Implementing a supply chain planning tool – pitfalls you should avoid

In our earlier article, we outlined the most common mistakes companies make when selecting a supply chain planning tool: from unclear use cases to underestimating total cost of ownership. But choosing the right tool is only half the journey to the mountain peak. The real value is unlocked (or lost) during implementation.

The hard truth is: more than half of technology implementations fail to deliver the expected business value. A recent BCG study found that only 30% of digital transformations meet or exceed their objectives.[1] This highlights that the odds are against a smooth supply chain tool implementation unless companies take a structured approach. Delays, low adoption, poor data integration, or organizational confusion can erode trust and ROI (return on investment) before the tool is fully operational.

Based on our experience and industry evidence, here are the most common pitfalls that derail tool implementations – and how to avoid them.

1. Rushing into implementation without a roadmap

Too often, companies launch into tool configuration without a realistic, phased implementation plan. Once the tool is selected, the pressure is to “just get it done”. The time needed for meetings and workshops to define requirements is frequently underestimated, and the preparation time is often not accounted for. Project participants may not have sufficient capacity alongside their daily business. As a result, priorities shift, dependencies are overlooked, rework is required, and teams burn out.

Best practice: Define a clear roadmap, including milestones, responsibilities, and success criteria. Avoid a “big bang” rollout. Apply an agile approach instead: start with a minimum viable product (MVP), test it with real users, adjust based on feedback, and scale up in phases. This staged rollout reduces risk and increases user confidence.

 

2. Unclear ownership and project

When it is unclear who owns key decisions (from process design to data standards) implementation progress slows and accountability disappears. Governance goes beyond steering committees – it requires clear accountability for both technical and business dimensions.

Best practice: Set up project governance from day one. Assign process owners, data stewards, and decision mandates across workstreams. Clear ownership builds speed and alignment. Don’t forget change management throughout the organization: communicate proactively, involve key stakeholders early, and invest in user readiness (agile approach helps here as well).

 

3. Missing alignment between internal stakeholders and external partners

Tool implementations involve multiple parties: internal IT, business functions, the software vendor, and an implementation partner. Misalignment across these groups is a frequent cause of project failure. Typical issues include unclear roles (e.g., who prepares and validates data, who trains end-users), misplaced expectations (external partners often don’t know the business deeply), or IT-business silos.

Best practice: Create a robust delivery model with clear ownership. Decide in advance what to outsource (e.g., system development, training, integration), and what to do yourself (e.g., planning process adjustments, data preparation). Set up product owners, involve subject matter experts (SMEs) and enterprise architects, and hold regular structured alignment meetings to keep everyone up to date.

 

4. Poorly defined or shifting scope

Scope creep is a classic implementation risk. Teams keep adding features or adjust processes mid-project, resulting in delays, budget overruns, and loss of focus. This is especially high with custom software solutions.[2]

Best practice: Clearly define scope upfront and manage it through structured change control. Prioritize the “must-haves” and separate them from “nice-to-haves” to protect timelines and deliver value early.

 

5. Over-customization

Trying to replicate outdated workflows or legacy habits in the new tool often leads to unnecessary complexity, poor usability, and higher maintenance costs. Companies that try to replicate all the business specifics in a standard off-the-shelf tool have to deal with the increasing complexity (and costs!) at each future update.

Best practice: Leverage the tool’s standard capabilities wherever possible. Focus on outcomes rather than replicating existing screens or reports. Every customization should have clear business justification. If your supply chain network or planning process requirements are not covered by the available solutions, consider developing a fully custom software solution (and do not forget to secure know-how to develop it in the long-term).

 

6. Insufficient data preparation

Even the best-configured tool cannot function without clean and structured data. We highlighted this in the previous article, but this point cannot be stressed enough. New orders with delivery dates in the past, negative inventories, incomplete or duplicate information… Poor data quality is common. Human errors, bad habits, unclear specifications, and a lack of data governance are the main reasons.

Best practice: Dedicate a workstream to data preparation and ensure continuous data cleansing. Identify the root causes of poor data quality and make sure there is a standard data governance in place before as well as after go-live. Good planning starts with good data.

 

7. Lack of integration with key systems

Without real-time or reliable data exchange between systems like ERP (enterprise resource planning), MES (manufacturing execution system), or BI (business intelligence) tools, the planning tool becomes an isolated island, or worse, a source of conflicting information. This causes not only additional administrative effort (e.g., of using multiple systems to validate information) but also reduces the user acceptance.

Best practice: Design integration of systems early. Define data flows, update cycles, and exception handling. Seamless connectivity and transition ensure your planning tool operates as part of the broader digital ecosystem – one source of truth.

 

8. No plan for post-go-live support

Many teams consider implementation as completed at go-live, only to find that adoption stalls, users struggle, or issues pile up without support structures. This leads in the best case to delays but could also lead to costly recovery programs.[3]

Best practice: Set up a post-go-live plan to secure user acceptance and continuous improvement. That could include information sharing, hypercare support, feedback loops, knowledge transfer, user encouragement and celebration of success stories. Treat go-live as the beginning of value realization, not the end of the project.

The implementation of a planning tool is not just a technical task – it’s an organizational change, where strategy, processes and people must be on the same side. The best tools can still fail if ownership, data, communication, and integration are mismanaged. Avoiding these pitfalls can make the difference between a tool that delivers strategic value and one that ends up not utilized and blamed for performance issues.

At TenglerConsulting, we help companies not only select the right supply chain planning solutions but also ensure that the expectations on the new planning capabilities are fulfilled and the ROI is achieved. Drawing on our years of experience, we support you as a coordinating link between your organization and an implementation partner, provide subject matter expertise on planning processes, conduct project management (aligning people, processes, and technology), and ensure communication among all stakeholders. Together, we help you avoid unnecessary pitfalls and ensure an implementation with lasting impact.

 

 

Sources:
[1] Grebe M. et al., 2024: Most Large-Scale Tech Programs Fail—Here’s How to Succeed [Accessed: 30 August 2025].
[2] Gross G. et al., 2025: 18 famous ERP disasters, dustups, and disappointments [Accessed: 30 August 2025].
[3] Project Management Institute, 2009: Postimplementation blues: techniques and challenges of recovering a business after go-live, through the application of project management [Accessed: 30 August 2025].

In the earlier article, we focused on the critical mistakes to avoid during planning tool selection. For more information on optimizing your supply chain planning, please take a look at our Insights.