ERP

Configure-to-order Companies: Configure-to-order (CTO) manufacturing presents a unique category, as most businesses don’t initially operate in this model due to the overhead of product standardization, which can be challenging for startups. Additionally, the expectations of B2B and B2C industries for configure-to-order processes can differ significantly. B2C sectors such as furniture, mattresses, automotive, appliances, and tires often require configurability, primarily driven by consumer expectations. In contrast, B2B industries needing configurability encompass oil and gas parts, aftermarket services, industrial distributors, equipment manufacturers, and field service firms, for which the needs might be either customer-driven or inward-facing to streamline estimation and quoting processes. Smaller companies may initially categorize themselves as either service or engineer-to-order focused, managing their quoting processes manually before transitioning to configure-to-order workflows.

Configure-to-Order Manufacturing Business Processes: The processes for configurability vary based on drivers, demanding distinct architecture and systems. Configure-to-order workflows typically necessitate product templates and extraction of variables for configuration parameters. Different customer personas and journeys may dictate varying configuration needs; consumer-facing apps often feature fewer variables to prevent user overwhelm, while internal sales tools may offer more options based on customer requests. Field service apps, constrained by device limitations, particularly require simplified models for workers.

Configure-to-order Manufacturing ERP Needs. The configure-to-order manufacturing ERP requirements vary depending on process integrations across systems and also the complexity of the architecture. Businesses emphasizing engineering may utilize CAD and PDM systems with web plugins for customer collaboration, limiting configurable BOMs to these systems without affecting ERP processes. Alternatively, ERP systems may manage configurable BOMs, accommodating production and pricing variations per configuration. Consumer and field service processes often handle configurations within the commerce or field service layers, transmitting finalized BOMs. Curious about configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems in 2024? Let’s explore.

Criteria

• Definition of a configure-to-order manufacturing company. These companies in the configure-to-order ecosystem include manufacturers that are configuration-driven in a variety of industries, including building materials, mattresses, furniture, aftermarket, industrial distribution, medical devices and more. The list considers companies of all sizes in this ecosystem.
• Overall market share/# of customers. The higher marketshare among engineer-to-order companies drives higher rankings on this list.
• Ownership/funding. The superior financial position of the ERP vendor leads to higher rankings on this list.
• Quality of development. How modern is the tech stack? How aggressively is the ERP vendor pushing cloud-native functionality for this product? Is the roadmap officially announced? Or uncertain?
• Community/Ecosystem. How vibrant is the community? Social media groups? In-person user groups? Forums?
• Depth of native functionality. Last-mile functionality for specific industries natively built into the product?
• Quality of publicly available product documentation. How well-documented is the product? Is the documentation available publicly? How updated is the demo content available on YouTube?
• Product share and documented commitment. Is the product share reported separately in financial statements if the ERP vendor is public?
• Ability to natively support diversified business models. How diverse is the product in supporting multiple business models in the same product?
• Acquisition strategy aligned with the product: Any recent acquisitions to fill a specific hole for configure-to-order industries? Any official announcements to integrate recently acquired capabilities?
• User Reviews: How specific are the reviews about this product’s capabilities? How recent and frequent are the reviews?
• Must be an ERP product: Edge products such as HCM, CRM, eCommerce, MES, or accounting solutions that are not fully integrated to support enterprise-wide capabilities are not qualified for this list.

10. Rootstock

Rootstock specializes in serving SMBs with the support for configure-to-order models, leveraging Salesforce’s robust CPQ and field service features. It’s ideal for businesses requiring tight integration of configurator processes with CRM, field service, and eCommerce, particularly in medical device sectors with regulatory-dependent territory planning. Thus, Rootstock earns the #10 spot on our list of leading configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Native integration with other salesforce products. Its strength Includes native integration with other Salesforce CPQ and Field Services. This is especially beneficial for configure-to-order companies where the configurator processes need to be tightly embedded with CRM and field service processes.
2. Native capabilities to support configure-to-order BOMs. Along with the manufacturing business models, Rootstock has support for configure-to-order BOMs, which might be a challenge with other products that might not be designed for configure-to-order processes.
3. WBS-centric manufacturing capabilities. Most configure-to-order businesses are likely to be building complex products requiring configurations, making it critical to have WBS-centric processes.

Weaknesses

1. Finance and accounting. Rootstock’s core ERP capabilities are not as robust as those of other manufacturing ERP systems. Their accounting capabilities are also not as layered and scalable, requiring ad-hoc arrangements.
2. Reliance on third-party quality module. Rootstock would need several apps from Salesforce or non-salesforce ecosystems to be comparable in capabilities with other products on this list, posing communication challenges and implementation risks.
3. Smaller Ecosystem. The ecosystem is relatively small for rootstock, with less than 500 installations. This could also pose a risk in finding talent for future support and customizations.

9. Oracle Cloud ERP

Oracle Cloud ERP is uniquely positioned for service-centric configure-to-order businesses, which tend to have different configure-to-order workflows than product-centric organizations, with their need for subscriptions, pricing, and bundles. While Oracle Cloud ERP’s CPQ and configurator workflows may also require additional add-ons to support the needs of diverse configure-to-order businesses. Although, the core ERP workflows would be sufficient for most business models. Thus, securing its rank at #9 on our list of top configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Robust finance capabilities for large, global configure-to-order manufacturers. Capabilities include having five layers of GL restrictions, multiple layers of sub-ledgers, and book closing requirements across divisions, especially relevant for larger Configure-to-order businesses primarily interested in using Oracle Cloud ERP as a corporate financial ledger.
2. Proven solution with large workloads. Large companies may process millions of GL entries per hour. These workloads may be even higher for configure-to-order manufacturing companies, requiring them to decouple transactions as a single system might struggle to support, forcing them to best-of-breed architecture for such companies, an ideal fit for Oracle Cloud ERP.
3. Ecosystem.  Oracle Cloud ERP has an ecosystem of experienced consultants who have the capabilities to handle the design and architecture of such complex enterprises.

Weaknesses

1. Limited last-mile capabilities and configure-to-order integrations. The last-mile capabilities and specialized integrations are relevant to configure-to-order businesses that might require third-party add-ons.
2. It’s not necessarily a manufacturing solution. Oracle Cloud ERP’s concentration in configure-to-order businesses is limited, especially for product-centric organizations, making this vertical a lower priority for Oracle than service-centric organizations.
3. Overwhelming for SMB configure-to-order manufacturers. The enterprise data model and financial layers might be overwhelming for SMB configure-to-order manufacturers.

8. Acumatica

Acumatica caters to configure-to-order businesses with intricate workflows, offering text-based configurator capabilities. Although not as immersive as Infor or Epicor in its 3D capabilities, Acumatica’s configurator, accessible via the customer portal, suits companies aiming to enhance internal quoting and estimation processes. Thus, positioning Acumatica at #8 among the leading configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Configurator add-on and configurable BOMs. Acumatica has a configurator add-on that sits on top of the core ERP modules, enabling the core configurator capabilities. It also supports configurable BOMs, which can support complex engineering processes or light products delivered through eCommerce.
2. Support for sub-assemblies and phantom. Acumatica has strong support for sub-assemblies, which is crucial for configure-to-order BOMs, both for costing and scheduling. It also has strong support for phantoms, which is another huge plus, as most configure-to-order verticals will have a substantial number of phantoms as part of their BOMs.
3. Support for complex rule-based configurations. Most field service-centric businesses are likely to have very complex rules with nesting and dependencies among the configurable logic. For example, if the material is leather, then the color could be either blue or black. Rules such as these are complex and can be enabled through configurator processes if the underlying logic doesn’t support nested rules.

Weaknesses

1. Limited global capabilities. The current multi-entity functionality might be limiting for configure-to-order companies with operationally connected offshore locations.
2. Limited mature manufacturing capabilities. Advanced features such as allocation layers or kanban are not built natively as part of the product, making it challenging for large configure-to-order companies aiming to streamline their inventory.
3. Multiple add-ons may be required for configure-to-order manufacturing. Requires several third-party add-ons, such as MES, PLM, and quality, posing integration and communication challenges.

7. Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O

While Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a very rich product model to support complex configure-to-order operations, it will require configurator add-ons to support the needs of configure-to-order business models. Despite being limited to configurator capabilities, it will be more suitable for diverse configure-to-order operations or companies with uncertain business models because of M&A activity. Thus, securing the #7 spot among the top configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Richer core ERP capabilities for configure-to-order companies in the cloud. Compared to other solutions that might have superior layers for other service-centric verticals, such as Oracle Cloud ERP, Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a mature cloud version for configure-to-order companies requiring base layers that can be easily augmented by third-party add-ons.
2. Various best-of-breed options to support various configure-to-order business models. The best-of-breed ERP integration, such as CRM or field service, would allow supporting various configurator processes that might be tightly embedded with CRM or field service workflows. The other engineering or eCommerce-centric configurator processes would require third-party add-ons.
3. Powerful ecosystem and marketplace add-ons. Microsoft has a talent and consulting base in countries where finding talent may be a challenge. 

Weaknesses

1. Limited pre-baked integrations for configure-to-order companies. The integration relevant for configure-to-order companies such as PLM, CAD, or eCommerce would require third-party ERP add-ons, increasing communication and integration risks.
2. Too big for smaller companies. The smaller companies would find it overwhelming with the configuration and approval flows built for large enterprises.
3. Integration and implementation risks for complex 3D configurator-driven processes. The implementation requiring substantial data exchange between the eCommerce and ERP layers might pose integration and communications challenges without the IT maturity and budget required for due diligence and process design.
   

6. SAP S/4 HANA

SAP S/4 HANA targets major global configure-to-order manufacturers, offering compatibility with SAP Hybris for a 3D configurator experience via the eCommerce layer. While other configure-to-order models like engineering or field service-centric may need third-party add-ons, SAP S/4 HANA boasts a robust product model supporting intricate configure-to-order processes. Its capability to manage millions of transactions per hour suits Fortune 500-scale enterprises, particularly those emphasizing financial compliance and governance. However, it may not be optimal for SMBs lacking internal IT maturity. Thus, securing the #6 spot on this list of top configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Enterprise product designed for configure-to-order centric companies. The item master, product model, and inventory are friendly for complex configure-to-order businesses because of scalable and modular BOM and costing layers.
2. The power of HANA to run global operations end-to-end in one system. Our simple test of HANA’s capabilities with 100K serialized goods receipt found it to be faster than most systems out there. SAP S/4 HANA could process it in under 22 seconds, while Oracle cloud ERP took more than 18 mins for the same test. This is especially friendly for large configure-to-order businesses aiming to run their consolidated global MRP runs in one system.
3. Financial governance and best-of-breed architecture. Financial traceability is built with each transaction, which makes the transactions and SOX governance flows highly traceable, especially friendly for publicly traded configure-to-order companies. 

Weaknesses

1. Behind in cloud capabilities. While SAP has made tremendous advancements, the cloud ERP version is still behind its on-prem variant.
2. Too big for smaller configure-to-order companies. Companies looking for a fully baked suite without internal IT capabilities will find it overwhelming.
3. Limited last mile Capabilities and third-party pre-integrated options. The last-mile capabilities relevant for configure-to-order businesses, such as CAD, PLM, configurator, etc, would require third-party add-ons.

5. IQMS/DELMIAWorks

DELMIAWorks caters to configure-to-order engineering and plastic-centric enterprises with intricate inventory requirements. It integrates seamlessly with SolidWorks, also facilitating streamlined workflows and enhanced customer collaboration. However, it may not be the optimal choice for eCommerce or field service-centric firms seeking consumer-grade 3D configurator experiences or configurable service functionalities on multiple mobile devices. IQMS is better suited for smaller configure-to-order companies or larger entities as a subsidiary-level system. Thus, earning it the #5 spot among configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. BOM structure is friendly for configure-to-order companies. configure-to-order companies that are heavy on engineering collaboration, including collaboration with customers, would find DELMIAWorks to be compelling.
2. Best for configure-to-order companies on SolidWorks. With the same company as SolidWorks owning it, tighter and seamless integration of both products, which are built and maintained by the same vendor, is a huge plus.
3. Technology – This is probably the most legacy solution of all on this list, with no announcement if they plan to modernize the technology.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for configure-to-order companies diversifying their operations and being active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. The consulting base is extremely limited, with most resellers being CAD resellers and having limited experience in ERP implementation and cross-functional processes.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. While a great subsidiary solution and a solution for pure-play configure-to-order manufacturers, it’s not the best fit for companies requiring diverse mixed-mode manufacturing companies or companies with complex business models.

4. IFS

Ideal for service-, project-, and asset-centric organizations, IFS is a great solution for highly engineered products particularly with WBS-centric workflows and long-standing programs. It would be ideal for companies requiring engineering collaboration and service-centric configurable quotes. Although, it might not be the best fit for eCommerce-centric consumer-grade 3D experience workflows. Despite these considerations, IFS maintains its rank at #4 on our list of top configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Unique program architecture tailored to track the costs of large configure-to-order programs. Unlike smaller ERP systems with a 1:1 relationship between a sales order and a project, IFS is designed to handle large programs where consolidated visibility would be critical without ad-hoc arrangements.
2. Enterprise-grade field service and asset management capabilities. Especially suitable for configure-to-order companies because of their need to maintain expensive assets with complex workflows and scheduling requirements for field services.
3. Unique financial workflows to support complex configure-to-order programs. Expensive products with configure-to-order operations require unique workflows, such as closing transactions financially at the line level, which might not be possible with ERP systems not designed to handle such transactions.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for configure-to-order companies active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. Its presence and install base are still limited in North America compared to other solutions on this list.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. While IFS can provide the best-of-breed capabilities in a tier-two architecture or can act as one solution, IFS might not be the best fit to be used just as the corporate ledger for large configure-to-order enterprises.

3. Epicor Kinetic

Epicor Kinetic is tailored for small-to-mid-size configure-to-order manufacturers, particularly in industries with formal manufacturing processes. It offers a simpler 3D configurator experience, eliminating the need for consultants to configure products. However, its configurator may lack extensive options and scalability compared to more complex counterparts like Infor CSI or LN. While it excels in its niche, Epicor may not be the best choice for consumer-grade 3D configurator or configurable services experience. Thus, securing the #3 spot among top configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Strong for configure-to-order comapnies with formal manufacturing processes. The simplicity of the configurator is especially appealing to companies with limited consulting and implementation budgets, combined with their BOMs, especially appealing for businesses with formal manufacturing processes.
2. Strong with complex inventory needs. For configure-to-order companies that use product attributes not only to drive the production BOMs but also if these variables are used as part of the production processes and planning, Epicor inventory processes would be especially friendly.
3. Microsoft look-and-feel. Epicor has a very similar look and feel to Microsoft ERP products.

Weaknesses

1. Global financial operations. Unlike larger products that might support more than three layers of financial hierarchies, such as corp, subsidiary, entity, and business units, the limited number of layers would operationally inefficient workarounds, such as using sub-accounts for such traceability.
2. Embedded experience with field service and quality. Despite recent acquisitions, the field service capabilities are not as embedded and proven as some of the other products on this list, making it challenging for service companies looking for a configurable service experience.
3. Weak ecosystem and marketplace. Epicor takes a suite approach to its products while selling directly to its customers. This limits the overall consulting and marketplace penetration.

2. Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline)

Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline) combines enterprise-grade configurator experience for complex products. It uses the same configurator module as its larger counterparts, such as Infor LN or M3, and can provide 3D product experiences that are very similar to SAP Hybriswell as visual 3D assemblies with complex animations and product orientations. While the configurator is complex, the underlying inventory layers might struggle for companies that use configurable attributes as part of their MRP or production runs. It might not be the best fit for companies with WBS-centric processes. Thus, placing it at #2 on our list among configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Complex configurator with consumer-grade 3D experience. Ideal for companies seeking consumer-grade 3D experiences, such as the furniture or mattress industry, as well as companies in the aftermarket and field-services spaces requiring OEM BOMs to be exploded on consumer-facing websites for field service and part purchase.

2. Support for configurable BOMs with images. The configurator supports image-based guided configuration, quoting, and estimation processes.
3. Field service integration of configurable BOMs. The field service processes support configurable BOMs for parts and service departments, which might require visual guidance on OEM BOMs.

Weaknesses

1. Limited WBS-centric support for configurable products. The process model does not have as comprehensive support for WBS-centric processes, making it not as great fit for complex products with long lead times and complex programs requiring operational collaboration along with the financial activities and milestones as part of the project.
2. Limited support for complex inventory with MRP and scheduling processes. The MRP and scheduling processes has limited support for product attributes, especially when it comes to using them for planning and purchase, making it inferior fit for industries with complex industries such as metal or chemical industries.
3. Weak ecosystem and third-party options. Similar to Epicor, Infor CSI takes the suite approach. So it might be harder to find integration with best-of-breed third-party ERP add-ons.

1. Infor CloudSuite LN

Similar to Infor CSI, Infor CloudSuite LN bundles the same enterprise-grade product and overcomes other limitations, such as WBS-centric processes and support for larger programs.LN also has superior support for international supply chain processes, including vendor collaboration, especially where vendor and customer collaboration might be required to enable the configurator experience. Thus, winning the #1 spot among configure-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Global operations. Infor LN is the only solution in the market that has sufficient layers of financial hierarchies and global trade compliance functionality pre-baked with products to support configure-to-order manufacturers exploring global financial and operational synergies. 
2. Last-mile capabilities along with breadth of capabilities for diversified manufacturing business models. Configure-to-order verticals require deeper core ERP capabilities such as milestone and progress billing, operational tracking of programs, and consolidated view of costs of large programs not just as a report but also as part of the operational workflow without having users leave their transactional screens.
3. Best-of-breed integrations offered out-of-the-box. Most tools that make-to manufacturer would require, such as HCM, PLM, data lake, ERP, WMS, TMS, and advanced supply chain planning, are all pre-integrated with LN.

Weaknesses

1. Might not be the best fit as a corporate solution for holding and private equity companies. Holding companies as diverse as configure-to-order manufacturing, construction, and professional services may not be able to keep all of their entities on one solution and database.
2. Legacy UI and Experience. Infor LN is a legacy solution with limited cloud-native capabilities such as universal search, mobile experience, etc.
3. Weak Ecosystem and Marketplace. The consulting base and marketplaces are virtually non-existent for Infor LN.

Conclusion

Achieving success in configure-to-order manufacturing ERP particularly demands extensive process and product model sophistication. When processes align with industry or consumer expectations, leveraging established standards simplifies product formalization, facilitating the development of processes around predefined norms. Implementing configure-to-order manufacturing ERP processes for operational efficiency or streamlined quoting requires significant reengineering of product models and business processes. Thus, choosing the right ERP system necessitates a meticulous examination of transactions and workflows to avoid implementation challenges. While this list provides valuable guidance, consulting an independent ERP consultant can significantly improve implementation outcomes.

FAQs

Engineer-to-order Companies: Engineer-to-order (ETO) manufacturing companies possess a distinctive blend of traits from various manufacturing models like project manufacturing and make-to-order. These entities are known for their intricate operations, spanning industries like equipment manufacturing, modular housing, or bridge construction. Distinguishing true ETO setups from construction-centric projects can be challenging due to overlaps. Despite these complexities, identifying an ETO company primarily hinges on its profound engineering focus.

Engineer-to-order Manufacturing Business Processes: The engineering process varies depending on the product type, often commencing with customer engineers providing initial drawings or specifications for desired machinery or equipment. However, these initial drawings typically require refinement through extensive collaboration between customer and vendor engineers until a satisfactory prototype and estimate are achieved. Additionally, the level of organizational maturity greatly influences the structure of Bills of Materials (BOMs). In nascent stages, companies may lack consolidated procurement and planning processes, resorting to project-specific ordering and planning. As such, selecting an appropriate ERP system hinges on the organization’s maturity level.

Engineer-to-order Manufacturing ERP Needs. Every ERP system operates within specific data model parameters. For instance, certain systems may necessitate revision numbers at the outset of a process. Without a formalized procedure for maintaining these numbers or adhering to engineering control processes, products requiring revision numbers may seem superfluous, leading to user adoption challenges. Alternatively, some products may not integrate engineering BOMs within the ERP system, presuming they will be housed in a CAD or PLM/PDM system. Failure to align engineering processes with SKU numbering or parts management can result in downstream BOM issues, necessitating ad-hoc solutions impacting the choice of an ERP system. So, which are the leading engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems for 2024?

Criteria

• Definition of an engineer-to-order manufacturing company. These companies in the engineer-to-order ecosystem include manufacturers that are heavily engineering-focused in a variety of industries, including automotive, aerospace, oil and gas, custom machinery, and industrial automation. The list considers companies of all sizes in this ecosystem.
• Overall market share/# of customers. The higher marketshare among engineer-to-order companies drives higher rankings on this list.
• Ownership/funding. The superior financial position of the ERP vendor leads to higher rankings on this list.
• Quality of development. How modern is the tech stack? How aggressively is the ERP vendor pushing cloud-native functionality for this product? Is the roadmap officially announced? Or uncertain?
• Community/Ecosystem. How vibrant is the community? Social media groups? In-person user groups? Forums?
• Depth of native functionality. Last-mile functionality for specific industries natively built into the product?
• Quality of publicly available product documentation. How well-documented is the product? Is the documentation available publicly? How updated is the demo content available on YouTube?
• Product share and documented commitment. Is the product share reported separately in financial statements if the ERP vendor is public?
• Ability to natively support diversified business models. How diverse is the product in supporting multiple business models in the same product?
• Acquisition strategy aligned with the product: Any recent acquisitions to fill a specific hole for engineer-to-order industries? Any official announcements to integrate recently acquired capabilities?
• User Reviews: How specific are the reviews about this product’s capabilities? How recent and frequent are the reviews?
• Must be an ERP product: Edge products such as HCM, CRM, eCommerce, MES, or accounting solutions that are not fully integrated to support enterprise-wide capabilities are not qualified for this list.

10. Rootstock

Rootstock caters to engineer-to-order centric SMBs, offering robust mobile-native capabilities atop the Salesforce platform. It is particularly fit for smaller engineer-to-order companies that heavily use the Salesforce platform for their CRM and field service solutions. It might also fit as a subsidiary solution for some entities that might prefer a unified user experience across the enterprise. Thus, given these considerations, Rootstock ranks at #10 on our list of top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Native integration with other salesforce products. Its strength Includes native integration with other Salesforce products such as Salesforce CRM and Field Service. This is especially beneficial for engineer-to-order companies with longer sales cycles already managing their sales and estimation processes on Salesforce.
2. Mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities. While Rootstock might not have as comprehensive coverage for every manufacturing mode, it can support the make-to-order and make-to-stock needs of engineer-to-order organizations.
3. WBS-centric manufacturing capabilities. Most engineered-to-order organizations also require WBS-centric capabilities for their operational project management needs, making these capabilities necessary for engineer-to-order organizations.

Weaknesses

1. Finance and accounting. Rootstock’s core ERP capabilities are not as robust as those of other manufacturing ERP systems. Their accounting capabilities are not as layered and scalable, requiring ad-hoc arrangements.
2. Reliance on third-party quality module. Depending upon the vertical that engineer-to-order organizations might serve and based on the architectural requirements, quality processes could be extremely critical at every touch point, including production, procurement, return, and engineering. Rootstock’s reliance on third-party modules may cause communication challenges, posing ERP implementation risks.
3. Smaller Ecosystem. The ecosystem is relatively small for rootstock, with less than 500 installations. This could pose a risk in finding talent for future support and customizations.

9. Oracle Cloud ERP

Oracle Cloud ERP is uniquely positioned for construction and telecom-centric engineer-to-order manufacturing companies. While they share similarities with traditional engineer-to-order manufacturing organizations, the estimation and quoting process could be completely different. While the BOMs could come across as being similar, they are uniquely different. Oracle Cloud ERP is also a superior fit for companies that might also have PSA-like processes for such organizations that might combine consulting with project manufacturing. Thus, securing its rank at #9 on our list of engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Robust finance capabilities for large, global Engineer-to-order manufacturers. Capabilities include having five layers of GL restrictions, multiple layers of sub-ledgers, and book closing requirements across divisions, especially relevant for larger Engineer-to-order businesses primarily interested in using Oracle Cloud ERP as a corporate financial ledger.
2. Proven solution with large workloads. Large companies may process millions of GL entries per hour. These workloads may be even higher for engineer-to-order manufacturing companies, requiring them to decouple transactions as a single system might struggle to support, forcing them to best-of-breed architecture for such companies, an ideal fit for Oracle Cloud ERP.
3. Ecosystem.  Oracle Cloud ERP has an ecosystem of experienced consultants who have the capabilities to handle the design and architecture of such complex enterprises.

Weaknesses

1. Limited last-mile capabilities and engineer-to-order integrations. The last-mile capabilities and specialized integrations relevant to engineer-to-order businesses might require third-party add-ons.
2. It’s not necessarily a manufacturing solution. Oracle Cloud ERP’s concentration in engineer-to-order businesses is limited, making this vertical a lower priority for Oracle compared to service-centric organizations.
3. Overwhelming for SMB engineer-to-order manufacturers. The enterprise data model and financial layers might be overwhelming for SMB engineer-to-order manufacturers.

8. Acumatica

Acumatica is uniquely suitable for engineer-to-order organizations with its robust BOMs, support for make-to-order and stock processes, and strong capabilities for projects. While Acumatica might be a great fit for smaller engineer-to-order projects, complex machinery may require program-level support where each project might be mapped to a line item at a quote level, requiring mature capabilities for engineer-to-order verticals. These capabilities will be required when consolidated costing at the program level, and reporting will be key. Thus, given its pros and cons, Acumatica ranks at #8 among the top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Rich BOMs and scalable costing layers. Acumatica BOMs are highly organized and follow logical structure across the screens, making them highly scalable for engineer-to-order companies.
2. Support for sub-assemblies and phantom. Acumatica has strong support for sub-assemblies, which is crucial for engineer-to-order BOMs, both for costing and scheduling. It also has strong support for phantoms, which is another huge plus, as most engineer-to-order verticals will have a substantial number of phantoms as part of their BOMs.
3. Diverse capabilities to support the needs of multiple business models. The product can accommodate multiple business models in the same database, making it easier to explore synergies across different business models, including distribution, construction, and field services.

Weaknesses

1. Limited global capabilities. The current multi-entity functionality might be limiting for engineer-to-order companies with operationally connected offshore locations.
2. Limited mature manufacturing capabilities. Advanced features such as allocation layers or kanban are not built natively as part of the product, making it challenging for large engineer-to-order companies aiming to streamline their inventory.
3. Multiple add-ons may be required for engineer-to-order manufacturing. Requires several third-party add-ons, such as MES, PLM, and quality, posing integration and communication challenges.

7. SAP S/4 HANA

Targeting large global engineer-to-order manufacturing companies, its product model is capable of handling most mixed-mode manufacturing, including product specifications and variants that are used not only for reporting but also for planning and transaction processing. SAP S/4 HANA excels in handling millions of transactions per hour, a requirement for companies on a Fortune 500 scale. Ideal for large publicly traded companies heavy on financial compliance and governance, it may not suit SMB manufacturing companies without internal IT maturity. SAP S/4 HANA enjoys a unique advantage for MRP-driven companies requiring enterprise-grade workloads intending to keep all of their entities in one database. Thus, ranking at #5 on this list of top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Enterprise product designed for engineer-to-order centric companies. The item master, product model, and inventory are especially friendly for engineer-to-order businesses because of scalable and modular BOM and costing layers.
2. The power of HANA to run global operations end-to-end in one system. Our simple test of HANA’s capabilities with 100K serialized goods receipt found it to be faster than most systems out there. SAP S/4 HANA could process it in under 22 seconds, while Oracle cloud ERP took more than 18 mins for the same test. This is especially friendly for large engineer-to-order businesses aiming to run their consolidated global MRP runs in one system.
3. Financial governance and best-of-breed architecture. Financial traceability is built with each transaction, which makes the transactions and SOX governance flows highly traceable, especially friendly for publicly traded engineer-to-order companies. 

Weaknesses

1. Behind in cloud capabilities. While SAP has made tremendous advancements, the cloud version is still behind its on-prem variant.
2. Too big for smaller engineer-to-order companies. Companies looking for a fully baked suite without internal IT capabilities will find it overwhelming.
3. Limited last mile Capabilities and third-party pre-integrated options. The last-mile capabilities relevant for engineer-to-order businesses, such as CAD, PLM, configurator, etc, would require ERP third-party add-ons.

6. Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O

Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O excels in localizations where other focused solutions might not be available, providing only a few options for engineer-to-order companies. While Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a very rich product model to support complex engineer-to-order operations, it might not have a complete suite and integrated options as focused solutions, such as Epicor Kinetic or Infor LN, requiring third-party add-ons for these capabilities. Despite being limited with suite capabilities, it will be more suitable for diverse engineer-to-order operations or companies with uncertain business models because of M&A activity. Hence, securing the #6 spot among the top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Richer core ERP capabilities for engineer-to-order companies in the cloud. Compared to other solutions that might have superior layers for other service-centric verticals, such as Oracle Cloud ERP, Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a mature cloud version for engineer-to-order companies.
2. Best-of-breed products integrated at the database level. While Microsoft has best-of-breed integration, such as CRM or field service, they might not be as directly relevant for engineer-to-order companies but will be useful for engineer-to-order companies with diverse business models. 
3. Powerful ecosystem and marketplace add-ons. Microsoft has a talent and consulting base in countries where finding talent may be a challenge. 

Weaknesses

1. Limited pre-baked integrations for engineer-to-order companies. The integration relevant for engineer-to-order companies such as PLM, CAD, MES, and configurator would require third-party add-ons, increasing communication and integration risks.
2. Too big for smaller companies. The smaller companies would find it overwhelming with the configuration and approval flows built for large enterprises.
3. Limited last mile capabilities. The last-mile functionality relevant to specific industry verticals, such as PPAP compliance or AS9100, might require substantial consulting efforts.

5. IFS

Targeting larger field service and MRO organizations, IFS is a great solution for larger engineer-to-order companies looking for best-of-breed field service and EAM capabilities atop corporate financial ledgers such as SAP or Oracle. It is also a great fit for companies managing large programs with very long lead times that might have constraints, such as finishing the complete value stream activity as part of the sales quote before starting on the new one, requiring complex relationships between sales quotes and programs that smaller systems might be able to support. Despite these considerations, IFS maintains its rank at #5 on our list of top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Unique program architecture tailored to track the costs of large engineer-to-order programs. Unlike smaller ERP systems with a 1:1 relationship between a sales order and a project, IFS is designed to handle large programs where consolidated visibility would be critical without ad-hoc arrangements.
2. Enterprise-grade field service and asset management capabilities. Especially suitable for engineer-to-order companies because of their need to maintain expensive assets with complex workflows and scheduling requirements for field services.
3. Unique financial workflows to support complex engineer-to-order programs. Expensive MRO operations require unique workflows, such as closing transactions financially at the line level, which might not be possible with ERP systems not designed to handle such transactions.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for engineer-to-order companies active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. It has a limited presence and install base in North America compared to other solutions on this list.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. While IFS can provide the best-of-breed ERP capabilities in a tier-two architecture or can act as one solution, IFS might not be the best fit to be used just as the corporate ledger for large engineer-to-order enterprises.

4. Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline)

Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline) targets SMB engineer-to-order firms with diverse SKUs and intricate subassemblies, offering a flexible BOM framework. While this flexibility aids from an engineering change control perspective, it can pose challenges for companies needing fluid subassembly structures without tight labor and operations coupling. Moreover, it’s less suitable for organizations with complex inventory needs, as inventory attributes are primarily for reporting, not planning. Despite its strong engineer-to-order features, its support for mixed-mode manufacturing, like project-centric operations, may lack depth. Therefore, placing it at #4 on our list of top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Support for both informal and formal BOMs and engineering processes. Infor CSI BOMs don’t mandate a revision number, making it easier for companies with relatively unsophisticated data models and engineering processes to use without going through the painful formalization of SKUs and BOMs. 
2. Detailed and scalable costing layers. The costing layers scale well, especially for verticals where material pricing may fluctuate, requiring frequent readjustments, such as industries dependent upon steel. 
3. Field service integration with the core manufacturing processes.  Deep composable serviceable units are built as part of the core solution with complex assemblies and back-and-forth interactions of channels to service units in the field.

Weaknesses

1. Disconnected financial reporting experience. Unlike other products, the product does not embed financial reports and necessitates an external Excel interface, thus creating a patchy experience for users.
2. Poor user experience and steep learning curve. While marketed as a cloud product, it has limited cloud capabilities, such as enterprise search and opening multiple tabs, making the experience non-intuitive.
3. Weak ecosystem and third-party options. Similar to Epicor, Infor CSI takes the suite approach. So it might be harder to find integration with best-of-breed third-party apps.

3. Infor CloudSuite LN

Infor CloudSuite LN is a comprehensive manufacturing solution that combines the best of the most focused manufacturing solutions, especially engineer-to-order managing large programs, including WBS-based workflows, as well as distribution-focused capabilities for their parts business. Besides being comprehensive, it also has engineer-to-order-specific last-mile capabilities and pre-baked integrations such as PLM, CAD, CPQ, and more. Thus, securing its rank at the #3 position on our list of the top engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP solutions.

Strengths

1. Global operations. Infor LN is the only solution in the market that has sufficient layers of financial hierarchies and global trade compliance functionality pre-baked with products to support Engineer-to-order manufacturers exploring global financial and operational synergies. 
2. Last-mile capabilities along with breadth of capabilities for diversified manufacturing business models. Engineer-to-order verticals require deeper core ERP capabilities such as milestone and progress billing, operational tracking of programs, and consolidated view of costs of large programs not just as a report but also as part of the operational workflow without having users leave their transactional screens.
3. Best-of-breed integrations offered out-of-the-box. Most tools that make-to manufacturer would require, such as HCM, PLM, data lake, ERP, WMS, TMS, and advanced supply chain planning, are all pre-integrated with LN.

Weaknesses

1. Might not be the best fit as a corporate solution for holding and private equity companies. Holding companies as diverse as engineer-to-order manufacturing, construction, and professional services may not be able to keep all of their entities on one solution and database.
2. Legacy UI and Experience. Infor LN is a legacy solution with limited cloud-native ERP capabilities such as universal search, mobile experience, etc.
3. Weak Ecosystem and Marketplace. The consulting base and marketplaces are virtually non-existent for Infor LN.

2. IQMS/DELMIAWorks

IQMS is suitable for engineer-to-order companies because of its tight alignment and integration with SolidWORKS, which is heavily used with large mechanical equipment. Containing major components required for engineer-to-order companies as part of the suite, such as CAD, PLM etc, along with ERP, is a huge benefit for engineer-to-order companies limited on budget. IQMS would be an ideal fit for smaller engineer-to-order companies or for larger companies as a subsidiary-level system. Hence, contributing to its placement at #2 among engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. BOM structure is friendly for engineer-to-order companies. Engineer-to-order companies that are heavy on engineer collaboration, including collaboration with customers, would find DELMIAWorks to be compelling.
2. Best for engineer-to-order companies on SolidWorks. With the same company as SolidWorks owning it, tighter and seamless ERP integration of both products, which are built and maintained by the same vendor, is a huge plus.
3. Technology – This is probably the most legacy solution of all on this list, with no announcement if they plan to modernize the technology.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for engineer-to-order companies diversifying their operations and being active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. It has a limited consulting base with most resellers being CAD resellers, with limited experience in ERP implementation and cross-functional processes.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. While a great subsidiary solution and a solution for pure-play engineer-to-order manufacturers, it may not suit companies requiring diverse mixed-mode manufacturing companies or companies with complex business models.

1. Epicor Kinetic

Epicor Kinetic targets small-to-mid-size engineer-to-order manufacturers specializing in industries with formal manufacturing processes and complex inventory needs, such as automotive, aerospace, metal, fabrication, and medical devices. It is also equally deep in project-centric operations and distribution processes, making it ideal for diverse engineer-to-order operations. Despite recent developments, Epicor Kinetic might not best suit companies with global financial operations and deep field service operations. Nevertheless, it’s still one of the best engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Strong for comapnies with formal manufacturing processes. Mandatory revision numbers and the BOMs driven by revision numbers would be especially appealing for formal engineering organizations familiar with similar formal structures.
2. Strong with complex inventory needs. Companies that require multiple attributes that need to be part of the planning and MRP, such as metal, fastener, automotive, and aerospace, would find Epicor to be appealing.
3. Microsoft look-and-feel. Epicor has a very similar look and feel to Microsoft ERP products, providing you with the same experience but with much deeper last-mile capabilities where other products might struggle.

Weaknesses

1. Global financial operations. Unlike larger products that might support more than three layers of financial hierarchies, such as corp, subsidiary, entity, and business units, the limited number of layers would operationally inefficient workarounds, such as using sub-accounts for such traceability.
2. Embedded experience with field service and quality. Despite recent acquisitions, the field service capabilities are not as embedded and proven as some of the other products on this list.
3. Weak ecosystem and marketplace. Epicor takes a suite approach to its products while selling directly to its customers. This limits the overall consulting and marketplace penetration.

Conclusion

Engineer-to-order manufacturing stands out due to its intricate blend of make-to-order and project manufacturing, coupled with complexities like field service and configure-to-order processes. Unlike make-to-stock businesses, which face challenges primarily in supply chain planning and demand forecasting, engineer-to-order operations grapple with complexities in estimation, engineering, and procurement processes. Selecting the perfect engineer-to-order manufacturing ERP system particularly demands a thorough evaluation of transactions and workflows. Opting for an incompatible system might result in implementation hurdles. While this list offers valuable insights, seeking advice from an independent ERP consultant can greatly enhance your implementation success.

FAQs

Make-to-stock Companies: Contrary to make-to-order enterprises, make-to-stock companies are often consumer-oriented, necessitating robust supply chain planning and potentially eCommerce capabilities. These companies span various sectors, encompassing both discrete and process manufacturing methodologies. Product portfolios may feature consumer staples like food items and household goods, as well as consumer electronics or automobiles. Material inputs can vary widely, particularly from plastics and chemicals to steel and organic ingredients. As long as products are stockpiled for future sale, they fall under the umbrella of make-to-stock operations.

Make-to-stock Manufacturing Business Processes: While many make-to-stock companies may incorporate elements of make-to-order processes, their product offerings typically lack the complexity found in engineer-to-order or project manufacturing setups. Given their retail or eCommerce-centric operations, robust supply chain planning is crucial, influencing the required system architecture and ERP functionalities. Despite simpler manufacturing processes, labor requirements may not be as extensive. Thus, resulting in less complex bills of materials primarily centered on ingredients.

Make-to-stock Manufacturing ERP Needs. The ERP requirements for make-to-stock operations can be influenced by various external systems like POS, S&OP, merchandising, planning, and eCommerce, depending on the system architecture. Given the consumer-centric nature of their products, make-to-stock businesses often rely heavily on logistics processes involving WMS and TMS, distinguishing them significantly from make-to-stock or engineer-to-order models. Unlike these models, make-to-stock processes typically entail less emphasis on configurator, CPQ, CAD, PLM, and PDM, as their products are comparatively simpler. Their bills of materials (BOMs) are less intricate, with fewer sub-assemblies and shorter lead times. Therefore, let’s explore the top 10 make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Criteria

• Definition of a make-to-stock manufacturing company. These companies in the make-to-stock ecosystem include manufacturers primarily following make-to-stock business mode in a variety of industries, including CPG, food and beverage, chemicals, automotive, aerospace, furniture, or building materials etc. The list considers companies of all sizes in this ecosystem.
• Overall market share/# of customers. The higher marketshare among make-to-stock companies drives higher rankings on this list.
• Ownership/funding. The superior financial position of the ERP vendor leads to higher rankings on this list.
• Quality of development. How modern is the tech stack? How aggressively is the ERP vendor pushing cloud-native functionality for this product? Is the roadmap officially announced? Or uncertain?
• Community/Ecosystem. How vibrant is the community? Social media groups? In-person user groups? Forums?
• Depth of native functionality. Last-mile functionality for specific industries natively built into the product?
• Quality of publicly available product documentation. How well-documented is the product? Is the documentation available publicly? How updated is the demo content available on YouTube?
• Product share and documented commitment. Is the product share reported separately in financial statements if the ERP vendor is public?
• Ability to natively support diversified business models. How diverse is the product in supporting multiple business models in the same product?
• Acquisition strategy aligned with the product: Any recent acquisitions to fill a specific hole for make-to-stock industries? Any official announcements to integrate recently acquired capabilities?
• User Reviews: How specific are the reviews about this product’s capabilities? How recent and frequent are the reviews?
• Must be an ERP product: Edge products such as HCM, CRM, eCommerce, MES, or accounting solutions that are not fully integrated to support enterprise-wide capabilities are not qualified for this list.

10. Oracle Cloud ERP

Geared toward large global make-to-stock firms, Oracle Cloud ERP excels with high transaction volumes, especially when Oracle Cloud ERP might be used only as a corporate financial ledger while using other specialized solutions such as QAD or DELMIAWorks at the subsidiary level. With the retail-friendly TMS and WMS system along with the RMS component, Oracle Cloud ERP is especially friendly for make-to-stock businesses. Thus, securing its rank at #10 among the top 10 make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems in 2024.

Strengths

1. Robust finance capabilities for large, global make-to-stock manufacturers. Capabilities include having five layers of GL restrictions, multiple layers of sub-ledgers, and book closing requirements across divisions, especially relevant for larger make-to-stock businesses with several hierarchies across their retail divisions.
2. Proven solution with large workloads. Large companies may process millions of GL entries per hour. The transaction volume is especially higher for make-to-stock businesses, especially if these transactions are hosted inside the ERP. 
3. Ecosystem.  Oracle Cloud ERP has an ecosystem of experienced consultants who have the capabilities to handle the design and architecture of such complex enterprises.

Weaknesses

1. Expensive consulting is required for make-to-stock integrations. While systems such as WMS, TMS, RMS, and S&OP are likely to be part of the suite, they will still require substantial consulting expertise to enable similar capabilities as might be available out-of-the-box with focused solutions such as DELMIAWorks or QAD.
2. Limited industry-specific capabilities. Oracle Cloud ERP is likely to have industry-specific compliance required in certain verticals, such as plastic-specific capabilities with DELMIAWorks or automotive ERP capabilities with QAD.
3. Overwhelming for SMB make-to-stock manufacturers. The enterprise data model and financial layers might be overwhelming for SMB make-to-stock manufacturers.

9. SAP S/4 HANA

Targeting large make-to-stock manufacturing companies with global operations, SAP S/4 HANA excels in handling millions of transactions per hour. The EWM and LE products from SAP are especially friendly for make-to-stock-centric businesses, supporting both embedded or decoupled architecture where make-to-stock businesses might have 3PL components as part of their business processes. Such businesses also require faster processing or movement of goods within warehouses. Despite the pros and cons, it secures its rank at #9 among the make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems in 2024.

Strengths

1. An enterprise-grade product designed for diverse manufacturing companies, including make-to-stock. The item master, product model, and warehouse architecture can accommodate the needs of most manufacturing business models, including make-to-stock.
2. The power of HANA to run global operations end-to-end in one system. Our simple test of HANA’s capabilities with 100K serialized goods receipt found it to be faster than most systems out there. SAP S/4 HANA could process it in under 22 seconds, while Oracle cloud ERP took more than 18 mins for the same test. This is especially friendly for verticals such as electronics with serialized product offerings. 
3. Financial governance and best-of-breed architecture. Financial traceability is built with each transaction, which makes the transactions and SOX governance flows highly traceable. 

Weaknesses

1. Behind in cloud capabilities. Despite advanced technical capabilities such as AI, the last mile industry capabilities and operational functionality are limited in the cloud version.
2. Too big for smaller companies. Companies looking for a fully baked suite without internal IT capabilities will find it overwhelming.
3. Limited last mile capabilities and third-party pre-integrated options. The last-mile capabilities available with other ERP systems, such as QAD or DelmiaWORKS, would not be as strong with SAP S/4 HANA.

8. Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline)

With its primary target market being make-to-order, Infor CloudSuite Industrial would be a great fit for companies with mixed-mode manufacturing processes, especially for products and business models where they would require equal depth in both processes. While Infor Cloud Industrial can cover both, it might not be the best fit for companies that are retail or eCommerce heavy because of its complex product model. It is also not the best fit for companies with complex inventory needs such as metal or plastics. Thus, with the primary target being SMB make-to-stock companies heavier in manufacturing, it ranks at #8 among the top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems in 2024.

Strengths

1. Support for both informal engineering processes. This is especially friendly for make-to-stock companies without formal engineering processes or complex products. 
2. Deep costing layers. While costing might not be the most critical for make-to-stock companies, it might be beneficial for companies with fluctuating costs, such as electrical components or steel manufacturers. 
3. Field service integration with the core manufacturing processes. Verticals heavier in residential or field services would require tightly embedded field services with the manufacturing processes, making it friendlier for make-to-stock companies with field services operations.

Weaknesses

1. Disconnected financial reporting experience. Unlike other products, financial reports are not embedded with the product and would require an Excel interface, creating a patchy experience for users. 
2. Poor user experience and steep learning curve. While marketed as a cloud product, the cloud capabilities, such as enterprise search and opening multiple tabs, are limited, making the experience non-intuitive.
3. Weak ecosystem and third-party options. Similar to Epicor, Infor CSI takes the suite approach. So it might be harder to find integration with best-of-breed third-party apps.

7. Infor CloudSuite LN/M3

Infor CloudSuite LN and M3 are two completely different products and target upper mid-market make-to-stock companies compared to Infor Cloud Suite Industrial. With the primary target market for LN being complex and engineer-to-order-centric manufacturing business models, it might be a good fit for make-to-stock companies with diverse business models. M3 targets retail, apparel, and chemical manufacturing companies – the majority of them are made-to-stock with heavy retail components. Thus, given their fit for many make-to-stock verticals, it ranks at #7 on our list of top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Global operations. For LN and M3, there are very few comprehensive manufacturing solutions with a heavy global presence, containing capabilities such as global trade compliance and international supplier collaboration that are uniquely relevant for make-to-stock verticals. 
2. Last-mile capabilities, along with the breadth of capabilities for diversified manufacturing business models. Make-to-stock with heavier distribution operations would require capabilities such as handling units that are natively built with both products.
3. Best-of-breed integrations offered out-of-the-box. Most tools that a manufacturer would require, such as HCM, PLM, data lake, ERP, WMS, TMS, and advanced supply chain planning, are all pre-integrated with LN and M3.

Weaknesses

1. It might not be the best fit as a corporate solution for holding and private equity companies. Make-to-stock companies as diverse as manufacturing, construction, and professional services may not be able to keep all of their entities on one solution and database.
2. Legacy UI and Experience. Infor LN and M3 are both legacy solutions with technical limitations to provide the cloud-native experience with universal search, mobile experience, etc.
3. Weak Ecosystem and Marketplace. The consulting base and marketplaces are virtually non-existent for both Infor LN and M3 if you need third-party best-of-breed pre-integrated solutions.

6. Plex

Adopting an MES-first strategy, Plex targets companies in the Toyota and Ford automotive ecosystems. Despite superior technology compared to other solutions on this list, Plex has fewer installs, primarily focusing on the automotive industry. The automotive industry, especially the large OEMs, where Plex is especially known, are generally made-to-stock, requiring joint collaboration with their suppliers, which might be overkill for simpler made-to-order businesses. Plex would be an ideal fit for MES-heavy make-to-stock manufacturers, especially in the automotive ecosystem, emphasizing more operational capabilities than the core ERP needs. Thus, securing its rank at #6 among the top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Last-mile functionality for Toyota and Ford ecosystems. Tailored for manufacturers in the Toyota ecosystem (i.e., Toyota suppliers), Plex offers distinctive features, especially the compliance requirements that would require substantial consulting efforts on vanilla ERP systems.
2. MES-first approach. Originating as an integrated MES solution, Plex boasts extensive MES capabilities. This appeals to make-to-stock companies handling processes traditionally within ERP, like quality, scheduling, and asset maintenance, providing a valuable shop floor perspective.
3. Cloud-native UI and architecture. Similar to cloud-native alternatives like NetSuite or Acumatica, Plex features a cloud-native and mobile-friendly user interface.

Weaknesses

1. Limited core ERP capabilities. While Plex lacks extensive finance and accounting capabilities for global organizations, it could be a great two-tier solution used at the plant level on top of Oracle and SAP as a corporate system.
2. Limited make-to-stock manufacturing capabilities. While it might have some make-to-stock capabilities, it might not be the best fit for make-to-stock manufacturing companies requiring mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities.
3. Limited ecosystem and consulting base. Plex has fewer installations and a minimal marketplace and consulting base compared to other manufacturing ERP systems on this list.

5. Acumatica

Tailored for manufacturing companies in the $10-100 million range, Acumatica suits make-to-stock manufacturers with relatively simpler global operations present in fewer countries. Acumatica has several advantages for make-to-stock manufacturers, including native integration with eCommerce systems and the availability of add-ons on its marketplace to augment its core capabilities. While the product and BOM model is relatively scalable to work even for make-to-order manufacturing, it would be more suitable for make-to-stock because of the missing advanced features such as Kanban or allocation layers, a crucial need for make-to-order operations. Thus, given its pros and cons, it ranks at #5 on our list of top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Native integration with leading eCommerce platforms. Along with BOMs and manufacturing capabilities that are friendlier for make-to-stock verticals, it integrates natively with leading eCommerce platforms, a requirement for most make-to-stock verticals.
2. Diverse business models but friendlier for discrete make-to-stock manufacturers. The product can accommodate multiple business models in the same database, making it easier to explore synergies across different business models, and is especially friendlier for discrete make-to-stock verticals because of its BOMs being aligned to discrete manufacturing.
3. Cloud-native UI. Superior experience for teams using ERP primarily on mobile devices. 

Weaknesses

1. Pricing. With make-to-stock verticals being consumer-focused, the consumption-based pricing might be more expensive due to the higher number of transactions.
2. Process manufacturing capabilities. It might not be the best fit for make-to-stock verticals requiring process manufacturing capabilities, which would require thick add-ons, risking implementation.
3. Limited global capabilities. The current multi-entity functionality might be limiting for make-to-stock companies with operationally connected offshore locations.

4. IQMS/DELMIAWorks

IQMS, tailored for plastics-centric operations, would be uniquely suitable for plastic extrusion make-to-stock manufacturing companies working for large OEMs in the automotive and aerospace verticals. IQMS natively supports the supply chain planning and S&OP operations for plastic-centric verticals. But it might not be the best fit for other discrete-centric make-to-stock verticals. IQMS would be an ideal fit for smaller make-to-stock companies or for larger companies as a subsidiary-level system. Thus, contributing to its placement at #4 among make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Great for plastic-extrusion make-to-stock manufacturers. While limited in its mixed-mode capabilities, it’s especially suitable for plastic-centric make-to-stock industries when it comes to unique scheduling requirements.
2. S&OP planning capabilities are friendlier for make-to-stock verticals. Make-to-stock, especially process manufacturing such as plastic manufacturing requires unique CAD and PLM capabilities, along with the S&OP planning capabilities included with the suite.
3. Technology – This is probably the most legacy solution of all on this list, with no announcement if they plan to modernize the technology.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for make-to-stock companies diversifying their operations and being active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. The consulting base is extremely limited with most resellers being CAD resellers, with limited experience in ERP implementation and cross-functional processes.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. It might not be the right fit for make-to-stock companies primarily using it as a corporate financial ledger.

3. Epicor Kinetic

Epicor Kinetic targets small-to-mid-size make-to-stock manufacturers specializing in industries with complex inventory needs, such as automotive, aerospace, metal, fabrication, and medical devices. While the product model is friendlier for formal engineering organizations, the complex inventory layers and distribution planning are included as part of the same solution, making it a fit for certain make-to-stock verticals such as metal, automotive, or medical devices. However, the requirement of formal engineering processes might discourage companies with SKUs without the need for revision numbers. Thus, securing their rank at #3 among the top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Strong with complex inventory needs. Companies that require multiple attributes that need to be part of the planning and MRP, such as metal, fastener, automotive, and aerospace, would find Epicor Kinetic to be appealing.
2. Strong support for distribution processes along with manufacturing. Distribution planning requires complex structures for bin numbers, a unique requirement for make-to-stock manufacturing companies that are heavier on distribution.
3. Microsoft look-and-feel. Epicor has a very similar look and feel to Microsoft ERP products, providing you with the same experience but with much deeper last-mile capabilities where other products might struggle.

Weaknesses

1. Global financial operations. Unlike larger products that might support more than three layers of financial hierarchies, such as corp, subsidiary, entity, and business units, the limited number of layers would operationally inefficient workarounds, such as using sub-accounts for such traceability.
2. Support for process manufacturing. While Epicor Kinetic has a module to support process manufacturing, the capabilities are lean to support the operations of pure-play make-to-stock process manufacturers.
3. Embedded experience with field service and quality. Despite recent acquisitions, the field service capabilities are not as embedded and proven as some of the other products on this list.

2. Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O

Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O excels in localizations where other focused solutions might not be available, providing only a few options for make-to-stock companies. It is uniquely suitable for make-to-stock companies with several TMS and WMS options along with S&OP that closely integrate with MS Dynamics 365 F&O. It can not only support both discrete and process verticals, but it also has very strong support for distribution-heavy operations, making it uniquely suitable for diversified make-to-stock operations. Therefore, given its pros and cons, it ranks at #2 on our list of make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Richer core ERP capabilities for make-to-stock companies in the cloud. Compared to other solutions that might have superior layers for other service-centric verticals, such as Oracle Cloud ERP, Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a mature cloud version for make-to-stock companies.
2. Support for both discrete and process verticals as well as complex distribution operations. Unlike other products on this list that can support only a few manufacturing business models, Microsoft Dynamics F&O supports both discrete and process as well as distribution operations.
3. Powerful ecosystem and marketplace add-ons. Microsoft has a talent and consulting base in countries where finding talent may be a challenge. 

Weaknesses

1. Limited pre-baked integrations for make-to-stock companies. The integration relevant for make-to-stock companies such as eCommerce and POS are not OEM owned, requiring third-party add-ons.
2. Too big for smaller companies. The smaller companies would find it overwhelming with the configuration and approval flows built for large enterprises.
3. Limited last mile capabilities. The last-mile functionality relevant to specific industries, such as plastic or medical, would be substantially limited, requiring third-party add-ons or custom development.

1. QAD

With QAD’s focus being primarily on mid-to-large automotive, electronics manufacturing, and life sciences companies, it is uniquely suitable for make-to-stock companies that are heavy on the supply chain. It might also not be the best fit for companies requiring mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities along with make-to-stock. While they have announced plans to advance their technology stack, the new version might take a while to be fully rolled out and available. Thus, securing its rank at #1 on our list among the top make-to-stock manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Global capabilities. While not as globalized and localized as other larger solutions, such as SAP S/4 HANA or Oracle, QAD is widely localized, supporting several countries that require global synergies and international supplier collaboration and supply chain planning.
2. Supply chain suite + ERP. Combining capabilities that traditionally resided in a Supply Chain Suite, QAD includes trade compliance, TMS capabilities, and S&OP planning in its core solution. These capabilities are highly applicable for make-to-stock business models.
3. Integrated best-of-breed capabilities. QAD offers best-of-breed integration that can support not only make-to-stock operations but also other mixed-mode manufacturing operations requiring integrations such as CAD or PLM.

Weaknesses

1. Diverse business models. QAD’s limited focus poses challenges for holding and private equity companies with aggressive M&A cycles trying to keep all of their entities on one solution.
2. Global corporate solution. While operationally strong, QAD may not be the best fit for companies seeking a global corporate financial solution.
3. Weak ecosystem. QAD lacks a robust ecosystem, including limited partners and coverage for third-party add-ons and marketplaces.

Conclusion

Make-to-stock manufacturing demands specialized inventory and supply chain planning solutions tailored for this sector. Not all manufacturing products are suitable for make-to-stock processes, especially those designed for discrete manufacturing. While a few products offer support for both discrete and process manufacturing along with distribution planning, the majority are geared toward specific business models, complicating the selection of software tailored for make-to-stock operations. Picking the ideal make-to-order manufacturing ERP system requires a meticulous review of transactions and workflows. Also, selecting an ill-suited system could lead to implementation challenges. While this compilation provides helpful guidance, consulting with an independent ERP consultant can significantly improve your implementation outcomes.

FAQs

Make-to-order Companies: In the vast realm of manufacturing, make-to-order companies stand out with their distinct operations. Often grouped alongside make-to-stock, engineer-to-order, and project manufacturing, make-to-order firms operate uniquely. Unlike make-to-stock businesses, they craft products upon order placement, necessitating specialized supply chain processes. While similar to engineer-to-order setups, make-to-order companies typically require less customer interaction and tackle less intricate engineering challenges.

