ERP, CRM and core application programmes delivered so the technology lands, the processes change with it, and people actually use what was built.
Enterprise application programmes rarely fail on technology. They fail on adoption, on process decisions deferred until configuration forces them, and on business ownership that was assumed rather than agreed.
The pattern is familiar: a platform selected on features, an integrator delivering to specification, and a business that recognises too late that the specification described how it works today rather than how it needs to work next.
The result is a programme that goes live but does not land. Workarounds reappear, reporting is rebuilt in spreadsheets, and the benefits case quietly stops being mentioned.
We start with the process and the decisions rather than the platform: what has to change, who owns each decision, and what the business will stop doing. That determines whether configuration, integration or change capacity is the constraint.
Delivery is staged so value arrives before the full programme completes, and adoption is designed in from the start with the people who will operate the system, rather than handed over at the end as training.
Representative engagement types. Scope is always shaped around the programme and the capability already in place.
Finance, supply chain and operations processes moved onto a single platform in staged releases.
Sales and service processes configured around how revenue is actually won and retained.
Retiring systems that carry undocumented knowledge, without losing the logic they hold.
Core systems connected so data moves once and reconciles rather than being re-entered.
Manual handoffs redesigned before they are automated, so the workflow is worth keeping.
An independent read on a programme that has slipped, with a realistic route back to delivery.
Practical working experience across these environments. We are not a reseller for any of them, so platform recommendations stay independent.
Delivered through whichever model fits the programme. Compare all delivery models
A defined implementation, migration or recovery phase with agreed milestones and acceptance criteria.
A full programme team spanning analysis, delivery management, integration and change.
Solution architecture review, vendor selection support and programme assurance.
Targeted business analysis, integration or programme management capacity for a delivery phase.
A part-time transformation lead where a full-time appointment is not yet warranted.
On the client side. We represent your interests in design decisions, hold the integrator to the outcome rather than the specification, and make sure the process and adoption work sitting outside their scope actually happens.
No. Recovery is a common starting point. The first step is an honest assessment of scope, outstanding decisions and realistic timeline, which sometimes means telling you the original date is gone rather than defending it.
Both. Some programmes need one senior business analyst or programme manager alongside an existing team; others need a full delivery squad. The delivery models above set out how each is structured and governed.
No. We hold no reseller or implementation partnership, so a platform recommendation reflects fit rather than margin. If the right answer is to keep and extend what you already have, that is what we will tell you.
InsightWhy process and data readiness decide whether new systems deliver the benefits promised.
Read the article
InsightWhat happens to application estates when integration is handled one deal at a time.
Read the articleInsightsCommentary on technology delivery, cloud, security and transformation from the Synnovate team.
Browse the blogTell us what you are trying to change and we will set out the delivery model and the capability that fits.
Discuss your project