Our comprehensive solutions and services guide you on your digitalization journey.
Finding the right business solution:
We speak your language! Our industry-specific solutions are perfectly tailored to your needs.
Energizing customer service with intelligent automation
Tips and updates for our solutions, informative blog posts, compelling case studies, and news about our company.
The "Intelligent Automation" specialization is awarded exclusively to partners who meet strict criteria.
10 min read •
For complex international ERP, CRM, data and AI programmes, delivery excellence cannot depend on individual experience alone. Our implementation approach turns what we learned from numerous past projects into a consistent way of working.
At BE-terna, we have developed an implementation approach for complex international technology transformation projectsprograms. Not because the market needed another project management framework, but because established frameworks alone were not enough for the reality we were encountering in ERP, CRM, data and increasingly AI transformations.
Once a programme stretches across several countries, business units, processes and technology platforms, the difficult questions become very practical. Who owns the future process? Who decides when two countries want different things? What belongs in the common solution and what should remain local? How do we know that the organisation is genuinely ready for go live? And how do we make sure that what we learn in one rollout improves the next?
We combined a hybrid delivery methodology, Microsoft Success by Design and BE-terna project experience into one implementation approach. The purpose is not to add more project administration. It is to give teams a consistent way to manage governance, scope, readiness, organisational change and rollout complexity, while still allowing the project to adapt when new information appears.
Our implementation approach is not a secret ingredient. It is our way of making delivery excellence repeatable.
This distinction matters. Experienced people will always be critical to a successful transformation, but complex international delivery cannot depend only on what individual project managers or consultants know. Experience has to become something a wider team can reuse, challenge and improve. As we often put it internally: experience wins projects, while the implementation approach delivers them consistently.
The challenge in complex technology transformation programmes is not a lack of methodologies. There are already established project management approaches, Microsoft implementation guidance and proven delivery principles. The real difficulty starts when those principles meet the reality of an organisation.
One company may already have harmonised processes across its countries. Another may have accumulated years of local practices, customisations and different systems. In one programme, the future state may require only limited process change. In another, the implementation becomes an opportunity to redesign the way the business operates. This is why we never treat a major implementation as more than as a technology project, but rather a transformation program. The business solution, the business processes and the organisation are changing together. The complexity of the transformation depends on how harmonised existing processes are, how large the gap is between the current and future state, how customised existing solutions are and how much of the technology landscape is shared across the organisation. A technically successful implementation can still disappoint the business if users continue working around the new system, process ownership remains unclear or different countries recreate their old ways of working inside thea new platformsolution.
A useful methodology therefore needs to go further than describing good principles. It must make them practical enough to guide real decisions.
Our implementation approach consists of three layers.
The first is a hybrid project methodology. It gives us the structure and high level predictability associated with traditional project delivery, while maintaining the iterative and incremental elements needed to respond to change and mataine a high level of stakeholder engagement. We establish scope and direction early, then progressively elaborate the solution through implementation cycles and present solution increments.
The second is Microsoft Success by Design, which brings Microsoft implementation guidelines, milestones and solution best practices into the programme.
The third is BE-terna specifics. This is where frameworks are translated into detailed ways of working through project strategies, governance, project plans, RACI matrices, templates and lessons learned from previous implementations. That third layer is particularly important. A framework can tell a team that governance matters. A working implementation approach needs to make clear who can make a decision, what information is required, when something needs to be escalated and how the decision affects the rest of the programme. The same applies to scope and , risk management, testing and organisational readiness. The value lies in turning good principles into repeatable project behaviour.
Our guiding principles reflect this balance. We prioritise the must haves, use standard functionality wherever possible, involve users frequently, break long activities into iterations and use what we learn to refine later stages of the programme. The objective is simple: control the direction, while keeping the delivery open to learning.
The real value of an implementation approach becomes visible when the programme gets difficult — when teams need a clear way to make decisions, manage risks and keep delivery on track. Take decision making. In complex projects, delays are often caused not by technology but by uncertainty about ownership. Several people may be involved in a topic, but nobody knows who has the authority to make the final call. Our governance model defines decision rights, authority levels and escalation paths. Decisions are delegated to the lowest appropriate level, while important decisions, deliverables and end to end processes have a clearly accountable owner. RACI matrix translates this into day to day responsibilities by defining who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted and Informed.
