Challenges Japanese Companies in Thailand Face When Selecting an ERP System (3)

Date : 08-07-2026

Key Consideration (2) : Ensure That the Japanese Consultant Can Understand, Consolidate, and Clearly Explain the Findings to Management

Continuing from the previous article, the second key consideration is the role of the vendor’s Japanese consultant. The consultant should actively participate in the current-state assessment and clearly explain the Thai consulting team’s findings to the client’s Japanese management team. These findings include current business processes and operational challenges.

Even when skilled Thai consultants conduct detailed interviews and identify important operational issues, the initial results are often a list of separate requests and concerns from each department. This is natural because many companies operate in departmental silos. Staff members usually focus on their own department and may not have an overall company perspective.

One of the most important roles of the Japanese consultant is to organize and interpret these findings from the viewpoint of senior management’s business goals. The consultant should then present a clear and organized summary to decision-makers.

In many cases, vendors ask Japanese sales representatives, rather than consultants, to handle this role. However, this can create a risk. Discussions with the client’s Japanese management team may not become deep or productive. Instead, the conversation may end with comments such as, “Our Thai consultant will explain the details.” As a result, management may not be fully convinced by the assessment findings.

Therefore, while skilled Thai consultants are important, as explained in the previous article, Japanese consultants are also critical. A vendor should build a project team that effectively combines both Japanese and Thai consultants. This can be a major success factor for a useful and productive current-state assessment.

---

Key Consideration (3) : Lead the Project Without Falling into a “Like-for-Like Replacement” Mindset

The third and final consideration is whether the vendor can guide the project away from a “like-for-like replacement” mindset. “Like-for-like replacement” means replacing the old system with a new system while keeping the same screens, reports, and operations as much as possible.

Of course, it is important to identify and document the functions of the current system. However, this work has limited value if the project team does not understand why each function exists and what business purpose it supports.

If the assessment only lists all current functions and concludes that the new system must have the same screens, reports, and procedures, implementation will likely become very difficult.

One of the basic principles of ERP implementation is called “Fit-to-Standard.” This means that a company adjusts its business processes to fit the standard functions of the ERP package as much as possible. It also means minimizing custom development.

However, customization may be necessary in some cases. For example, it may be needed to support business processes that create a competitive advantage or to meet critical requirements from major customers. In such cases, additional development may be justified.

However, if the current-state assessment does not ask the basic question of why a particular function is needed and simply assumes that all existing functions must be kept, several risks can occur:

• ERP vendors may submit proposals with costs that are much higher than expected. This can delay or stop the selection process. If the project loses flexibility around Fit-to-Standard and requires full replication of current functions, vendors often treat many functions as custom development.
• Improvements may be limited to system-level benefits, such as faster processing speed or easier operation. The project may not solve deeper business process issues. As a result, executive management, including headquarters, may feel that the new system does not provide enough business value compared with its cost.

To avoid these risks, the vendor’s capability is clearly important. However, the client organization must also provide the right direction and motivation from the management level.

Examples include :

• Clearly explain management’s view of the company’s current challenges and the improvements expected from the new ERP system.
• Help employees understand how the new ERP system will benefit both themselves and the organization. Management should also encourage employees to review current processes from an overall company perspective, rather than simply protecting existing ways of working.

Compared with ERP projects in Japan, projects at overseas subsidiaries often face a bigger challenge. Local staff may not fully understand these basic principles unless management explains them clearly.

Japanese managers sometimes assume that employees naturally understand the purpose and objectives of the project. In overseas operations, this assumption can be risky. Clear, logical, and direct communication from management is often one of the most important factors for project success.

In this series, we have discussed how to conduct a current-state assessment to define ERP requirements that truly support the organization’s future needs.

In the next article, we will discuss the next stage of ERP selection: how to evaluate and compare ERP vendors after receiving their proposals and quotations based on the assessment results.