Why size should matter to CIOs but not in the way you think

Enterprise resource planning systems have always been among the most complex technology solutions within organisations. They underpin finance, procurement, payroll, asset management, human resources, to name a few functions and are critical to business operations.

Because of that risk, many organisations have historically relied on large consulting firms to help manage ERP transformation, assuming that their scale and brand reputation will reduce any delivery risk.

However, new research suggests that assumption doesn't work anymore.

A recent independent study commissioned by TechnologyOne and conducted by IBRS examined 23 public sector business transformation projects throughout Australia involving the replacement or refreshment of core business systems. These projects spanned federal, state and local government agencies as well as education institutions and government businesses.

The findings are very interesting and align with independent research and industry roundtables Lánluas has commissioned with TechnologyOne customers across Australia, New Zealand and the UK over the last few years.

Projects that relied heavily on tier-one consulting firms for strategy and program management were more likely to experience budget overruns and delivery delays. In contrast, projects that maintained stronger internal ownership, worked closely with the software vendor, and engaged consultants selectively for specialist expertise were significantly more likely to succeed.

In many cases, those specialised consultants were boutique organisations with deep expertise in the relevant platform.

This does not suggest that large consulting firms lack capability. Rather, it highlights a structural shift in how enterprise software is implemented.

Modernising delivery to match technology

Modern SaaS ERP platforms, like TechnologyOne, operate very differently from the legacy systems that shaped many traditional consulting methodologies.

Historically, ERP implementations involved large-scale, multi-year programs built around heavily customised and on-premise software. Consulting firms developed extensive frameworks designed to manage that complexity: layered governance structures, detailed documentation cycles and large delivery teams.

Those approaches were logical in an environment where software upgrades were infrequent, and each deployment required significant bespoke development.

SaaS platforms have changed that model.

Today's enterprise systems evolve continuously through vendor-managed updates. Implementation approaches are more iterative, configurations replace customisation, and transformation outcomes depend as much on organisational change as technical deployment, pre- and post-go-live.

When size does matter

Specialist boutique consulting firms tend to operate with leaner governance structures and deeper expertise within a specific ecosystem. As ERP implementations only tend to happen once a decade within an organisation, it is unrealistic to expect in-house teams to have the experience to deliver this successfully.

In my experience, they also have the autonomy, workplace culture and flexibility to align and embed more closely within the client organisation and ways of working, enabling better knowledge transfer and capability building for internal teams. 

Moving forward

For CIOs, this report raises important questions. It may not mean abandoning large consulting firms altogether, particularly for complex multi-system transformations or global programs, but understanding that for modern SaaS ERP environments, like TechnologyOne, the optimal model may look different.

ERP systems remain the operational engine of modern organisations. Their successful implementation and continuous improvement depend not only on technology decisions but also on delivery models and responsible leadership.

We need to recognise as an industry that as enterprise software evolves, the consulting models supporting it must evolve in step.

For CIOs overseeing transformation programs now and in the coming years, the question may no longer be which consulting firm you can afford, but which advisory model best aligns with your needs and outcomes you are seeking to achieve.