Let’s assume (for simplicity of not tackling any more topic of running in parallel rollout stream and enhancement stream) that you have successfully rolled out all your sites. So, you are stable on V2 or maybe even V3 of your CORE Model, and still have remaining (I mean … growing) backlog of requested enhancements from your XX sites, starting from already mature users, to the most newly rolled out ones with enthusiastic neophytes.
This backlog will never stop growing.
It is possible (with current economy) that in the time you were rolling the solution, market changes started changing the way you produce. Maybe you introduced some new products with new business processes (that for now run only on one two sites, but you want to push them globally) or maybe you are just planning to do so in a big bang to all sites, and you needed your rollouts to be finished for that.
In every case mentioned above (and all other cases), YOU need to decide what you do next.
What do you agree to put into CORE Model V_NEXT and what not. YOU need to keep your core model harmonized and CORE, not allow it to drift into 20 or 30 site solutions. You need governance to continue from program governance to overall solution governance.
Again – main person to keep it all aligned is MOM Solution Owner (the person now might be already a head of COE). Now, instead of project tasks he/she has now to switch a bit more towards demand management. This requires also having authority to say yes or no to Business Process Owners, most likely worldwide.
In very large, worldwide organizations, for such authority you need to form a...
Governance Council
... which will have definite say “yes or no” to whatever effort is needed to provide some capabilities requested by all sites.
Governance Council will decide strategy, which has to be respected in the whole organization. They will approve when changes are to be made to solution, with what frequency etc. Basically, they decide what investments in the manufacturing operations management are beneficial for the company as a whole.
This is necessary, because the longer the solution exists, the more are channels start providing new requests how to evolve it. It is natural, world evolves solution supporting ways of working this transforming world is expected to evolve as well. Continuous improvement.
For the solution to remain harmonized there needs to be a transparent process on how it is managed. How to submit an enhancement and who will make a decision whether it fits everyone or not. There needs to be track of decisions made, and it has to be clear to IT and / or outsourcing organization what is requested to be added, by when etc. Solution cannot be left completely alone, as it will not support business as it should. It cannot satisfy only those who are shouting the most. As I wrote in one of articles earlier, there will always be some skilled and crafty people, who will take the evolution in their hands if things are not moving at all. That may result in 20 different solutions instead of one core model in quite a short time.
Frequency of the governance
Again there is no rule that will fit everyone. For one organization quarterly is enough, for others yearly, for another it will be needed to do it monthly, because they are very dynamic with their processes and products. No matter how frequently, it has to be done and known to all users that it is handled and how.
The governance can be dedicated to MOM solution, or, we have many customers that run this together with their ERP governance as one body. We even have customers that deploy the enhancement within monthly cycle both to ERP and MOM at the same time. We also have customers who outsource most of COE activities, and only governance remains in their hands, and run it separately for ERP, MOM and PLM.
What is best?
Best is what serves the purpose for your type of organization, culture and change frequency in your production mechanisms.
