When reviewing multiple proposals for an ERP implementation project, it’s tempting to skip straight to the bottom line: the price. And very often, the reaction is immediate. One offer looks clear, fast, almost too good to be true. The other one takes longer, costs more, and seems a bit more complex. So naturally, the question arises: 

 

Why should I pay more? 

 

It’s a fair question. Especially in a market where many ERP integrators promote rapid (Express) methodologies, ready-to-use, standardized implementations at low cost. And let’s be honest: we’ve done it too. We know how it works. And we also know how easily things can go wrong… quietly.

 

According to this report, 47% of ERP projects go over budget, and 9.3% turn into a complete budget disaster, with costs spiraling well beyond what was initially planned

 

That’s precisely why we chose a different path. An approach that is more rigorous, more demanding, but also more sustainable, and above all, clearer and better guided: the traditional method, built around your real business needs, not a prepackaged model, and made simple through personalized support every step of the way. 

 

Is it longer? Yes. 
Is it more expensive? Also. 
But does it work better? Absolutely. 

Fast, but for whom?

Fast isn’t always far. 

 

There’s definitely a real market for rapid ERP implementations. They meet a clear demand, companies that want to go straight to the point, without too much complexity. This is often the case for companies with strong internal IT expertise or a good command of ERP concepts, enabling them to manage the project relatively autonomously.

 

These rapid methodologies rely on preconfigured setups, standardized templates, preformatted Excel data migrations, and lighter support. 

 

They have clear advantages: they cost less, are faster, and require fewer internal resources. And for some types of businesses, that can work, for a while. 

 

But here’s the thing: with an ERP, much like with clothing, tailored always fits better than off-the-shelf. And what might seem good enough today often won’t be tomorrow. 

 

This type of approach generally isn’t suitable for:

• companies with complex or non-standard processes.
• companies planning for rapid growth.
• organizations requiring specific integrations, advanced automation, or strong change management.
• companies looking for real support to engage their teams and ensure long-term success.

And then there’s another reality we see all too often: Companies that thought they were making the right choice by going with the rapid approach… And a few months later, they find themselves having to start all over again.

Express vs Traditional: two approaches, two worlds apart

When it comes to ERP implementation methods, it all comes down to choices… and consequences.

 

On one hand, there’s a rapid methodology, designed to go straight to the point, with minimal involvement from the provider, but which shifts a large part of the workload onto the client.

 

On the other hand, there’s a traditional approach, built around your reality, your processes, and your long-term goals.

 

Still hesitating? Here’s what it looks like, phase by phase.

 

Project phase		Express Method	Traditional Method
Analysis	➔	The integrator presents a standard, often generic process. It’s up to you to identify what doesn’t fit your reality.	Our experts take the time to understand your organization, your business processes, your pain points, and your goals. The analysis is proactive, not passive.
Configuration	➔	The environment is pre-configured. You receive a form or file to complete any missing information.	Configuration is co-built with your teams. You receive training along the way, allowing for better knowledge transfer and stronger ownership of the system.
Data migration	➔	Excel templates are provided. You fill them in yourself, with occasional assistance. Very little cross-checking is performed.	We build migration packages together, adapted to your data and business realities. We provide active support during extraction, validation, and data loading.
Training	➔	Training relies mainly on guides and self-learning. Occasional demonstrations needed.	Hands-on training sessions that are interactive and tailored to your roles and environment. Real business cases are used as learning examples.
Unit testing	➔	You are given standard test scenarios. One or two are done with you, and then you test alone. The result: many blind spots at go-live.	We build your own test scenarios with you. You are supported at every stage, with structured follow-up and full validation of critical business cases.
Security & roles	➔	A list of standard roles is provided in a file. You assign access rights and hope for the best.	A security strategy is defined with you. You are trained on access and profile management, with continuous support until go-live.
Integration testing	➔	Your teams perform integration tests alone. A support session may be scheduled, but follow-up is limited.	We help you build your integration test scenarios, guide you through their execution, and ensure everything is validated before moving forward.
Custom development	➔	Generally absent or considered exceptions that require additional budgeting. You adapt to the software, not the other way around.	Every need is analyzed, documented, developed, and rigorously tested. The ERP is adapted to your reality, not the other way around.
Go-live (deployment)	➔	The go-live plan is standard, often based on pre-filled Excel packages. Execution relies heavily on your internal teams.	A personalized go-live plan is co-executed with you. We remain by your side throughout the process, even when unexpected challenges arise.

 

On paper, these two approaches might seem similar. But in practice? 

 

One gives you a tool defined within a rigid and generic framework, and as soon as you want to step outside of it, it costs more. The other one supports you so that this tool becomes a true performance driver. And that makes all the difference. 

