

Financial and Strategic Benefits:

High payback on investment.

Improved adaptability to market changes.

Reduction in operating cost and thereby giving Increased Profits

Achievement of company-wide consistency of information

Gain greater visibility into sales order and fulfillment data

Reduced time required for consolidation of accounts considerably

Enhanced order fulfillment by accelerating the sales order process

Standardized business processes, reports, and data for increased efficiency and

control

Increased business transparency to control costs and support operational decisions

Compliance with international financial reporting standards

Transformation of the terms of competition within the market

Improved data accuracy and consistency via real-time monitoring for informed

decisions.

Improved spend management

Improved employee productivity significantly

Establish greater operational efficiency via integrated processes

Improved inventory management and also helps in reducing material wastage

Improved asset tracking to streamline maintenance planning and tax filing.

Gain better supply chain visibility and control to support negotiations and service

Streamlined and standardized business processes transaction


9/26



3.2 Operational Benefits

Improved spend management

Improve employee productivity significantly

Established greater operational efficiency via integrated processes

Improved inventory management and also helps in reducing material wastage

Improved asset tracking to streamline maintenance planning and tax filing.

Gained better supply chain visibility and control to support negotiations and service

Streamlined and standardized business processes

3.3 Customer Benefits

Transaction process will become easier for the customer

Proper visibility and transparency

Improved ability to meet customer commitments

3.4 QuantifyingMOV

In order to calculate whether the project is successful or not it was very essential to find

out a quantified targets which will be achieved with the help of this project .So in this case

we have calculated the measurable organizational value for a period of 5 years and have

formulated certain targets which the project is supposed to meet at the end of 1year to

become a successful project. They are:

1) The implementation of the ERP package across the organization should give a rapid

pay back, in 20 months.

2) The implementation should also provide a very good return on investment based on

substantial cost savings and business value creation as compared to continuing with the

legacy systems.

3) In addition to the compelling economic benefits, the implementation is viewed asstrategic, helping companies increase competitiveness, improve business agility and

predict IT costs more accurately.

Now to make things in a more systematic manner we have summarized the MOV in a

tabular format so that it can be verified at the end of the stipulated time period.


10/26



Objective Change factor Time

Rapid payback time 20 months

Operating cost Reduction by 10% 1 year

Delay in Financial close cycle Reduction by 1% 1 year

Higher resource utilization Increase by 5% 1 year

Higher productivity of finance, HR, and operations FTEs Increase by 10 % 1 year

Higher accuracy of load forecast data Increase by 5% 1year

Reduced monthly billing cycle time Reduction by 5% 1year

Outbound-shipping processing time Reduction by 5% 1year

Order-turnaround time Reduction by 1 % 1year

3.5 Framework for Evaluating Implementation

An intuitive framework for evaluating the cost savings, business value and strategic

benefits for implementation was developed for this case. This framework includes four

key elements:

1. Implementation cost analysis

2. Post-implementation cost savings analysis

3. Post-implementation business value improvement analysis

4. Post-implementation strategic benefit analysis

Framework Cost and Benefit Drivers

Now in order to carry out the above mentioned analysis it was very essential that we need to

have some parameters for the analysis. The below mentioned table provides a list of the cost,

cost savings, business value and strategic drivers included in this implementation business case

framework and economic analysis.

Implementation

Cost Line Items

Cost Savings Line

Items

Business Value Line

Items

Strategic Benefit

Line Items

Planning costs Operating cost Availability relatedvalue improvement

Competitiveness

InternalImplementation

Parts inventory Enhanced decisionmaking

High Efficiency


11/26



Implementation (3rd

party)

Days in inventory Process or cycle time

savings/ value (order

entry)

Overall business

agility / time to

market

Training Financial close cycle Predictability of costs

Hardware costs Days sales outstanding Access to IT resources

OS licensing costs Higher resourceutilization IT standardization / ITbest practice approach

OS support fees Higher productivity offinance, HR, and

operations FTEs

Reduction in risk

DB licensing costs Higher accuracy ofsales forecast data

Travel Reduced monthly

billing cycle

Now based on the cost, cost savings and business value drivers in the preceding table, a

comprehensive, comparative cost and benefit model to quantify the implementation return on

investment (ROI) over a five-year analysis horizon was developed . The costs and benefits

were based on the actual and expected costs and benefits validated in the primary and

secondary research phases of the project. A discounted cash flow analysis was employed to

account for the relative timing of the costs and benefits spanning the five years. The cost

savings and benefits in the first year were factored down to account for the length of the

implementation deployment and were factored up in years two through five to account for

general growth in the ERP environment.


12/26



4. Analysis of Alternatives

Now in order to find out which ERP package can best suit the need and which can basicallymeet the quantified targets, a comparative study between various ERP packages have beencarried out in this case.

It includes

1) SAP HANA SAP BI reporting suite

2) Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise 8.8 and 8.9 and Enterprise One 8.11

3) Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012

4.1Total cost of Ownership

For quantifying the cost related with the project following factors are taken in to

consideration for calculating the total cost of ownership

The various costs that incurs during an implementation includes:

Planning cost:It is the cost associated with planning prior to implementation.

Implementation (Internal): Internal Labor for the implementation activities including

installation, configuration and testing

Implementation (3rd party): 3rd party labor for the implementation activities

including installation .configuration and testing

Training:The training investment for the new package

Hardware cost:Cost for the hardwares associated with new implementation

OS Licensing cost:Server Licensing cost and the user accounts costs

New Server OS support fees:On-going server OS Support Cost (annual )

Database licensing cost:Licensing cost for the new database associated with ERP

Travel:Travel cost associated with implementation

Admin/ misc:Admin / misc cost associated with migration

4.2Total Benefits of ownership

These are the savings or the benefits which company will receive because of implementing

ERP across the organization. These benefits are classified into:

1) Cost saving Line items

2) Implementation Value Drivers

3) Strategic Implementation Drivers


13/26



Total Benefits of Ownership

Cost Savings Line Items Business Value Line Items Strategic Benefit LineItems

Operating cost Availability related value

improvement

Competitiveness

Parts inventory Enhanced decision making High Efficiency

Days in inventory Process or cycle time savings/value (order entry,

Overall business agility /time to market

Financial close cycle Predictability of costsDays sales outstanding Access to IT resourcesHigher resource utilization IT standardization / IT best

practice approachHigher productivity of finance, HR,and operations FTEs

Reduction in risk

Higher accuracy of sales forecastdataReduced monthly billing cycle timeImproved profit-after-tax (PAT)marginOrder-turnaround time

4.3 Financial Analysis Used

Here we are using the Return on Investment Method to calculate the ROI and from this we

calculate the payback period also

4.4 SAPHANA SAP BI reporting suite

4.4.1 Economic Analysis

The following analysis provides a summary of the return on investment and expectedbreakeven based on implementation cost/benefit analysis over five years. The results

are based on the net present value (NPV) of the cost and benefit cash flows over the

five year period.

Based on an average five-year implementation cost of $675K, with an average

implementation length of six months from initial planning to production deployment,

the company cited substantial cost savings and business value drivers, yielding a total


14/26



five-year benefit of $2.65M. This results in a five-year Return on Investment (ROI) of

293% and a payback of 15 months from the completion of the migration.

Fig 1

Business Case Summary

Implementation(Investment) $675,407

Cost Savings (NPV* of Cash Flows) $1,561,618

Business Value (NPV* of Cash Flows) $1,092,458

Five Year Benefits (NPV*) $2,654,076

Net Benefit (Return Less Investment) $1,978,669

Return On Investment 293%

Estimated Payback (Months) 15

*Discount rate for NPV of cash flows = 10%

4.4.2 Cash Flow Summary Analysis

The figure below illustrates the annual analysis of the implementation cost

(investment), cost savings and business value for the initial year through year five.

