Comments on: Why is add-on better than custom, any day? http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom Ensuring Microsoft Dynamics NAV implementation success since 2003 Thu, 17 May 2012 21:05:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-980 Vjekoslav Babic Mon, 04 May 2009 12:50:53 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-980 @Stipe: thanks a million! That's the document that was linked here in the first place, only it was moved from its previous location to this official MS Download site page. @Stipe: thanks a million! That’s the document that was linked here in the first place, only it was moved from its previous location to this official MS Download site page.

]]> By: Stipe http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-979 Stipe Mon, 04 May 2009 12:29:14 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-979 Hi! Recently I found dowloadable version of Add-on Solutions Catalog - you can find it in Microsoft official website <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B90D9680-FDB8-4413-B706-12EC62A5DCF8&displaylang=en" rel="nofollow">here.</a> Hi!
Recently I found dowloadable version of Add-on Solutions Catalog – you can find it in Microsoft official website
here.

]]> By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-978 Vjekoslav Babic Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:27:50 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-978 @Dave: thanks for reporting this broken link to me! I haven't noticed this. They must have removed the downloadable PDF version, I also wasn't able to locate it, so I've now put this link you gave me. @Dave: thanks for reporting this broken link to me! I haven’t noticed this. They must have removed the downloadable PDF version, I also wasn’t able to locate it, so I’ve now put this link you gave me.

]]> By: Dave Roys http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-977 Dave Roys Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:44:51 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-977 Hi Vjeko, I tried the link to find the add-on catalog and it is not longer there. You may want to update the post with this URL http://www.microsoft.com/dynamics/solutionfinder.mspx. Cheers, Dave. Hi Vjeko, I tried the link to find the add-on catalog and it is not longer there. You may want to update the post with this URL http://www.microsoft.com/dynamics/solutionfinder.mspx. Cheers, Dave.

]]> By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-960 Vjekoslav Babic Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:25:42 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-960 ghuebner, thanks for comments, and welcome to this blog. You are completely right about "standard add-ons", and I believe there will be more of those in the future. About add-on vendors "stealing" customers away, I have this to say: market is free, and no customer will just sell themselves--if they are happy with their current partner, they won't just go to another company. But there are many partner companies not taking decent care about their customers, and if an add-on vendor "steals" some of these customers, the customers will be better-off. A neglected customer is an unhappy customer, and these customers can damage the reputation of the product. If an add-on vendor can change that, by all means let them do so. I also agree with you that an add-on rarely takes the degree of fit to 100%. But do the customizations take it there? I don't think so--they might get it to 99%, or 99,5%, but hardly ever to 100%. But I don't think it should be the ultimate goal. It's the sigma game. Getting to 95% is great, and it might be cost-effective. Taking it to 99% can easily cost twice as much, taking it to 99.9% can cost a fortune. I am sure that companies can easily go-live with their solution supporting 90, 80, even 70% of their processes, as long as business critical processes don't suffer due to ERP. Since 100% is almost never achieved, chasing it can cost the companies their ROI. ghuebner, thanks for comments, and welcome to this blog.
You are completely right about “standard add-ons”, and I believe there will be more of those in the future. About add-on vendors “stealing” customers away, I have this to say: market is free, and no customer will just sell themselves–if they are happy with their current partner, they won’t just go to another company. But there are many partner companies not taking decent care about their customers, and if an add-on vendor “steals” some of these customers, the customers will be better-off. A neglected customer is an unhappy customer, and these customers can damage the reputation of the product. If an add-on vendor can change that, by all means let them do so.
I also agree with you that an add-on rarely takes the degree of fit to 100%. But do the customizations take it there? I don’t think so–they might get it to 99%, or 99,5%, but hardly ever to 100%. But I don’t think it should be the ultimate goal. It’s the sigma game. Getting to 95% is great, and it might be cost-effective. Taking it to 99% can easily cost twice as much, taking it to 99.9% can cost a fortune. I am sure that companies can easily go-live with their solution supporting 90, 80, even 70% of their processes, as long as business critical processes don’t suffer due to ERP. Since 100% is almost never achieved, chasing it can cost the companies their ROI.

]]> By: ghuebner http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-963 ghuebner Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:24:53 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-963 There is yet annother aspect concerning addons. Since the pure standard NAV may cover about 80 to 90 % of the customers needs, using an addon may raise this portion to 95 %, but I rarely found an addon covering 100 % without the need to customize one thing or the other... There is yet annother aspect concerning addons. Since the pure standard NAV may cover about 80 to 90 % of the customers needs, using an addon may raise this portion to 95 %, but I rarely found an addon covering 100 % without the need to customize one thing or the other…

]]> By: ghuebner http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-962 ghuebner Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:18:20 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-962 Well, I think choosing an addon or doing customizations depends strongly on the quality of the addon software and on the support, the addon selling company is providing (for example concerning bugs,...). I made the experience that the more often an addon has been sold, the fewer will be the problems you can get into with it. There are really already some "standard-addons" at present, escpecially in areas like payroll, electronic payments or EDI, e. g. But one point is worthwhile being discussed: there is always the possibility that the addon selling company decides from day-to-day to make acquisitions (concerning updates, e. g.) to end-users directly (the market is rough) and perhaps you will not be the first company to lose some customers along that way... Well, I think choosing an addon or doing customizations depends strongly on the quality of the addon software and on the support, the addon selling company is providing (for example concerning bugs,…). I made the experience that the more often an addon has been sold, the fewer will be the problems you can get into with it. There are really already some “standard-addons” at present, escpecially in areas like payroll, electronic payments or EDI, e. g.
But one point is worthwhile being discussed: there is always the possibility that the addon selling company decides from day-to-day to make acquisitions (concerning updates, e. g.) to end-users directly (the market is rough) and perhaps you will not be the first company to lose some customers along that way…

]]> By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-965 Vjekoslav Babic Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:20:15 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-965 If a partner is doing localization, then partner should bill these costs to the customer. It should still be much cheaper for that partner to localize the product, than to develop it from scratch, even if they never again re-sell that localization to anybody else. Now that you mention LS Retail - how much do you think a custom development (and maintenance) of such a functionality cost, compared to localizing it? It is cost-effective for both the customer and the partner. About scale, you are absolutely right, localization of smaller add-ons might easily cost more than a from-the-scratch development. And here is a hole in my original article: smaller add-ons don't really offer all those benefits. I also agree with your point, and as I said in the post, "it's not all black and white". It really isn't. The point of my post was to emphasize the benefits that add-ons offer, which are often overlooked. If a partner is doing localization, then partner should bill these costs to the customer. It should still be much cheaper for that partner to localize the product, than to develop it from scratch, even if they never again re-sell that localization to anybody else. Now that you mention LS Retail – how much do you think a custom development (and maintenance) of such a functionality cost, compared to localizing it? It is cost-effective for both the customer and the partner.
About scale, you are absolutely right, localization of smaller add-ons might easily cost more than a from-the-scratch development. And here is a hole in my original article: smaller add-ons don’t really offer all those benefits.
I also agree with your point, and as I said in the post, “it’s not all black and white”. It really isn’t. The point of my post was to emphasize the benefits that add-ons offer, which are often overlooked.

]]> By: Tomasz Maciak http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-966 Tomasz Maciak Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:44:21 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-966 I rather mean partner's costs, because (but maybe I'm form too distant country ;) ) ISV seeks partners to localize their products for given country and I'm talking from such partner perspective. Anyway, I think also some scale factor should be added to discussion, because there is difference in ratio "localization cost/developing replacement cost" between let say "LS Retail" and small "interface to banking systems" but still both products are add-ons and are listed in add-on catalogue. My point is, that I can agree, that to use add-on is an good solution, but it should be always considered, if it is worth in specific situation. Specially if there is no suitable add-on already localized (or developed locally) and we should consider localization costs (including learning costs, translations etc.). I rather mean partner’s costs, because (but maybe I’m form too distant country ;) ) ISV seeks partners to localize their products for given country and I’m talking from such partner perspective.

Anyway, I think also some scale factor should be added to discussion, because there is difference in ratio “localization cost/developing replacement cost” between let say “LS Retail” and small “interface to banking systems” but still both products are add-ons and are listed in add-on catalogue.

My point is, that I can agree, that to use add-on is an good solution, but it should be always considered, if it is worth in specific situation. Specially if there is no suitable add-on already localized (or developed locally) and we should consider localization costs (including learning costs, translations etc.).

]]> By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-961 Vjekoslav Babic Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:34:38 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-961 Hi Tomasz: you are right about two things here. First, localization does add cost, but both localization and localization maintenance costs contribute with a fraction to the total costs of the product. However, it depends largely on what belongs to the localization: any country specific regulatory functionality, or just language translation. Translation shouldn't be a problem at all, and with proper planning its costs can be kept at minimum. Regulatory localization can definitely be a problem. But again, add-on is the same as NAV itself, only on much smaller scale; if you commit to a product, and focus your business to building and maintaining a product (and willingly decide not to try to do implementations at the same time), then it has much more chances of success. Second, sales potential has to be an important factor in deciding whether to do an add-on or not, as with any product lifecycle management. I would say that commitment to the product is what keeps its cost down--if you decide to commit to the add-on sales, and focus your energies there, you can easily become "the" product for certain vertical, and shouldn't have any problems selling it. But if you do, as other commenters mentioned here, engage in generic NAV projects in addition to maintaining an add-on, then your add-on most likely won't succeed: your energies will be mostly focused on implementation projects, while they are needed in product marketing, sales and support in order for your add-on product to establish and retain a sustainable revenue chain for you. It's typical product vs. solution story: both are viable business models (obviously), but both can't be done at the same time by the same people. If a single company does both, then they have to have separate and 100% dedicated teams for product and solutions. If they don't, both product and solution quality will suffer as focus shifts, it will be dificult to achieve economies of scale, it's likely that they won't build enough industry expertise, in the end meaning much higher product costs, which in the end means less sales, and less point in having the product in the first place. Anyway, it's nice to see you here! Hi Tomasz: you are right about two things here.
First, localization does add cost, but both localization and localization maintenance costs contribute with a fraction to the total costs of the product. However, it depends largely on what belongs to the localization: any country specific regulatory functionality, or just language translation. Translation shouldn’t be a problem at all, and with proper planning its costs can be kept at minimum. Regulatory localization can definitely be a problem. But again, add-on is the same as NAV itself, only on much smaller scale; if you commit to a product, and focus your business to building and maintaining a product (and willingly decide not to try to do implementations at the same time), then it has much more chances of success.
Second, sales potential has to be an important factor in deciding whether to do an add-on or not, as with any product lifecycle management. I would say that commitment to the product is what keeps its cost down–if you decide to commit to the add-on sales, and focus your energies there, you can easily become “the” product for certain vertical, and shouldn’t have any problems selling it. But if you do, as other commenters mentioned here, engage in generic NAV projects in addition to maintaining an add-on, then your add-on most likely won’t succeed: your energies will be mostly focused on implementation projects, while they are needed in product marketing, sales and support in order for your add-on product to establish and retain a sustainable revenue chain for you. It’s typical product vs. solution story: both are viable business models (obviously), but both can’t be done at the same time by the same people. If a single company does both, then they have to have separate and 100% dedicated teams for product and solutions. If they don’t, both product and solution quality will suffer as focus shifts, it will be dificult to achieve economies of scale, it’s likely that they won’t build enough industry expertise, in the end meaning much higher product costs, which in the end means less sales, and less point in having the product in the first place.
Anyway, it’s nice to see you here!

]]> By: Tomasz Maciak http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-964 Tomasz Maciak Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:12:46 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-964 Hi Vjeko :) I think than one more thing should be told about implementation of add-on's -> localization. If you add localization cost and cost of maintaining localization to cost of add-on solution, it rarely is worth implementation. We localized and maintain localization of few add-on solution and I assure, that it should be a big add-on with potential in sales to decide to do it. Hi Vjeko :)
I think than one more thing should be told about implementation of add-on’s -> localization. If you add localization cost and cost of maintaining localization to cost of add-on solution, it rarely is worth implementation.
We localized and maintain localization of few add-on solution and I assure, that it should be a big add-on with potential in sales to decide to do it.

]]> By: Erik Ernst http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-967 Erik Ernst Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:33:38 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-967 Vjeko, Taking a look back on companies who have been/are succesfully delivering add-on's for NAV, ex. Celenia, TopSolutions, Lanham, ShipCentric (and many others). They all started their business as "normal" Navision partners, but at some point in their history they found out that if they should continue to expand their business, then they needed to do something different. They have all either sold the "normal" Navision reseller part of their business or moved their add-on activities to a separate company. The problem as I see it, is also that most NAV reselling partners are actually looking at add-on developers who are also selling directly as competitors. So if we should list what it requires to be a succesful add-on provider then it would be: You must be 100% dedicated to your add-on(s) Which means: 1) You should not be selling the add-on (incl. the services) directly to end-users 2) Your resellers can trust that you're not "stealing" their customers On the other hand, I don't say that it's wrong that a reselling partner start selling an industry solution as an add-on, they just need to realize that it's not that easy, if they are not dedicated. Vjeko,
Taking a look back on companies who have been/are succesfully delivering add-on’s for NAV, ex. Celenia, TopSolutions, Lanham, ShipCentric (and many others). They all started their business as “normal” Navision partners, but at some point in their history they found out that if they should continue to expand their business, then they needed to do something different. They have all either sold the “normal” Navision reseller part of their business or moved their add-on activities to a separate company.

The problem as I see it, is also that most NAV reselling partners are actually looking at add-on developers who are also selling directly as competitors.

So if we should list what it requires to be a succesful add-on provider then it would be:

You must be 100% dedicated to your add-on(s)

Which means:
1) You should not be selling the add-on (incl. the services) directly to end-users
2) Your resellers can trust that you’re not “stealing” their customers

On the other hand, I don’t say that it’s wrong that a reselling partner start selling an industry solution as an add-on, they just need to realize that it’s not that easy, if they are not dedicated.

]]> By: Vjekoslav Babic http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-968 Vjekoslav Babic Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:28:46 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-968 Dharmendra, Erik: You are absolutely right, as Dave is - finding good add-ons is difficult, and any tool which could assist customers in doing so would be more than welcome. Definitely some criteria should always be taken into account when evaluating, such as "how many customers have successfuly deployed the add-on, and are willing to endorse it". However, this might be unfair towards those who are developing add-ons and are just launching them - they don't have any customers, and have to fight a tough battle being found, chosen and implemented. Eric, your observation that many "add-ons" are actually customizations that their vendors have decided to monetize beyond original project - I've seen these too. Personally, I believe this doesn't have to be a problem, as long as the vendor has a dedicated team of people maintaining such add-on. If they don't, then they are worse than customizations, because their support costs in the long run can easily exceed the cost difference gained on not customizing NAV. However, again as you point out, Eric, if this is the case, you might end up customizing the add-on heavily, which again cancels the cost benefit it should achieve. My criteria would always be along these lines: does the add-on vendor specialize in the add-on business, or do they just do add-ons as a side-business to their principal consultancy/implementation practice? If they don't focus on add-ons (even exclusively!), then this is a clear warning sign and a huge risk factor. If they do - their add-on will probably be a better choice than custom development. There are several companies which do nothing but add-on development and delivering their business expertise in their add-on implementations. You can't possibly beat them on quality, cost performance or schedule, with any kind of custom development--when their add-on is needed, they are truly the best possible choice. I'm so glad that this article has ignited this discussion, because most of the risks of the add-ons have been exposed. Dharmendra, Erik:
You are absolutely right, as Dave is – finding good add-ons is difficult, and any tool which could assist customers in doing so would be more than welcome. Definitely some criteria should always be taken into account when evaluating, such as “how many customers have successfuly deployed the add-on, and are willing to endorse it”. However, this might be unfair towards those who are developing add-ons and are just launching them – they don’t have any customers, and have to fight a tough battle being found, chosen and implemented.
Eric, your observation that many “add-ons” are actually customizations that their vendors have decided to monetize beyond original project – I’ve seen these too. Personally, I believe this doesn’t have to be a problem, as long as the vendor has a dedicated team of people maintaining such add-on. If they don’t, then they are worse than customizations, because their support costs in the long run can easily exceed the cost difference gained on not customizing NAV. However, again as you point out, Eric, if this is the case, you might end up customizing the add-on heavily, which again cancels the cost benefit it should achieve.
My criteria would always be along these lines: does the add-on vendor specialize in the add-on business, or do they just do add-ons as a side-business to their principal consultancy/implementation practice? If they don’t focus on add-ons (even exclusively!), then this is a clear warning sign and a huge risk factor. If they do – their add-on will probably be a better choice than custom development.
There are several companies which do nothing but add-on development and delivering their business expertise in their add-on implementations. You can’t possibly beat them on quality, cost performance or schedule, with any kind of custom development–when their add-on is needed, they are truly the best possible choice.

I’m so glad that this article has ignited this discussion, because most of the risks of the add-ons have been exposed.

]]> By: Erik Ernst http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-969 Erik Ernst Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:33:13 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-969 Hi Vjeko, Your blog posts are as always a joy to read. Whereas I agrees with you that add-ons most often are the right way to go, instead of creating your own custom solution, then there are situations and reason for not doing. Dave is right that finding the "right" add-on is difficult. Not only does Microsoft's official "catalog" contain over 2000 "add-ons", but the tool is not really so great. As Dave, then I have experienced that the so called add-ons really only are customized solutions made for a single customer. And most of the add-ons I have actual seen (even the ones who claim that they have been certified by Microsoft) are often badly documented, or do not follow even basic programming standards such as always developing in US-English and adding local languages after. The most recent add-on we purchased in my company we had to rewrite completely (changed about 90% of the objects of the add-on) before it could be used according to our standards. In the Dynamics User Group we've just created an <a href="http://dynamicsuser.net/groups/dynamics-nav-add-ons/media/default.aspx" rel="nofollow">Dynamics NAV Add-on Catalog"</a> and a <a href="http://dynamicsuser.net/groups/dynamics_ax_add-ons/media/default.aspx" rel="nofollow">Dynamics AX Add-on Catalog</a>. So what do we think that we can do different. Really not so much. But it's our hope that the community will see this tool as their own, so that the add-on developers add the add-on to the catalog, and the members are given a chance to rate and write reviews and comments about these add-ons, if they know them. So an add-on with a high rating and good reviews should be better. Hi Vjeko,
Your blog posts are as always a joy to read.

Whereas I agrees with you that add-ons most often are the right way to go, instead of creating your own custom solution, then there are situations and reason for not doing.
Dave is right that finding the “right” add-on is difficult. Not only does Microsoft’s official “catalog” contain over 2000 “add-ons”, but the tool is not really so great. As Dave, then I have experienced that the so called add-ons really only are customized solutions made for a single customer.

And most of the add-ons I have actual seen (even the ones who claim that they have been certified by Microsoft) are often badly documented, or do not follow even basic programming standards such as always developing in US-English and adding local languages after. The most recent add-on we purchased in my company we had to rewrite completely (changed about 90% of the objects of the add-on) before it could be used according to our standards.

In the Dynamics User Group we’ve just created an Dynamics NAV Add-on Catalog” and a Dynamics AX Add-on Catalog.

So what do we think that we can do different. Really not so much. But it’s our hope that the community will see this tool as their own, so that the add-on developers add the add-on to the catalog, and the members are given a chance to rate and write reviews and comments about these add-ons, if they know them. So an add-on with a high rating and good reviews should be better.

]]> By: Dharmendra Desai http://navigateintosuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom/comment-page-1#comment-976 Dharmendra Desai Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:51:35 +0000 http://NavigateIntoSuccess.com/blog/add-on-better-than-custom#comment-976 Hi, I have both good and bad experiences with Add Ons. Since some of my views have already been voiced in earlier comments, I would like to comment upon what can be done. 1) Micrsoft encouraging registration of Add Ons from partners is good but some official channel should be available to guide Partners upon selection of Add Ons. This should not merely go by the offerings of the Add on but also by the history of the Add On. Things like: 1) No. of customers presently and successfully using the Add on. 2) Support history of the ISV 3) INfo on upgrades 4) Exact functionalities available ( surely not the Intrucutory documents. 4) An easy database to be able to search on the basis of objective requirements. As the blog writer says: Even I do see the benefits of going for an Add On. Optimization is the key. Hi,
I have both good and bad experiences with Add Ons. Since some of my views have already been voiced in earlier comments, I would like to comment upon what can be done.

1) Micrsoft encouraging registration of Add Ons from partners is good but some official channel should be available to guide Partners upon selection of Add Ons. This should not merely go by the offerings of the Add on but also by the history of the Add On. Things like: 1) No. of customers presently and successfully using the Add on. 2) Support history of the ISV 3) INfo on upgrades 4) Exact functionalities available ( surely not the Intrucutory documents. 4) An easy database to be able to search on the basis of objective requirements.

As the blog writer says: Even I do see the benefits of going for an Add On. Optimization is the key.

]]>