ERP covers finance, HR, distribution, manufacturing, procurement, service and supply chain. For this to work efficiently and effectively in a modern cloud environment, a common process, data, governance and security model is a prerequisite. This way, it ensures the flow of real-time information in business processes both inside as well as outside the company. iWhat I like about this definition is that it highlights not only functional aspects (the modules that must be present for it to be ERP) but also the foundational aspects, like integration, common processes, a single data model, and business processes.
From a functional point of view, one can immediately see that Workday does not have an ERP solution, simply because they lack distribution, manufacturing, and most supply chain functionality—like transportation management and warehouse management. What’s also missing in Workday are Internet of Things (IoT) capabilities, maintenance, order management, product lifecycle management (PLM), most of configure-price-quote (CPQ) and risk management.
Workday doesn’t have a common process and data model. The many acquisitionsii that Workday has made so far come with their own process and data models. This contributes to the lack of deep end-to-end processes: with missing functional modules, inconsistent processes, and multiple data models, you cannot have complete end-to-end processes; at the very least, they’re inconsistent and don’t flow.
What also contributes to a lack of deep, end-to-end processes is the fact that Workday is using many different data stores. It inevitably increases the chance of having inconsistencies in processes, master data and data models, and potential security, governance and SOD (separation of duties) issues.
Having many data stores with Workday means:
In addition to the fact that Workday doesn’t have an ERP solution, it also doesn’t have a CRM solution or manufacturing and supply chain planning. What company or organization doesn’t have customers? With Workday, you have to manage customers in another platform, which again leads to the same problems: even more data stores (Workday plus a 3rd party vendor), missing functional modules, and inconsistent processes.
There are arguments that one could use to explain Workday’s strategy:
But in all three cases, you’d have to ask yourself ten questions:
Chances are that you will answer “no” to a few of these questions. The potential issues described here are directly attributable to the fact that Workday is incomplete and inconsistent with its multiple data stores.
Oracle built a completely, brand new set of business capabilities for the cloud from the ground up, using a single data model for all line-of-business challenges. It is modular and composable by design but engineered to work together for seamless extension.
Companies need to move toward a portfolio that is more adaptable to business change, with composable applications that can be assembled, reassembled, and extended. This is more important than the notion of suite vs. best-of-breed. Oracle can provide these composable applications because we have the entire suite of applications: ERP, EPM, CRM, HCM, and SCM. Many cloud providers started with one of those—like Workday with HCM, or SalesForce with CRM, and SAP with HCM (with the acquisition of SuccessFactors)—but with just one or two of these cloud solutions, they can’t offer the composition capabilities that Oracle can.
Oracle can offer a SaaS-based, business-centric application to complement any customer’s on-premises footprint. It adds immediate value, and we can seamlessly extend this partnership over time. With Oracle you have the possibility to compose this all into one cohesive suite, engineered to work together. No other vendor can do this right now. For a more detailed comparison between Oracle Cloud ERP and Workday, see https://www.oracle.com/erp/oracle-vs-workday/.