Also illustrated are the cumulative costs/investment and the cumulative economic

benefits. The cumulative cost lines in the graphic illustrate the payback in the first

quarter of the second year after the implementation of SAP


15/26



Fig 2

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Implementation Cost

(Investment) $675,407 $18,333 $18,333 $18,333 $18,333

Cost Savings $204,633 $429,730 $451,217 $545,444 $497,466

Business Value $147,787 $310,353 $325,871 $342,165 $359,273

Cost Savings + Business

Value $352,421 $740,084 $777,088 $887,609 $856,739

Cumulative Investment $675,407 $693,740 $712,074 $730,407 $748,740

Cumulative Benefit $352,421 $1,092,504 $1,869,592

$2,757,20

1

$3,613,94

0

4.4.3 Total Cost of ownership

The various factors influencing cost of ownership are shown in the figure below


16/26



Fig 3

A few key elements of analysis from the implementation cost research are listed below:

The labor costs for the implementation planning and implementation represent the

majority of the cost of the migration, 56% of the total five-year cost. The primary reason

for the substantial amount of cost is that the implementation includes the buying of theSAP application itself as well as the underlying ERP database implementation.

Software support fees are the next major cost element, primarily because this is a

recurring annual cost of approximately $18K that amounts to about $92K over the five-

year period.

New hardware purchase represents 6% of the total five-year cost, with a cost of $46K.

Server OS Licensing Costs represent only 3% of the total five-year cost, with a cost of

$24K.

4.4.4Total Benefits of Ownership

Now as we saw in the previous section the various costs associated with the

implementation here in this section we will see what all are the savings or the benefits

which we will receive because of implementing SAP across the organization.


17/26



These benefits are classified into

1) Cost Saving Line items

2) Implementation Value Drivers

3) Strategic Implementation Drivers

4) Cost saving Line items

These benefits are summarized in the form of a table which is shown below.

Saving Line Items % Reduction Savings

Operating Cost 14% $ 301,873

Parts inventory 7% $ 142,393

Days in inventory 8% $ 175,897

Financial close cycle 1% $ 25,128

Days sales outstanding 7% $ 150,769

Higher resource utilization 8% $ 180,923

Higher productivity of finance, HR, and operations FTEs 12% $ 251,282

Higher accuracy of sales forecast data 5% $ 103,193

Improved profit-after-tax (PAT) margin 7% $ 144,068

Reduced monthly billing cycle time 11% $ 238,717

Outbound-shipping processing time 6% $ 117,265

Order-turnaround time 2% $ 36,855

4.5Comparison with other Alternatives

4.5.1Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise 8.8 and 8.9

People Soft is another leading ERP vendor. And basically these days it is alwaysbetween SAP and People Soft the comparative study happens .So as a part of the

business case we thought of discussing the various costs we have discussed for SAP

implementation. As shown below we can see that when we use People Soft

application the payback period rises to about 21 months.


18/26






Business Value (NPV* of Cash Flows) $873,966





Discount rate for NPV of cash flows = 10%

4.5.2 Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012

Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012 is a comprehensive Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)

solution for organizations that empowers people to work effectively, manage change, and

compete globally. It makes it easy to operate across locations and countries by

standardizing processes, providing visibility across your organization, and helping to

simplify compliance.

As shown below we can see that in the case of Microsoft Dynamics the payback period

rises to 22 months




Business Value (NPV* of Cash Flows) $1,092,458





Discount rate for NPV of cash flows = 10%

Figure 4 presents the relative advantage of implementation of SAP when compared with People

Soft and Microsoft. Based on our research and analysis:

Implementation of SAP offers a better return on investment and a shorter payback

period than a implementation of People Soft and Microsoft dynamics , an average of


19/26



110% better ROI and a six month shorter payback, respectively.

The five-year cost for a implementation of People Soft is just slightly less (1%) than a

implementation of SAP. Despite the server operating system and user access licensing

costs for SAP, People Soft ongoing subscription support costs are much higher in yearstwo through five. And in the case with Microsoft the implementation cost itself is larger.

Implementation of SAP has the potential to improve cost savings by 53% over a

implementation of People Soft. The key areas where implementation of SAP provides

cost savings advantages over People Soft are Administration Labor (OS and DBMS),

Database Software Support/Maintenance and Platform Leverage. Implementation of

People Soft does not offer the opportunity for savings from implementation of the

underlying existing database and does not offer a significant savings in OS

administration staffing cost because an implementation to People Soft does not presenta significant staffing skill-level transition.

