Client: “We did only a fair job of training before go-live. Since then, we have had very little budget for ongoing training. Our users are struggling and often use work-arounds when they come to difficult functions. We then have a lot of reconciliation. Our users need more and better training.”
Me (feigning ignorance): Why aren’t they getting it?
Client: “We have no budget and no one has the authority to raise one.”
The bottom line is an organizational lack of respect for the subject of end user competency. The “authorities” are more concerned with the engine than its drivers (buying more software, improving the existing software, investing in middleware, changing the oil, cleaning the carburetor…). They want to hear that engine hum but are too often oblivious as to where it will take them and how.
I am reminded of conversations that crop up during implementations in which clients foretell the consequences of a late or botched go-live:
Distribution: “Trucks won’t go out!”
Finance: “We won’t be able to invoice!”
CEO: “We won’t get our reports!”
My personal favorite was a doctor who refused to give up his clipboard in favor of a light pen: “Patients will die!”
Then, by hook or by crook, the client goes live with SAP. Thereafter, thanks to the end users who are fulfilling the transactions, trucks go out, invoices are issued, and reports are generated. (Whether or not patients die is not a matter of a ballpoint pen or a light pen.)
My point here is that management does not recognize that if their end user/drivers are not properly supported, trucks will not go out, invoices will not be issued, and reports will not be generated.
So how do you get that message to management? Provide evidence.
The input of your support and end user “crowd” is more convincing than managerial opinion. That is why I endorse a collective assessment. So it isn’t one training manager trying to convince one director. With a collective assessment, it is 25, 40 or more people reporting on the state of affairs.
Two weeks ago, in the course of my first SAP-sponsored webinar “End Users at the Wheel”, we offered at no cost our new SAP End User Maturity Assessment, a web-based tool powered by Zieta Technologies. A number of firms have taken us up on this offer (which still stands, by the way).
Here are two early results:
The “Best of Times” firm is on a positive path toward the Expert Plane. This firm first went live in 2000 and has 4,500 end users around the world. The key to their success is a high level of ownership (authority, budget, respect) which has led to the maintenance of an environment that sufficient supports end user expertise. The global head of training tells me that her “power user” organization has been precisely what has troubled her and now she has confirmation, from 41 respondents around the world, that it is a priority. Evidence.
For the “Other Times” firm, the head of training is a recent hire into a company that went lived in November of 2008, pretty much the worst possible time. Shortly thereafter, the firm had to shed staff and end user training was limited to self-help for the most part. The head of training is using these results (from 25 respondents) to illustrate the depth and reach of the firm’s training issues. Evidence.
Both firms will address their most pressing weaknesses and re-assess, with the same respondent group, in two or three months.
The assessment is based upon a maturity model that proscribes the best practices for three key areas (Ownership, Environment, and Expertise) across five levels of maturity.
We test a client's adherence to 8 best practices per level on a scale of 1 to 10 and consider 7.5 an acceptable result.
What follows are some examples of the “evidence” produced in the assessment.
This client did well for level 1 (Planning) but is challenged in level 2 (Readiness) in terms of end user understanding of roles and goals and a disconnect between super users and business process owners.
By the time we get to level 5 (Expert Plane), we find that insufficient continuous is apparent and super user continuity is at risk:
In previous levels, we also had poor results relative to the super user program. These findings are doubly confirmed in the summary roadmap. Here, we have isolated the poorest results. Note that Par Result is the % of par (7.5) attained:
While assessment results do not provide absolute and definitive direction for your SAP end user support environment, they do provide credible evidence of your current state while pinpointing the most burning issues.
To download an overview of this assessment program and/or to register for free one-time usage, follow this link: