> replace the thing that works fine and passes audits.
You surely don’t mean Excel, do you? It did not pass the audit.
The main selling point of any ERP is that it may be used to solve the problem in a cost-efficient way. And the problem here is not a single report or aggregation of data sources, it is an enormous list of requirements, implementing which with a manual or semi-automated processes based on Excel would be even more expensive or risky. Those guys in NZ failed even to understand what they actually need (i.e. produce that list of requirements).
I'm not even specifically referring to this specific instance but rather in general.
They aren't even able to produce a list of requirements, so not only do you need a consultant to generate the list, they then need another consultant to work with whichever solution provider to meet the requirements.
This will cost astronomical amounts of money, take years and in the mean time, what is the solution other than the excel documents and better processes.
The excel document didn't fail the audit, the processes did. I guarantee if they followed correct processes and did it in physical ledgers an auditor will pass that audit, they sure would be annoyed about it though.
You surely don’t mean Excel, do you? It did not pass the audit.
The main selling point of any ERP is that it may be used to solve the problem in a cost-efficient way. And the problem here is not a single report or aggregation of data sources, it is an enormous list of requirements, implementing which with a manual or semi-automated processes based on Excel would be even more expensive or risky. Those guys in NZ failed even to understand what they actually need (i.e. produce that list of requirements).