Although every business operates in a different industry, they all share one common goal: profitability. Along the road to profitability, companies have tried various production methods over the years to plan and use resources effectively, ultimately choosing the approach that best fit their industry and organization. As industry demands change, revisions and adaptations to those models become inevitable. But why all this effort?

Of course, to achieve better efficiency metrics and accelerate return on investment, thereby boosting profitability!

Years ago, most companies using software modeled each application in isolation by department. Simply transferring a warehouse manager’s mental map of stock quantities and bin locations into software was seen as a major digitalization milestone. Managers who valued independent, department‑level reporting accelerated this digitalization by deploying systems that connected all departments and enabled planned resource usage across the organization. Naturally, this process was not easy.

Integrated operations eliminate siloed behavior, which triggered significant resistance. However, the leaders who stood behind the system drove their companies forward on the digitalization journey with confidence. Today, every company above a certain scale—large or small—has some form of ERP software in place. They continue to expand its capabilities by building in custom enhancements or integrating third‑party applications as needed. Some organizations remain satisfied with their existing systems, while those whose business models and volumes evolve begin to ask, “Is my current software still the right fit?” That question sparks a “second‑generation” ERP project, as teams form to reassess their options under intense pressure. The original investment—once cutting‑edge—has become obsolete, and the task of selecting a new solution that will serve the organization for years to come falls squarely on the project team’s shoulders. Although executives have the final say, decisions often align with the team’s recommendations. Project teams favor data‑driven analyses, crafting comparison tables, running agreed‑upon algorithms, and presenting formal reports.

Today, questions like “Does it have this feature?” and “How does it do that?” have given way to “How easily and how quickly can this be deployed on the shop floor?” Even if competing solutions offer comparable feature sets, implementation feasibility has become the paramount factor. The faster and more practical the adaptation process, the more closely a company’s efficiency rises in tandem. From decades past to the present, one constant remains: the desire to achieve higher profits with lower costs. A second—sometimes third—major software investment must deliver rapid cost payback and elevate the organization’s value. In response to these global demands, independent research and audit firms have stepped in. For example, IDC’s September 2019 study confirms the trends described above.

According to IDC, companies that select IFS Applications for their ERP needs see substantial increases in annual revenues, reductions in operational costs, up to 20 percent productivity gains per IFS user, faster shipping cycles, and investment payback rates exceeding 20 percent. We can attribute these results to IFS Applications’ user‑friendly design and its widespread, effective adoption in the field. For project evaluation teams seeking a new solution, IFS Applications now stand out even more—offering extensive, industry‑specific functionality; a unified platform for diverse production requirements; comprehensive asset management; ready‑made, department‑ and executive‑level reports; and much more. As companies continue their ongoing struggle for performance, efficiency, and profitability, IFS Applications remain an exceptionally powerful tool.