How Clear Communication Can Transform Your ERP Implementation.

According to the Project Management Institute (PMI), 56% of all project failures are attributed to poor communication. This figure underscores the critical importance of clarity in communication, particularly in complex projects like SAP ERP implementations, where teams are diverse and project scope is vast. Miscommunication—whether due to ambiguous phrasing or unchecked assumptions—can derail timelines, expand budgets, and compromise project success.

In SAP ERP projects, stakeholders range from technical developers to business users and external consultants, each with their unique expertise and perspective. Ambiguity in communication can lead to misunderstandings in requirements, role responsibilities, and implementation steps, resulting in rework, scope creep, or even system failures. For a transformational project where clarity is essential to success, addressing these issues proactively can be the difference between a successful go-live and a stalled, failing project.

Overview of Communication Groups

In this blog series, we will explore the key groups of communication errors that commonly occur in SAP ERP implementations. These groups include:

1. Ambiguity and Assumptions: Issues like syntax ambiguity, implicit assumptions, and ambiguous requirements that lead to misunderstandings and misalignment.
2. Information Management and Prioritization: Errors involving information overload, misdirection, and lack of context can cause confusion and inefficiencies.
3. Role and Responsibility Clarity: Problems stemming from unclear roles, overuse of jargon, and failure to assign tasks.
4. Team Dynamics and Collaborative Communication: Issues related to inconsistent communication channels, nonverbal miscommunication, and lack of feedback loops.
5. Structured Documentation and Change Management: Challenges like vague meeting agendas and inadequate documentation of changes hinder effective communication and progress.

This post will delve into Group 1: Ambiguity and Assumptions.

Understanding Ambiguity and Assumptions

Ambiguity and assumptions can manifest in various forms, each leading to significant communication challenges within SAP ERP projects. We will discuss three major types of communication errors that fall under this category: syntax ambiguity, implicit assumptions, and ambiguous requirements. Each error creates room for misunderstandings that can derail the project, causing delays, resource misallocation, or misaligned stakeholder expectations.

Syntax Ambiguity

Syntax ambiguity occurs when a statement can be interpreted in multiple ways due to its structure or vague wording. For example, imagine a requirement document that says, “Send the updated plan to the team.” Whether the recipient should create and send an updated version or simply forward an existing plan is unclear. Without clarification, such ambiguity can lead to delays or misaligned tasks, confusing the team.

Another typical instance of syntax ambiguity might occur in project status updates. If a project lead says, “Complete all testing phases by next month,” it is unclear whether “next month” refers to the month’s beginning or end. This ambiguity can create significant issues in time-sensitive projects where every day counts. Similarly, ambiguous language in change requests, such as “implement the necessary updates to improve system performance,” does not specify which updates are necessary or how performance should be measured. This lack of clarity often leads to varying interpretations, resulting in wasted effort or rework.

The impact of syntax ambiguity is significant because it creates room for misinterpretation. Misunderstandings of tasks, requirements, or timelines can derail workflows, lead to duplicated efforts, misallocate resources, and ultimately cause delays that affect the entire project lifecycle.

Implicit Assumptions

Implicit assumptions happen when individuals assume others share the same context, background knowledge, or understanding without explicitly verifying it. For example, a technical consultant might refer to “BAPI” without explaining what it is, assuming everyone in the room understands this SAP-specific term. For business users unfamiliar with technical jargon, this creates a knowledge gap that inhibits their ability to engage effectively.

Another example of implicit assumptions can occur when onboarding new team members. Experienced team members may not realize that new hires are unaware of particular company conventions or tools referenced in meetings. This oversight can cause new members to feel lost or unable to contribute, leading to gaps in productivity. Additionally, when discussing project requirements, a stakeholder may assume that developers understand the underlying business processes well enough to fill the gaps in requirement documents. Without explicitly confirming this, developers might proceed with an incorrect understanding, leading to significant rework later.

Implicit assumptions impact project teams by leading to incomplete understanding, implementation errors, and a lack of shared vision. When team members do not have the same understanding or knowledge, they are less likely to work effectively together, leading to inconsistencies and misaligned project deliverables.

Ambiguous Requirements

Ambiguous requirements are vaguely defined or open to multiple interpretations, often causing misalignment and scope creep. For instance, a requirement that reads, “The system should be user-friendly,” is too subjective. Does this mean fewer screens, faster load times, or a simpler layout? Without measurable criteria, developers and business stakeholders may envision completely different outcomes.