What speed often costs you: the real risks of express methodologies 

At first, everything seems to be going well. And then… it doesn’t. 

That’s how the story often begins. An ERP project launched with a rapid approach, budget respected, timeline met, on paper.

 

But a few months after go-live, things get complicated: lost users, clunky processes, inconsistent data, or simple disillusionment with a system that doesn’t deliver. 

 

Because behind the promise of a rapid implementation, there are compromises few dare to name. Yet we see them every day. 

 

Here are some of the most frequent risks: 

• Low adoption rate: Without hands-on training or true knowledge transfer, your teams end up using only a fraction of the available features.
• Poorly adapted processes: The ERP is the heart of your operations. It drives your strategic decisions, structures your growth, and supports your performance. When it’s misaligned with your actual business processes, it creates bottlenecks that ripple across the organization.
• Unexpected costs: What wasn’t covered at the start quickly turns into a series of expensive fixes (custom development, data rework, additional support…).
• Missing or fragile integrations: Connections with your other systems are often postponed… sometimes indefinitely.
• Frustrating vendor dependency: Without strategic support, you end up dependent on a provider who never truly understood your needs.

And the worst part? This kind of failure doesn’t show up immediately. It creeps into everyday operations: wasted time, duplicate data entry, resistance to change. An ERP that was supposed to simplify your life becomes… a constant source of frustration. 

Why we chose to do things differently (and why it works better)

We won’t lie to you. We’ve also offered Express implementations, in certain contexts, they did meet specific, immediate needs. 

 

But over time, we’ve seen the limitations of this model. And more importantly, we realized that it didn’t fully reflect what truly matters to us: 

• Valuing the expertise of our teams.
• Ensuring a precise match between the client’s needs and the delivered solution.
• Aiming for adoption rates and performance that exceed expectations.

That’s why today, we’ve chosen a different path. Doing it better means taking the time to do it right. 

 

What does “right” mean to us?

It’s a methodology built on rigor, collaboration, and sustainability. At Era Consulting Group, we call it the traditional method. It’s a field-tested approach, developed and refined with our experts, our clients, and our projects. 

 

Here’s what it looks like when done right: 

• ERP solution designed for YOU, not a standard version forced onto your processes.
• A dedicated multidisciplinary team, composed of experts in manufacturing, distribution, finance, services, and sustainability, professionals who understand you, listen to you, and move forward with you.
•  A project built to last, and to evolve with your business (not something you’ll have to redo in 18 months).
• Clear governance, documented framework, solid deliverables, and a true culture of quality.
• Practical training sessions, not forgotten PDFs in a shared folder.
• A modular approach, allowing you to build, expand, and adjust… without having to start over.

And most importantly: You are supported from start to finish, and even beyond. We remain by your side to help your solution evolve as your business grows. Not left on your own between two Excel files. 

 

We often hear:

 

“We don’t have the budget to pay more.”

 

But the real question might be:

 

“Can we really afford to do it all over again in a year?” 

 

What’s sometimes called “saving” often turns out to be a mid-term trap. 
Because an ERP project that is poorly scoped, poorly adopted, or poorly designed always ends up costing more: 

• in rework
• in backtracking
• in loss of trust from your teams
• and sometimes, in outright project abandonment

---

---

Here are some examples of the hidden costs of a rapid implementation:

• Partial or complete system rework after a few months: because processes were poorly modeled, or roles were poorly defined.
• Lost time for your teams: working around the system, creating manual fixes, or entering data twice.
• Loss of engagement: a poorly adopted ERP generates frustration, resistance to change, and internal roadblocks.
• Post-go-live additions: every “forgotten” development becomes an unplanned expense, often much costlier than if it had been done during the project.

The truth is, the initial cost of a traditional implementation is transparent and planned. Whereas the cost of a botched project spreads out over time, silently draining performance 

Better to do it right once than to redo it twice

We fully understand the hesitation. Choosing an ERP is already a major decision. Choosing an implementation approach that is longer, more demanding, and more costly, that can be daunting. But here’s the thing: it’s not an extra cost. It’s an investment in peace of mind. 

 

At Era Consulting Group, we’re not here to “deliver fast.” We’re here to deliver right. Not because it suits us, but because your business deserves it. 

 

Today, you have a choice: 

• Opt for an express approach, if you have the expertise, autonomy, and internal resources to handle the majority of the project yourself.
• Or choose to be supported, and build a solution together with experts, a solution that truly works, and that reflects your business.

And if you’re still asking yourself: “Why would we pay more?”

 

Then ask this too: “How much would a failed project cost us?”