Company mission description

DONE Company (Dunn) is a young and rapidly developing team of specialists in the field of implementation and support of complex accounting systems ERP systems, as well as the provision of services for the implementation of advanced methods of financial management and budgeting .

The main criterion of our company is to support the financial and technical part of the company of our clients.

We try to provide comprehensive support, which starts from identifying problem (bottlenecks) in the client's business processes, determining the best ways to eliminate them, reorganizing the current business process (if possible, its standardization and automation ), start the control system.

This holistic approach ensures an excellent result - all our solutions have been put into commercial operation and bring real benefits to our Clients.

Company specifics

The main resource of our company is qualified consultants. A high level of qualifications is achieved through continuous training and knowledge control. Our team of consultants annually undergoes training and knowledge control at the Microsoft certification center, as well as regular training , trainings on HansaWorld systems . The relevance of knowledge in the field of financial and accounting is achieved by constant monitoring of legislation, as well as by solving real business problems of our clients.

The company guarantees the provision of quality services in the areas of support and implementation of ERP systems , as well as the implementation of advanced methods of financial management and budgeting.

Consultants are able to find and propose the most suitable solutions to a particular problem and at the same time assess the risks, determine the optimal algorithm of actions and quickly achieve the goal.

Many of our consultants have successfully worked in the real sector and know all the internal specifics of the organization of the company's work. This enables the team to avoid most problems (conflicts) before they even occur.

How we differ from competitors

Our specialists have sufficient experience in solving specific problems of leading companies in various sectors of the economy. This experience allows the team to find and propose the most optimal ways to solve the problems posed by the Client .

But not just solve a specific problem, but assess the risks and determine the optimal algorithm of actions. Administrative and organizational actions allow you to fix the problem quickly and guarantee a Client a quality result!

When optimization and automation of completely unrelated processes, with the right approach, gives a synergy effect and increases the productivity of processes at times.

Features of our approach to implementation and interaction with the client

We try to build our interaction with the Client on the principle of fairness.

Basically, complex automation projects are risky, since their result depends equally on both the organization conducting the automation and the Client's organization itself, the readiness and desire of the company's employees for changes, etc. When implementing the system, in this regard, there are many risks that can ultimately affect the success of the implementation.

Our approach allows us to evenly distribute risks and their consequences between the company and the client. This allows you to remove the so-called  "stoppers"  the implementation process, both on the part of the Client and on the part of the company implementing this or that product.

Currently, most companies use two diametrically opposite approaches in their work:

• The cost of the project is fixed.
• The cost of the work is determined based on the actual duration and hourly rate of the consultants' work.

In the first case, all project risks go to the company implementing the project, in the second - to the Client.

Such approaches in most cases lead to a conflict, which, as a rule, delays the deadline for the project. This unpleasant situation gives rise to a whole string of  "stoppers '' implementation. They appear due to the distrust of the parties to each other and the inability to come to an understanding. The project is doomed, unfortunately...

After analyzing the situation, the Done team (Dunn), found the right way to achieve the goal -  we combined these two approaches and distribute the risks between our company and the client, which in turn increases mutual trust and, as practice shows, simply does not allow most of the project  "stoppers ''.

Methodology

Statistical data on individual projects, reflecting the opinions of their participants and analyzed by Loginfo magazine, were grouped into the following groups:

• Insufficient attention of the enterprise management - 40%. Large-scale (and sometimes painful) changes that are usually associated with a project to implement complex automation systems cannot be implemented on their own. Very often, the client's management does not directly link the goals and results that it expects to receive as a result of implementation, with the transformations that need to be carried out in the company. Moreover, many decisions for such transformations require authority at the top management level. In other words, many managers from the very beginning of the project adhere to the position of what is implementation - it is, perhaps, a painstaking and expensive, but still in many ways a formal process, the course and results of which are determined by the knowledge and experience of specialists in the system, and not by the approaches of the enterprise management.
• Lack of clear goals - 17%. Obviously, the implementation project is carried out not for the sake of the process itself, but for the sake of achieving certain results. This almost obvious statement, oddly enough, is not always true on real projects. In a number of cases, before the start of work, both clearly formulated goals and criteria for achieving these goals were absent. The consequences are quite natural: the project and any of its stages can continue indefinitely, and the parties cannot determine whether what the project was started for has been achieved, whether its "mission'' can be considered. completed.
• Chaotic business processes - 14%. The organization and business processes of enterprises in the countries of the former USSR were very often formed "on the fly'', there is a lot of subjectiveness in them. Not all of these business processes will be supported by the standard functionality of the implemented system, including due to their complexity and disorder. By itself, automating such processes unchanged is much more difficult than if they were simpler and more consistent. If the task is formulated as the automation of all processes " as is '', then this can have a negative impact on both the cost and duration, and the risks of the project.
• Not Willingness to Change - 12%. Sometimes an enterprise is not ready for changes due to various reasons. For implementation, this can be an additional limitation. Unwillingness to change may consist, for example, in the absence of objective prerequisites for working in a " new way '': no ​​resources, no equipment, job responsibilities do not change, etc.
• Instability of legislation - 6%. Changes in legislation at any level can affect the results or the implementation process, as they are a factor of instability. In some cases, the negative impact of any such changes was amplified due to numerous modifications to the project of the basic functionality in the part where such changes (and, therefore, updates to the base product) are most likely.
• Corruption - 5%. The acquisition of the system is not for the purpose of real satisfaction of the needs of the enterprise, but because of the presence of a certain kind of " interests '' for the customer's employees, as a rule, means that the project will be unsuccessful and the client will not be satisfied.
• Low qualification of personnel at the enterprise - 4%. Despite the fact that in many enterprises this problem exists to one degree or another, its " contribution '' in the failure of projects, according to the respondents, is not so high. Perhaps this is due to the fact that raising the level of qualifications of personnel - quite a solvable task, if the management of the enterprise strives for this.
• Insufficient funding - 2%. In some cases, project budgets deliberately do not correspond to the amount of work that must be completed during the project. In this case, we can say that the project objectively lacks funding.

The same participants as in the previous survey named a number of factors contributing to the success of the project:

• Participation of the enterprise management in the project - 20%. The project for the implementation of an integrated automation system - this is a major transformation in the enterprise. Certain characteristics of the implemented system, specific technologies, etc. - only individual components of the enterprise management system. Ultimately, the effectiveness of management depends on how well the management process is built in the complex, how well all its components interact. Only the management of the enterprise can do this. That is why the active participation of the management in the project is simply necessary in order to achieve the expected results of implementation.
• Availability and adherence to the implementation plan - 19%. Obviously, the implementation project is carried out not for the sake of the process itself, but for the sake of achieving certain results. This almost obvious statement, oddly enough, is not always true on real projects. In a number of cases, before the start of work, both clearly formulated goals and criteria for achieving these goals were absent. The consequences are quite natural: the project and any of its stages can continue indefinitely, and the parties cannot determine whether what the project was started for has been achieved, whether its " mission '' can be considered. completed.
• Clear objectives and clear requirements - 16%. The organization and business processes of enterprises in the countries of the former USSR were very often formed " on the fly '', there is a lot of subjectiveness in them. Not all of these business processes will be supported by the standard functionality of the implemented system, including due to their complexity and disorder. By itself, automating such processes unchanged is much more difficult than if they were simpler and more consistent. If the task is formulated as the automation of all processes " as is '', then this can have a negative impact on both the cost and duration, and the risks of the project.
• Participation of the client's specialists - 16%. Sometimes an enterprise is not ready for changes due to various reasons. For implementation, this can be an additional limitation. Unwillingness to change may consist, for example, in the absence of objective prerequisites for working in a " new way '': no ​​resources, no equipment, job responsibilities do not change, etc.
• Quality of the system and team of consultants - 11%. Changes in legislation at any level can affect the results or the implementation process, as they are a factor of instability. In some cases, the negative impact of any such changes was amplified due to numerous modifications to the project of the basic functionality in the part where such changes (and, therefore, updates to the base product) are most likely.
• Business process reengineering before implementation - 8%. The acquisition of the system is not for the purpose of real satisfaction of the needs of the enterprise, but because of the presence of a certain kind of " interests '' for the customer's employees, as a rule, means that the project will be unsuccessful and the client will not be satisfied.
• The client has a strategy - 8%. Despite the fact that in many enterprises this problem exists to one degree or another, its " contribution '' in the failure of projects, according to the respondents, is not so high. Perhaps this is due to the fact that raising the level of qualifications of personnel - quite a solvable task, if the management of the enterprise strives for this.
• The client has a strategy - 8%. Despite the fact that in many enterprises this problem exists to one degree or another, its " contribution '' in the failure of projects, according to the respondents, is not so high. Perhaps this is due to the fact that raising the level of qualifications of personnel - quite a solvable task, if the management of the enterprise strives for this.
• Getting quick and effective return from the project - 2%. In some cases, project budgets deliberately do not correspond to the amount of work that must be completed during the project. In this case, we can say that the project objectively lacks funding.