Another example can be found in integration requirements. A statement such as “the system must integrate seamlessly with third-party tools” does not define what “seamlessly” means. It does not specify performance benchmarks, data transfer requirements, or response times. This ambiguity can result in developers building interfaces that do not meet stakeholders’ expectations. A third example could be found in performance requirements. When a specification states, “The solution should handle a high volume of users,” without defining what “high volume” means in numerical terms, it leaves developers and testers to guess the real target. Different interpretations of “high volume” can result in inadequate preparation for system load, leading to performance issues post-deployment.

Ambiguous requirements have a profound impact. They lead to differing expectations between stakeholders and developers, causing rework and delays when requirements need to be redefined or refined later in the project. This back-and-forth process wastes time and resources, creating frustration among the team and potentially damaging the project’s credibility as a whole.

Why These Issues Occur and How to Avoid Them

Ambiguity and assumptions are often a byproduct of the inherent complexities of SAP ERP projects. These projects typically involve large teams and multi-layered requirements, making it difficult to maintain clarity. The complexity of projects contributes significantly to creating ambiguity, as different team members may focus only on their areas of expertise and fail to provide the full context needed for others. Additionally, the time pressure to deliver can lead to hastily written communications that don’t undergo proper checks, which increases the likelihood of vague or ambiguous language. Another contributing factor is the diversity of teams involved in SAP ERP implementations. These teams are often composed of people from different backgrounds, including technical experts, business stakeholders, and consultants. Such diversity can easily result in overlooked clarifications, especially regarding industry jargon or basic concepts that might be unfamiliar to some team members.

To avoid these issues, it is crucial to establish practices for clear, concise, and verified communication. One key strategy is to be explicit in your communication. Always state what you assume your audience knows and ask if clarification is needed. Being explicit helps ensure everyone is on the same page, reducing the risk of misinterpretation. Another important approach is to avoid vague language. Instead of using subjective terms like “user-friendly” or “seamlessly,” use specific, measurable language that allows all stakeholders to understand precisely what is required. Lastly, create a culture that encourages seeking verification. Make it a standard practice to ask clarifying questions whenever there is uncertainty. This culture of verification ensures alignment across the team and reduces the likelihood of costly misunderstandings.

Relation to the Fast Implementation Track™ (FIT)

The concepts discussed in this blog directly relate to the core principles outlined in the Fast Implementation Track™ (FIT), as explained in my book. FIT emphasizes the importance of focus, communication, simplification, commitment, and education for a successful SAP ERP implementation. In particular, the issues of ambiguity and assumptions fall under the Communication and Simplification components of FIT.

The book’s Communication chapter stresses that clear and explicit communication is essential to keeping everyone aligned and working towards the same goals. Avoiding ambiguity and assumptions helps ensure all stakeholders understand what is required, reducing the risk of misunderstandings that can cause project delays. By applying FIT’s communication principles, you can minimize the negative impacts of syntax ambiguity, implicit assumptions, and ambiguous requirements.

Moreover, Simplification is a key element of FIT, where we aim to streamline processes and avoid unnecessary complexity. Simplifying communication by avoiding vague terms and clearly defining expectations helps create a more efficient and effective project environment. As described in the book, commitment to standard processes and avoiding unnecessary deviations are critical to the success of fast-track implementations. When requirements are ambiguous, the chances of adding unnecessary complexity increase, which can hinder the effectiveness of the FIT approach.

For more detailed strategies on implementing FIT and overcoming communication pitfalls in your SAP ERP projects, refer to the Communication and Simplification chapters in my book, “Make FIT Your Purpose.” These chapters provide actionable insights and real-world examples of how clear communication and simplification can make a significant difference in achieving project success.

Call to Action: How to Apply These Principles

To improve communication and minimize ambiguity and assumptions, consider the following actionable steps:

Immediately identify any ambiguous phrases or areas where implicit assumptions are made in your next meeting or email. Take the time to clarify these points and ensure that all stakeholders understand exactly what is being communicated. Making this a habitual practice can help eliminate misunderstandings from the outset.

Within One Week, introduce a “clarification checklist” for all team members. This checklist should include key points such as verifying assumptions, avoiding jargon unless fully explained, and ensuring that the main action or decision in every piece of communication is clearly articulated. You can foster a culture of precision and clarity by embedding this checklist into your team’s communication routine.

Implement a “requirements quality review” process within one month for all project documentation. Have all requirements reviewed by a mix of stakeholders, including both technical and non-technical participants, to catch ambiguous wording and implicit assumptions early. This collaborative review process helps to ensure that requirements are clearly defined and understood before moving forward, reducing the potential for costly rework and delays later in the project.