Make-to-order Manufacturing Business Processes: To grasp the dynamics of make-to-order processes, consider the distinction between one-off and planned needs. One-off needs, such as unique machine parts, often drive this approach, catering to specialized requirements. Additionally, factors like product cost and lead time urgency influence whether a product falls under make-to-order or make-to-stock categories. Typically, expensive products favor make-to-order to preserve cash reserves, while urgent customer demands may prompt some make-to-order items to transition to make-to-stock for enhanced service delivery.

Make-to-order Manufacturing ERP Needs. Make-to-order businesses require unique SKU strategies, often tailored to their specific processes. Unlike engineer-to-order enterprises, where make-to-order processes might also be required for their parts business, standalone make-to-order firms operate with simpler structures, fewer long-term projects, and reduced planning needs, simplifying the need for mixed-mode manufacturing. Their billing and financial planning requirements are also less complex. Additionally, managing the ecommerce component poses challenges, as it involves configurator processes due to less formalized SKUs, although not as ad-hoc as engineer-to-order setups. Now, let’s explore the top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems for 2024.

Criteria

• Definition of a make-to-order manufacturing company. These companies in the make-to-order ecosystem include manufacturers primarily following make-to-order business mode in a variety of industries, including automotive, aerospace, plastics, and building materials etc. The list considers companies of all sizes in this ecosystem.
• Overall market share/# of customers. The higher marketshare among make-to-order companies drives higher rankings on this list.
• Ownership/funding. The superior financial position of the ERP vendor leads to higher rankings on this list.
• Quality of development. How modern is the tech stack? How aggressively is the ERP vendor pushing cloud-native functionality for this product? Is the roadmap officially announced? Or uncertain?
• Community/Ecosystem. How vibrant is the community? Social media groups? In-person user groups? Forums?
• Depth of native functionality. Last-mile functionality for specific industries natively built into the product?
• Quality of publicly available product documentation. How well-documented is the product? Is the documentation available publicly? How updated is the demo content available on YouTube?
• Product share and documented commitment. Is the product share reported separately in financial statements if the ERP vendor is public?
• Ability to natively support diversified business models. How diverse is the product in supporting multiple business models in the same product?
• Acquisition strategy aligned with the product: Any recent acquisitions to fill a specific hole for make-to-order industries? Any official announcements to integrate recently acquired capabilities?
• User Reviews: How specific are the reviews about this product’s capabilities? How recent and frequent are the reviews?
• Must be an ERP product: Edge products such as HCM, CRM, eCommerce, MES, or accounting solutions that are not fully integrated to support enterprise-wide capabilities are not qualified for this list.

10. Plex

Adopting an MES-first strategy, Plex targets companies in the Toyota and Ford automotive ecosystems. Despite superior technology compared to other solutions on this list, Plex has fewer installs, primarily focusing on the automotive industry. The automotive industry, especially the large OEMs, where Plex is especially known, are generally made-to-stock, requiring joint collaboration with their suppliers, which might be overkill for simpler made-to-order businesses. Plex secures its rank at #10 among the top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems by emphasizing more operational capabilities than the core ERP needs, thus making it an ideal fit for MES-heavy make-to-order manufacturers, especially in the automotive ecosystem.

Strengths

1. Last-mile functionality for Toyota and Ford ecosystems. Tailored for manufacturers in the Toyota ecosystem (i.e., Toyota suppliers), Plex offers distinctive features, especially the compliance requirements that would require substantial consulting efforts on vanilla ERP systems.
2. MES-first approach. Originating as an integrated MES solution, Plex boasts extensive MES capabilities. This appeals to make-to-order companies handling processes traditionally within ERP, like quality, scheduling, and asset maintenance, providing a valuable shop floor perspective.
3. Cloud-native UI and architecture. Similar to cloud-native alternatives like Acumatica or NetSuite, Plex features a cloud-native and mobile-friendly user interface.

Weaknesses

1. Limited core ERP capabilities. While Plex lacks extensive finance and accounting capabilities for global organizations, it could be a great two-tier solution used at the plant level on top of Oracle and SAP as a corporate system.
2. Limited make-to-order manufacturing capabilities. While it might have some make-to-order capabilities, it might not be the best fit for make-to-order manufacturing companies requiring mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities.
3. Limited ecosystem and consulting base. Plex has fewer installations and a minimal marketplace and consulting base compared to other manufacturing ERP systems on this list.

9. IQMS/DELMIAWorks

IQMS, tailored for plastics-centric operations, would be uniquely suitable for plastic extrusion make-to-order manufacturing companies working for large OEMs in the automotive and aerospace verticals. These companies generally have unique workflows, such as maintaining SDS for each client and meeting their quality requirements. Enabling these capabilities on top of vanilla ERP systems might require substantial consulting efforts. IQMS would be an ideal fit for smaller make-to-order companies or for larger companies as a subsidiary-level system, thus contributing to its placement at #9 among make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Great for plastic-extrusion make-to-order manufacturers. While limited in its suite, capabilities for plastic-centric make-to-order industries outshine when it comes to unique scheduling requirements.
2. Best for make-to-order companies on SolidWorks. With the same company as SolidWorks owning it, tighter and seamless integration of both products, which are built and maintained by the same vendor, is a huge plus.
3. Technology – This is probably the most legacy solution of all on this list, with no announcement if they plan to modernize the technology.

Weaknesses

1. Limited focus. The limited focus might be a challenge for make-to-order companies diversifying their operations and being active with M&A cycles. 
2. Limited ecosystem. The consulting base is extremely limited with most resellers being CAD resellers, with limited experience in ERP implementation and cross-functional processes.
3. It is not the right fit for holding and private equity companies as a corporate ledger. While a great subsidiary solution and a solution for pure-play make-to-order plastic-centric manufacturers, it’s not the best fit for companies requiring diverse mixed-mode manufacturing companies or companies with complex business models.
   

8. QAD

With QAD’s focus being primarily on mid-to-large automotive, electronics manufacturing, and life sciences companies, its scope for make-to-order companies is limited, meaning it might not be the best fit for every make-to-order business model, requiring careful evaluation. It might also not be the best fit for companies requiring mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities along with make-to-order. While they have announced plans to advance their technology stack, the new version might take a while to be fully rolled out and available, securing its rank at #8 on our list among the top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Global capabilities. While not as globalized and localized as other larger solutions, such as SAP S/4 HANA or Oracle, QAD is as limited as smaller solutions and can accommodate several countries with global synergies in one product/database.
2. Supply chain suite + ERP. Combining capabilities that traditionally resided in a Supply Chain Suite, QAD includes trade compliance, TMS capabilities, and S&OP planning in its core solution. These capabilities are not generally as applicable for make-to-order business models but might be a great fit for companies that may have other layers in their business model along with make-to-order.
3. Integrated best-of-breed capabilities. QAD offers best-of-breed integration, such as PLM and TMS, which would require substantial consulting efforts on top of other vanilla ERP systems.

Weaknesses

1. Diverse business models. QAD’s limited focus poses challenges for holding and private equity companies with aggressive M&A cycles trying to keep all of their entities on one solution.
2. Global corporate solution. While operationally strong, QAD may not be the best fit for companies seeking a global corporate financial solution.
3. Weak ecosystem. QAD lacks a robust ecosystem, including limited partners and coverage for third-party add-ons and marketplaces.

7. Oracle Cloud ERP

Geared toward large global manufacturing firms, Oracle Cloud ERP excels with high transaction volumes, especially when Oracle Cloud ERP might be used only as a corporate financial ledger while using other specialized solutions such as Infor LN or Epicor Kinetic at the subsidiary level. Oracle Cloud ERP might have limited last-mile capabilities and integrations required for make-to-order businesses such as CAD, PLM, configurators, or MES. Oracle Cloud ERP would rely on third-party add-ons for such capabilities. Being primarily relevant for larger make-to-order companies. Thus, Oracle Cloud ERP ranks at #7 on our list of top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Robust finance capabilities for large, global make-to-order manufacturers. Capabilities include having five layers of GL restrictions, multiple layers of sub-ledgers, and book closing requirements across divisions, especially relevant for larger make-to-order businesses primarily interested in using Oracle Cloud ERP as a corporate financial ledger.
2. Proven solution with large workloads. Large companies may process millions of GL entries per hour. These workloads may be even higher for manufacturing companies. They might need to decouple transactions as a single system might struggle to support, requiring best-of-breed architecture for such companies, an ideal fit for Oracle Cloud ERP.
3. Ecosystem.  Oracle Cloud ERP has an ecosystem of experienced consultants who have the capabilities to handle the design and architecture of such complex enterprises.

Weaknesses

1. Limited last-mile capabilities and make-to-order integrations. The last-mile capabilities and specialized integrations relevant for make-to-order businesses might require third-party add-ons.
2. Not necessarily a manufacturing solution. Oracle Cloud ERP’s concentration in make-to-order businesses is limited, making it a lower priority for make-to-order businesses.
3. Overwhelming for SMB make-to-order manufacturers. The enterprise data model and financial layers might be overwhelming for SMB make-to-order manufacturers.

6. Acumatica

Tailored for manufacturing companies in the $10-100 million range, Acumatica suits make-to-order manufacturers with simpler operations. While Acumatica has BOMs and manufacturing layers required for make-to-order operations, mature ERP layers such as Kanban or allocation might be limiting compared to other richer manufacturing solutions such as Epicor Kinetic or Infor LN. However, Acumatica might be a better fit for companies with diverse make-to-order business models when they might have flavors of other business models such as eCommerce, field service, or construction. Thus, given its relevance for smaller make-to-order manufacturers, it ranks at #6 on our list of make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Rich BOMs and scalable costing layers. Acumatica BOMs are highly organized and follow logical structure across the screens, making them highly scalable for companies with complex product models.
2. Diverse capabilities to support the needs of multiple business models. The product can accommodate multiple business models in the same database, making it easier to explore synergies across different business models without requiring isolated operations for heterogeneous operations.
3. Cloud-native UI and flexible pricing options. Superior experience for teams using ERP primarily on mobile devices. Consumption-based pricing options reduce costs substantially for certain business models, such as seasonal businesses with labor spikes.

Weaknesses

1. Limited global capabilities. The current multi-entity functionality might be limiting for make-to-order companies with operationally connected offshore locations.
2. Limited mobile reporting capabilities.  The mobile capabilities are leaner for complex reporting scenarios such as parallel processing or reporting labor or machines separately from the same work center. These capabilities are highly critical for make-to-order operations.
3. Multiple add-ons may be required for make-to-order manufacturing. Requires several third-party add-ons, such as MES, PLM, and quality, posing integration and communication challenges.

5. SAP S/4 HANA

Targeting large global make-to-order manufacturing companies, SAP S/4 HANA excels in handling millions of transactions per hour, a requirement for companies of Fortune 500 scale. Ideal for large publicly traded companies heavy on financial compliance and governance, it may not suit SMB manufacturing companies without internal IT maturity. SAP S/4 HANA enjoys a unique advantage for MRP-driven companies requiring enterprise-grade workloads intending to keep all of their entities in one database. Thus, ranking at #5 on our list of top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Enterprise product designed for make-to-order centric companies. The item master, product model, and warehouse architecture are especially friendly for make-to-order businesses because of scalable and modular BOM and costing layers.
2. The power of HANA to run global operations end-to-end in one system. Our simple test of HANA’s capabilities with 100K serialized goods receipt found it to be faster than most systems out there. SAP S/4 HANA could process it in under 22 seconds, while Oracle cloud ERP took more than 18 mins for the same test. This is especially friendly for large make-to-order businesses aiming to run their consolidated global MRP runs in one system.
3. Financial governance and best-of-breed architecture. Financial traceability is built with each transaction, which makes the transactions and SOX governance flows highly traceable, especially friendly for publicly-traded make-to-order companies. 

Weaknesses

1. Behind in cloud capabilities. While SAP has made tremendous advancements, the cloud version is still behind its on-prem variant.
2. Too big for smaller make-to-order companies. Companies looking for a fully baked suite without internal IT capabilities will find it overwhelming.
3. Limited last mile Capabilities and third-party pre-integrated options. The last-mile capabilities relevant for make-to-order businesses, such as CAD and PLM integration, would require third-party add-ons.

4. Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O

Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O excels in localizations where other focused solutions might not be available, providing only a few options for make-to-order companies. While Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a very rich product model to support complex make-to-order operations, it might not have a complete suite and integrated options as focused solutions, such as Epicor Kinetic or Infor LN, requiring third-party add-ons for these capabilities. Despite being limited with suite capabilities, it will be more suitable for diverse make-to-order operations or companies with uncertain business models because of M&A activity, securing the #4 spot among the top make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Richer core ERP capabilities for make-to-order companies in the cloud. Compared to other solutions that might have superior layers for other service-centric verticals, such as Oracle Cloud ERP, Microsoft Dynamics 365 F&O has a mature cloud version for make-to-order companies.
2. Best-of-breed products integrated at the database level. While Microsoft has best-of-breed integration such as CRM or field service, they might not be as directly relevant for make-to-order companies but will be useful for make-to-order companies with diverse business models. 
3. Powerful ecosystem and marketplace add-ons. Microsoft has a talent and consulting base in countries where finding talent may be a challenge. 

Weaknesses

1. Limited pre-baked integrations for make-to-order companies. The integration relevant for make-to-order companies such as PLM, CAD, MES, and configurator would require third-party add-ons, increasing communication and integration risks.
2. Too big for smaller companies. The smaller companies would find it overwhelming with the configuration and approval flows built for large enterprises.
3. Limited last mile capabilities. The last-mile functionality relevant to specific industry verticals, such as PPAP compliance or AS9100, might require substantial consulting efforts.

3. Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline)

Geared towards SMB make-to-order companies with extensive SKUs and complex subassemblies, Infor CloudSuite Industrial (Syteline) excels with its flexible BOM structure, accommodating both formal and informal manufacturing processes. While it has great capabilities for make-to-order operations, a complex business model requiring other mixed-mode manufacturing capabilities, such as WBS or project-centric manufacturing, might not be as detailed, securing its rank at #3 on our list of make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Support for both informal and formal BOMs and engineering processes. Infor CSI BOMs don’t mandate a revision number, making it easier for companies with relatively unsophisticated data models and engineering processes to use without going through the painful formalization of SKUs and BOMs. 
2. Detailed and scalable costing layers. Compared to other products with patchy experience, the costing layers are well-designed and scale well, especially for verticals where material pricing may fluctuate, requiring frequent readjustments, such as industries dependent upon steel. 
3. Field service integration with the core manufacturing processes.  Deep composable serviceable units are built as part of the core solution with complex assemblies and back-and-forth interactions of channels to service units in the field.

Weaknesses

1. Disconnected financial reporting experience. Unlike other products, financial reports are not embedded with the product. This would require an external Excel interface, creating a patchy experience for users. 
2. Poor user experience and steep learning curve. While marketed as a cloud product, the cloud capabilities, such as enterprise search and opening multiple tabs, are limited. This makes the experience non-intuitive.
3. Weak ecosystem and third-party options. Similar to Epicor, Infor CSI takes the suite approach. So it might be harder to find integration with best-of-breed third-party apps.

2. Epicor Kinetic

Epicor Kinetic particularly targets small-to-mid-size make-to-order manufacturers. They particularly specialize in industries with formal manufacturing processes and complex inventory needs, such as automotive, aerospace, metal, fabrication, and medical devices. Epicor is also equally deep with project-centric operations and distribution processes, making it ideal for diverse make-to-order operations. Despite recent developments, Epicor Kinetic might not be the best fit for companies with global financial operations and deep field service operations. Thus, securing its ranks at #2 on our list among make-to-order manufacturing ERP systems.

Strengths

1. Strong for comapnies with formal manufacturing processes. Mandatory revision numbers and the BOMs driven by revision numbers would be especially appealing for formal engineering organizations familiar with similar formal structures.
2. Strong with complex inventory needs. Companies that require multiple attributes that need to be part of the planning and MRP, such as metal, fastener, automotive, and aerospace, would find Epicor to be appealing.
3. Microsoft look-and-feel. Epicor has a very similar look and feel to Microsoft ERP products. Thus, providing you with the same experience but with much deeper last-mile capabilities where other products might struggle.

Weaknesses

1. Global financial operations. Unlike larger products that might support more than three layers of financial hierarchies, such as corp, subsidiary, entity, and business units, the limited number of layers would operationally inefficient workarounds, such as using sub-accounts for such traceability.
2. Embedded experience with field service and quality. Despite recent acquisitions, the field service capabilities are not as embedded and proven as some of the other products on this list.
3. Weak ecosystem and marketplace. Epicor takes a suite approach to its products while selling directly to its customers. This limits the overall consulting and marketplace penetration.

1. Infor CloudSuite LN

Infor CloudSuite LN is a comprehensive manufacturing solution that particularly combines the best of the most focused manufacturing solutions. While there are several solutions on this list that could be a great fit for make-to-order manufacturing, they might struggle with diverse manufacturing operations with flavors of configure-to-order, field service, and project-centric manufacturing. Besides being comprehensive, it also has make-to-order-specific last-mile capabilities and pre-baked integrations such as PLM, CAD, CPQ, and more. Thus, securing its rank at #1 position on our list of the top make-to-order manufacturing ERP solutions.

Strengths

1. Global operations. Infor LN is the only solution in the market that has sufficient layers of financial hierarchies and global trade compliance functionality pre-baked with products. It supports make-to-order manufacturers exploring global financial and operational synergies. 
2. Last-mile capabilities along with breadth of capabilities for diversified manufacturing business models. Make-to-order verticals require deeper core capabilities that are tightly embedded as part of product and data models such as PPAP, as well as handling units, several layers of allocation management, and international trade compliance.
3. Best-of-breed integrations offered out-of-the-box. Most tools that make-to manufacturer would require, such as HCM, PLM, data lake, ERP, WMS, TMS, and advanced supply chain planning, are all pre-integrated with LN.

Weaknesses

1. Might not be the best fit as a corporate solution for holding and private equity companies. Holding companies as diverse as make-to-order manufacturing, construction, and professional services may not be able to keep all of their entities on one solution and database.
2. Legacy UI and Experience. Infor LN is a legacy solution with limited cloud-native capabilities such as universal search, mobile experience, etc.
3. Weak Ecosystem and Marketplace. The consulting base and marketplaces are virtually non-existent for Infor LN.

Conclusion

Make-to-order manufacturing stands out among other business models like make-to-stock or engineer-to-order. While key capabilities such as SKUs and BOMs are crucial, they aren’t as standardized or commercialized as in make-to-stock. However, financial processes are typically less complex compared to project manufacturing. This involves intricate revenue recognition and milestone billing for longer-term projects, unlike the relatively shorter runs in make-to-order. Thus, choosing the right ERP system for make-to-order manufacturing demands a thorough examination of transactions and processes. Also, opting for a system unsuited to this model risks implementation setbacks. While this list offers valuable insights, seeking guidance from an independent ERP consultant can greatly enhance your chances of success.

FAQs