Implementation of SAP also provides potential advantages for business value

generation. Based on our analysis, a implementation of SAP can improve business

value by 25% vis--vis implementation of People Soft over five years.


20/26



4.5.3Comparison of Market Shares

Fig 5

4.5.4Comparison of Various ERP Packages

ERP Packages*

Microsoft Net

Dynamics

Oracle People soft SAP HANA

Implementation Ease Moderate Extremely good Good

Application installation wizard Good Good Extremely good

Advanced configuration Good Good Extremely good

Process modeler Good Good Extremely good

Advanced data loading and

moving

Average Good Extremely good

Process-oriented integration Average Good Extremely goodPre-packaged integration

between vendor applicationsGood Extremely good Extremely good

Built-in web services integrations Good Good Good

Task-oriented navigation Average Good Extremely good

Navigation configurability Good Good Good

28%

20%

17%

10%

7%

18%

SAP

Oracle

Microsoft

Epicor

Infor

Others


21/26



Task-oriented dashboards Average Good Extremely good

Web client Average Good Good

Integrated office productivity Good Good Extremely good

Diagnostic and technical support Good Good Extremely good

Remote and online support Average Good Good

Performance diagnostics and

tuning

Good Extremely good Good

Patch management Average Good Good

Automated upgrade process and

toolsetsGood Extremely good Good

User-centric performance testing Average Extremely good Good

Data archiving. Extremely good Good

*Ratings in the order of Extremely Good, Good, Average, Moderate, Bad, Extremely Poor .Ratings

assigned by giving a mark between 10-0. The results derived from the survey conducted between 100

companies which have implemented these ERP Solutions. Source: ERP wire


22/26



5. Risks involved in ERP Implementation

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system implementation is typically a massive undertaking

for an enterprise. Due to the magnitude of an ERP implementation and the frequency

of ERP failures, companies have greater incentives to proactively identify and mitigate the

various risks associated with the implementation process.

ERP systems are designed to integrate internal and external information that enhances the flow

of communication and decision-making across an enterprise, and focuses on business

processes and functions. As a result of the vast nature of the ERP implementation process, the

related risks are commensurate with the scale of the ERP system project. Risks range from

broad to narrow and pervasively affect the outcome of business processes after the go -live

date when the ERP system is fully operational and available to end users (employees, lowerlevel managers, etc.).

The categories of risks involved are:

Organizational

Project

Technology

Resource

The following table summarizes the various mapped key risks under each category:

No. Category Key Risk

1 Organizational

Lack of Top Management commitment and support.

Insufficient raining of end-users.

Failure to redesign business process.

Underestimation of organizational structure and

business processes.

2 Project

Unclear goals and objectives.

Poor conflict management.

Poor of changes and risks management.

Poor project management.

Ineffective communications.


23/26



Poor motivation and project team work.

Lack of proper project planning and controlling.

Ineffective project cost and time management.

Lack of metrics for evaluating project efficiency and

benefits.

Lack of metrics for evaluating project work by

phases.

3 Technology

Lack of vendor support and partnership.

Poor integration of the infrastructure systems.

The design and implementation of system disrupts

the business operations.

Insufficient automation.

Underestimation of system technical architecture.

Poor software troubleshooting.

Data loses.

Insufficient testing phase.

4

Resource

(time, finance, human)

Limitation in resources.

Lack of business and technical knowledge.

Lack of competence of ERPs consultants.

Management Perspectives:

A common pitfall of management is to assume that ERP is solely an IT project. However,

post ERP implementation is pervasive such that most business processes are, at a minimum,

affected by the system and at times are completely removed or integrated. Change

management is broader than ERP systems, although change management managers should

work alongside ERP project managers to ensure an effective transition post ERP go-live. The

change management processspecifically for ERP implementationshould begin early on

within the ERP implementation process. The result of initiating change management early is

awareness created across the enterprise of the ERP project itself, and the impact and benefits

of the change on end users, business processes, and technology. Additionally, later in the

projects life cycle, change management creates more specific awareness of the

impact ERP has on job design and organizational structure.


