For small and mid-sized EMS companies, replacing an ERP system is rarely just an IT project. It usually turns into a full operational reset: quoting, inventory structure, purchasing workflows, production visibility, reporting, and communication processes all get pulled into the discussion.

That was the experience Betsy and the team at Solutions Manufacturing described during a recent episode of the Build Your Way podcast. Solutions Manufacturing is a high-mix, low-to-medium volume EMS provider serving aerospace, medical, industrial, and defense customers. Like many electronics manufacturers, they had been running on a heavily customized legacy system for years before deciding it was time for a change.

What makes their story useful is they approached it realistically and pragmatically, without expecting perfection.

They expected disruption. They planned for failure points. They accepted that some processes would need to evolve after go-live. And they treated ERP selection less like buying software and more like redesigning operational infrastructure.

The Trigger: Legacy Systems That Everyone Knew Too Well

One of the most common themes in EMS manufacturing is operational dependency on tribal knowledge.

The old system “works,” but only because everyone understands the workarounds.

That creates risk:

• Purchasing relies on unwritten rules
• Engineering understands part numbering quirks
• Planning depends on spreadsheet side systems
• Production scheduling lives in people’s heads
• Reporting requires manual interpretation

Solutions Manufacturing had reached that point. Their previous ERP environment had been in place since the 1990s and had accumulated years of customization and process layering.

This is common in contract manufacturing. Over time, systems evolve around immediate operational needs instead of long-term scalability.

The challenge is that eventually the business outgrows the flexibility of those workarounds.

Why the Transition Was Bigger Than ERP

The company did more than replace their ERP. They simultaneously:

• Implemented new quoting software
• Migrated away from internal part numbers
• Shifted toward manufacturer part numbers (MPNs)
• Reworked inventory structures
• Rebuilt reporting processes
• Redesigned production workflows

That combination dramatically increases complexity during implementation.

But it also reflects a practical reality in manufacturing ERP projects: once you are disrupting core processes anyway, companies often decide it is the right time to fix deeper operational problems too.

As Betsy put it during the interview:

“If it’s going to suck, you might as well make it suck a lot one time.”

The Hardest Part Wasn’t Training

Interestingly, the team described training as relatively manageable.

The hardest parts were:

1. Data Cleanup

Legacy manufacturing systems often contain years of inconsistent formatting, overloaded text fields, duplicate records, and undocumented dependencies.

The transcript repeatedly returns to the difficulty of data migration:

• Part records were difficult to normalize
• Information was embedded inside freeform text fields
• Inventory structures did not map cleanly into the new system
• Internal part numbering complicated conversion

This is one of the least glamorous parts of ERP implementation, but it is usually the most important.

Bad data simply becomes faster bad data in a new system.

2. Change Management Around Part Numbers

One of the biggest operational changes involved moving from internal part numbers to manufacturer part numbers.

This is a major shift for many EMS companies. Internal numbering schemes become deeply embedded across:

• Purchasing
• Engineering
• Inventory
• Machine integrations
• Accounting
• Production planning

The benefit of MPN-based inventory is operational flexibility:

• Shared inventory across customers
• Better purchasing leverage
• Cleaner shortage management
• Easier material substitutions

But the human side is difficult.

Employees memorize part numbers over years. Changing that system can feel like removing a shared operational language.

This closely mirrors many of the challenges discussed in Cetec ERP’s article on AVL and internal part number management.

ERP Success Often Looks A Little Messy

One of the more valuable parts of the conversation was how openly the team discussed ongoing process adjustments after go-live.

They are still refining:

• Stockroom organization
• Communication workflows
• Purchasing escalation processes
• Planner visibility
• Production tracking
• Shortage management

That is a healthy approach - ERP implementation is the beginning of ongoing continuous improvement. Once there is a system in place to support the desired changes, change still must occur amongst the users transacting in the system.

The companies that struggle most are often the ones expecting the software alone to create process discipline automatically. The companies that succeed tend to approach ERP as a framework that still requires ownership internally.

Building Reporting Around Real Manufacturing Problems

One of the most practical sections of the discussion focused on reporting and operational visibility.

The team used Metabase reporting tools heavily to answer practical manufacturing questions like:

• Which shortages actually matter right now?
• Which supplier dates are truly confirmed?
• Which work orders are partially complete?
• What inventory is actually available?
• Which kits are clear to build?

The answers to these questions roots the value of the ERP in the ability to quickly solve and handle daily disruption. This is where modern manufacturing ERP systems like Cetec ERP become significantly more valuable than static transaction systems.

The Most Useful Advice From the Interview

Toward the end of the discussion, Betsy gave what was probably the clearest takeaway from the entire conversation:

“Be curious about everything.”

That mindset showed up repeatedly throughout the implementation:

• Testing workflows early
• Exploring system functionality before go-live
• Building reports internally
• Iterating on processes after launch
• Challenging old assumptions

That level of involvement matters more than perfect software selection.

Because, ultimately, there is no perfect ERP. There are only systems that fit your manufacturing environment better than others, and teams willing to adapt operationally to make them successful.

Key Takeaways

• ERP transitions in EMS manufacturing are operational projects, not just software projects
• Data cleanup is usually harder than expected
• Moving to manufacturer part numbers improves flexibility but requires strong change management
• Process refinement continues well after go-live
• Reporting matters most when tied directly to daily production decisions
• Successful implementations require internal ownership and curiosity