Waste Management sues SAP over 'complete failure'

Trash hauler says it spent more than $100 million on a computer system that turned out to be "undeveloped, untested, and defective."
(From Reuters)

The story "Waste Management sues SAP over 'complete failure'" published March 27, 2008 at 7:30 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[als]

Waste Management

maybe Sap should change it's name to Waste Management.

[three_toed_frog]

Woohoo!

Man, I hope SAP gets sued into oblivion. We use it here where I work as well, and we constantly have issues with user profiles randomly disappearing, system failures, etc.

What a piece of crap. Good riddance.

[kieranmullen]

If only the goveremnts did this too

I am all for getting ride of frivolous lawsuits that waste taxpayer money, but I believe that local governments should bring various consultants and their companies to trial as well for billions in failed projects.

In Oregon we had the DMV try to install a new system a while back which never happened.

KieranMullen
http://360oregon.com

[gggg sssss]

Deloitte

now there is a group of clueless consultants getting paid to tell the time using their client's watch. But not as clueless as management that hires them instead of doing the job they get paid for.

[MadLyb]

Plenty of blame to go around

So, we have a 1.2 billion company claiming to have spent 100 million on a SAP implementation?!

A typical ERP implementation for a company that size is more like 30-40 million.

No financial accountability upfront, no due diligence on the actual software?

I think Waste Management needs to take a look in the mirror.

[baike]

buyer beware

no doubt. Whenever I hear about failed ERP deployments, all the blame goes to the vendor. But most of the time its the company that has the major contribution to the failure. It almost always comes down to poor analysis and bad decisions made way too early. Throw feature\requirements creep into the mix, consider the extended duration of the deployment and how it overlaps new releases of the product and its a perfect storm of incompetency and scale.

And I'm not surprised at the 100 mill mark. Big companies love throwing away good money after bad.

[igl00lgi]

Whats new?

So, when that slick looking guy, or woman, in the sharp looking suit says the magic words, "Don't worry." Run, don't walk. RUN. These companies, uhumm, O, are more sales teams than substance. Have to admit they are good at what they do, selling, not implementing. I watched a company go under while trying to implement a system from another well known company. Simply sad. Alot of people lost jobs, while the sales team moved onto another victim.

[d2louie]

Classic Example of Being Oversold

Sales Reps get compensated on the deals that they close. Consultants have to go in and clean up the mess and do the work. Right now it looks like the consultants are incompetent in building something up to specs, but really the Sales Rep just over sold the customer.

[fidlrjiffy]

Truly amazing

Waste Mgmt should sue SAP if only to highlight the fact that ERP implementations in general and so many vertical applications in particular are too generic to suit any company's business out of the box. Having said that this is a case of buyer beware as well as, no doubt, throwing good money after bad. Waste Mgmt did not do their homework and more likely skipped class altogether. Who does not know that SAP, PeopleSoft, and their ilk require huge efforts to get to the point where you're simply tired of trying to get it to work? Who doesn't know that SAP's job is to get the contract and that there is no point in being completely honest because the customer will simply go to the vendor who tells them what they want to hear? On what planet is any system implemented "without customization" and still cost $100 million? Executives at Waste Mgmt and other large companies do not get their bonuses by going "Oops, this was a mistake". Who'll take the bet that the guy who signed the contract is still around? What's unusual is that Waste Mgmt is suing. Usually, companies skulk out with their tails between their legs and make the best of a bad deal. Chances of Waste Mgmt winning are slim; SAP is not dumb enough to not have sign-offs up the wazoo and the implementation undoubtedly works "as designed" if only Waste Mgmt adopts their processes to SAP. Broadly speaking no business app can hope to mimic 100% any business process done by people. The other way around, maybe.

[gggg sssss]

Snake oil and koolaid

SAP, more than other ERP vendors thinks that they know all there is to know about running any business or governemnt organization. Senior Management abdicate their resposibility for running their business by outsourcing their thinking to SAP. They deserve what they get. Remember, SAP is a bunch of maingframe IBM guys still looking for clues.

How hard can it be to keep track of a few trucks of garbage?

[erickimberling]

ERP isn't about the technology, it's about the business processes and people. Waste Management isn't the only company that forced a misfit technology into its operations and exposed itself to a huge amount of risk. Of course, a successful ERP project begins with an effective ERP software selection process, but it also requires companies to clearly define their business processes and roles during implementation. Click here to read a good article about how to fix a failed ERP implementation.

Eric Kimberling
Panorama Consulting Group