24/26



Therefore, because of the vastness and pervasiveness of implementing an ERP system

(especially for first-time implementation) the risk are equally as prevalent in breadth and scale.

Consequently, there are many mistakes that companies make when not adequately focusing

efforts on both post and prior period implementation.

6. Recommendations

As SUN needs to integrate a large number of functional units to single application in which each

unit can speak to other and also reduces the cost, the company should go for ERP

implementation and that too with SAP. As discussed in the business case the advantages of

SAP over the other two ERP packages which are being compared here are numerous. The

return on investment for SAP implementation is better than the other two packages and also

SAP is the market leader in the ERP and there have so many testimonials for the increased

efficiency and customer satisfaction for SAP.

According to a survey done, here is a result which shows the graph that shows the planned and

the actual implementation time for SAP, Oracle and Microsoft Dynamics:

Fig 5


25/26



Also the table below describes how implementing SAP HANA is the best suited option for SUN

energy:

SAP Oracle Microsoft Others

Market Share 35% 28% 14% 23%

Average ERP Solution

Satisfaction and Benefits

Realization75% 60% 58% 60%

Average Cost to maintain

and implement the ERP

Tool

$16M $12M $3M $3.5M

Average implementation

Time Duration

15 months 13 months 12 months 11 months

Business Risk Factor 50% 56% 58% 62%

(***The above data is collected from various providers like Panorama, SAP and oracle sites)

The data above clearly shows that the cost involved in implementing SAP HANA is high yet the

risk factor involved is the lowest hence SAP HANA is the recommended ERP system.

As the analysis in the paper has demonstrated, the cost savings and the value generated from

SAP implementation are compelling in absolute terms as well as relative to People Soft and

Oracle. In addition to the economic and strategic reasons for SAP, the issue of risk mitigation is

also of importance. Oracles imminent acquisition of Sun Microsystems, heading towards a

potentially lengthy dispute with the European commission, presents many uncertainties as to

the sun products (here the ERP platform for Oracle is sun based) and creates unnecessary

risks. Taking all these points in to consideration and the other costs we strongly recommend

SAP to be implemented.


26/26


7. References

http://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-

delays-and-other-r#.VAsQbsKSz4Y

http://imtcj.ac.in/ITBI%2010%20Proceedings/Book/28.pdf

www.agl.com.au

http://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Aw

ard_Excellence_2012.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGL_Energy

http://www.aer.gov.au/industry-information

http://scn.sap.com/community/hana-in-memory/use-cases/blog/2014/05

http://sapignite.com/erp-fight-club-sap-vs-oracle-vs-microsoft-dynamics/
http://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://imtcj.ac.in/ITBI%2010%20Proceedings/Book/28.pdfhttp://imtcj.ac.in/ITBI%2010%20Proceedings/Book/28.pdfhttp://www.agl.com.au/http://www.agl.com.au/http://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGL_Energyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGL_Energyhttp://www.aer.gov.au/industry-informationhttp://www.aer.gov.au/industry-informationhttp://scn.sap.com/community/hana-in-memory/use-cases/blog/2014/05http://scn.sap.com/community/hana-in-memory/use-cases/blog/2014/05http://sapignite.com/erp-fight-club-sap-vs-oracle-vs-microsoft-dynamics/http://sapignite.com/erp-fight-club-sap-vs-oracle-vs-microsoft-dynamics/http://sapignite.com/erp-fight-club-sap-vs-oracle-vs-microsoft-dynamics/http://scn.sap.com/community/hana-in-memory/use-cases/blog/2014/05http://www.aer.gov.au/industry-informationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGL_Energyhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.tcs.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/TCS_AGL_SAP_Customer_Award_Excellence_2012.aspxhttp://www.agl.com.au/http://imtcj.ac.in/ITBI%2010%20Proceedings/Book/28.pdfhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Yhttp://erm.ncsu.edu/library/article/erp-implementation-risk-managing-sources-of-project-delays-and-other-r%23.VAsQbsKSz4Y

business case_erp

Documents