The same discipline applies to readiness. A date mileston in a project plan is not yet evidence that an organisation is ready to move forward. Phase gates and governance reviews are used to evaluate solution quality, testing, data, training, adoption, cutover, scope, budget and remaining risks before the programme progresses. Scope requires the same treatment. Projects rarely lose control because of one enormous request. More often, scope expands through many individually reasonable changes. Formal change control forces the programme to consider not only the effort required for a request, but also what it means for schedule, cost, quality, risks and other connected impacted areas of the project.
That is what repeatability means to us. It does not mean every project is the same. It means we have a consistent way to make difficult decisions.
International rollouts make the quality of the delivery approach particularly visible. The programme begins by defining the common processes and requirements and establishing the core solution. A pilot country then provides a real environment in which to validate both the solution and the rollout model. The team learns where local requirements appear, which activities require more effort than expected and which decisions should be taken earlier.
Those lessons should not remain with the pilot team. They should improve the next rollout.
For me, there is one very simple test: Does Country 5 feel easier than Country 1? If every country brings the same uncertainty, the organisation is repeating implementations rather than building a scalable rollout capability.
The same principle applies to the balance between global standards and local requirements. Tax, statutory reporting, regulatory requirements and language can justify local variation. Historical habits may not.
The purpose is not to make every country identical. It is to protect the common core while ensuring that local differences are understood, justified and governed.
Another important lesson is that implementation success should not be measured by how many requirements can be pushed into the first release.
We prioritise requirements according to business value, complexity, risk and urgency. A useful application of the Pareto principle is to identify the critical 20 to 30% of capabilities that can provide 80 to 90% of the expected business value, instead of treating every requested feature as equally important.
This is also how we think about MVP in enterprise implementations. An MVP is not a half finished solution. It is a production ready solution with the capabilities required to operate successfully from day one, while lower priority functionality can follow in planned releases.
This approach can reduce unnecessary customisation, testing effort, technical debt and long term maintenance. More importantly, it gives users the opportunity to experience the standard processes before deciding which additional functionality genuinely creates value.
More functionality is not automatically more value. Better prioritisation is.
The real test of an implementation approach comes halfway through a programme, when the original plan meets reality. A country raises an unexpected requirement. Testing reveals a process gap. A dependency is delayed. Data quality is worse than expected. Users are not as prepared as the project assumed.
At that point, the important questions are no longer theoretical. Who owns the issue? Who has authority to decide? What else will be affected? Is this global or local? Does it belong in the first release? What needs to be retested? Are we still ready to move forward? A good delivery system gives teams a consistent way to answer those questions. This also applies to organisational change. Adoption cannot begin shortly before go live. BE-terna's delivery implementation approach connects change management with project planning, business outcomes, process workshops, governance, iterative testing, user involvement, training and continuous improvement after go live.
None of these practices is revolutionary on its own.
The strength comes from applying them consistently as one delivery system.
When I say that BE-terna developed its own implementation approach, I do not mean that we invented a new project management theory.
We did something more practical. We combined proven delivery principles, Microsoft guidance and what we have learned through international projects into a consistent way of working.
That is important because experience is individual, but delivery excellence has to be repeatable.
Our implementation approach captures what works, makes it reusable and gives us a structure for improving it from one programme and rollout to the next. It gives teams a common way to govern decisions, manage scope, assess readiness, balance global and local requirements and respond when reality differs from the original plan.
ERP will evolve. CRM will evolve. Data platforms, analytics, automation and AI will change even faster.
The technology will keep moving.
The capability to deliver transformation well is something we can keep, reuse and continuously improve.
Choosing the right technology is only one part of the decision. The delivery model deserves the same level of scrutiny.
If you are planning an international implementation, we can look at how your programme will manage governance, global and local requirements, rollout sequencing, readiness and organisational change before those questions become project issues.
Subscribe to our Newsletter and get relevant updates …
Gal Šmidovnik is Head of International Project Organisation at BE-terna. He focuses on the structure and delivery of complex international technology transformation programmes, including governance, international rollouts and the transition from implementation into sustainable operations.
