Enterprise Applications, typically represented by solution types such as Customer Relationship Management and Enterprise Resource Planning, can be described as being bundles of different functionality that are designed to interoperate in support of the organisation's activities. ERP is a good example, as it is intended to more effectively manage the flow of raw materials and stock that an organisation requires in order to operate cost-effectively, for example a manufacturer of shoes would need to keep track of the materials needed to make shoes and packaging, manage production costs, like payment of wages and paying for utilities and equipment maintenance, then need to keep track of deliveries to a point of sale, such as a store.

Managing all these different types of activity will obviously cover a lot of ground, ranging across the manufacturing side, the employee side, and various financial points, such as accounts payable, purchasing costs, wages, and so on. Creating software in-house could take a long time and may not work as well as needed, whilst buying different applications (probably from different vendors) to manage each need creates a serious risk that the applications will not work together, resulting in chaos.

Enterprise Application suites have always been sold on the basis that they are valuable because they provide a wide range of functionality that is designed to work across all the different modules in the suite, eliminating the risk that applications will clash and fail to work. However, our research suggests that many businesses deploy Enterprise Applications for the wrong reasons, and that a significant amount of the functionality provided is simply not used at all - meaning that it is very difficult for these solutions to provide real value after all.

Enterprise Applications, typically represented by solution types such as Customer Relationship Management and Enterprise Resource Planning, can be described as being bundles of different functionality that are designed to interoperate in support of the organisation's activities. ERP is a good example, as it is intended to more effectively manage the flow of raw materials and stock that an organisation requires in order to operate cost-effectively, for example a manufacturer of shoes would need to keep track of the materials needed to make shoes and packaging, manage production costs, like payment of wages and paying for utilities and equipment maintenance, then need to keep track of deliveries to a point of sale, such as a store.

Managing all these different types of activity will obviously cover a lot of ground, ranging across the manufacturing side, the employee side, and various financial points, such as accounts payable, purchasing costs, wages, and so on. Creating software in-house could take a long time and may not work as well as needed, whilst buying different applications (probably from different vendors) to manage each need creates a serious risk that the applications will not work together, resulting in chaos.

Enterprise Application suites have always been sold on the basis that they are valuable because they provide a wide range of functionality that is designed to work across all the different modules in the suite, eliminating the risk that applications will clash and fail to work. However, our research suggests that many businesses deploy Enterprise Applications for the wrong reasons, and that a significant amount of the functionality provided is simply not used at all - meaning that it is very difficult for these solutions to provide real value after all.