Oracle E-Business Suite Reviews

The ability to streamline all of our information is the most valuable feature for us. Right now, we are on several ERP systems, most of which are not fully integrated so we don't have the ability to track our inventory through these systems.

It is still being implemented and this has been slow, so I would say we have not seen a lot of benefit yet. We do believe it will help us track our inventory from multiple ERP systems.

The biggest frustration I have with Oracle is that they have taken an acquisition approach. Because of this, the modules don't talk to each other. It is touted as being a fully-integrated system, but if something happens and purchasing doesn't necessarily follow through to the cost module, the amount of programming and specific manipulation required to get the modules to talk to each other is surprising to me, especially for a package from a company of Oracle's size.

We are partially implemented. We have been partially implemented for two-and-a-half-years. We started two-and-a-half years ago and are probably still three to five years out of a full implementation.

We had deployment issues with the modules not fully integrating with each other.

I haven't been particularly happy with it, but I think it is because we are transitioning from an ERP system, so that right now we don't run it as a fully web-based solution. I think all of the additional frustrations also have to do with internet speed and long wait times. Most ERP systems that aren't tied to the internet have quick response times, but with Oracle it's very slow.

We have struggled with it. The portions of our company that have implemented it are the smallest divisions, and in each instance when we've brought another one on, we've discovered that it creates a lot of challenges particularly from the volume of part numbers and transactions that are required to make anything happen.

That is actually where we are right now in our implementation, and we have paused it because we are about to go into the division that requires the most complexity and the highest number of transactions, and the scalability is a concern.

I don't interact enough with them to be able to answer. I know that we occasionally have to open service requests with Oracle. Of course, the IT team handles that and I am not part of the IT team. Sometimes the response time is a little slower than we would like, particularly when it has to do with month-end close. Very often we can't close a module because we are waiting on an SR.

It has been a very slow process that's very complicated and very rocky. We have used a consulting partner to get it implemented and there have been a lot of bumps and hurdles to get over.

It lacks integration between the modules, and the amount of customization required is surprising.

The most valuable feature for us is integrity in the sense that the General Ledger module is directed connected with our payables. And our Human Resources is connected with payroll, so it's one unit from HR's perspective, which is very efficient. Also now, we have the iRecruitment module, so it's a single continuum from HR to finance. We don't have to deal with different software.

Another important aspect for us is safety in the marketplace. We know it's not going to go away and that our investment in the solution is OK.

I mainly support human capital solutions, so the biggest benefit for me has been with the iRecruitment module that took very paper-driven tasks to just a few clicks. It's saved me a lot of time and provided connections between tons of separate interfaces.

iRecruitment is, however, a very weak module that gets a lot of user complaints. And even though we get good responses from Oracle Support, it's really clunky and is one of the weakest module that I think Oracle has.

We also didn't like the Time and Labor module. We replaced it with Chronos, and that's made a big difference.

I've been using it since 1999. Back then, we used only basic applications such as Payables/Receivables, Ledger Projects, HR, and payroll. We went with iProcurement in 2005 and then iRecruitment in 2006.

The issues with deployment depend on which modules are deployed as well.

We've had no issues with instability.

We've been able to scale for our needs.

The TARs assigned to us have improved a lot over the years. They have a lot of scripts that can be registered as concurrent. Previously in 1999, I'd have to think twice before logging a ticket because it was a back-and-forth nightmare. Now we can chat online very quickly.

As a developer, I have no power or decision in the selection process. But I think it was market presence and the stability that won over management. We purchased PeopleSoft before Oracle acquired them, and after they did, our whole organization uses Oracle now.

I think that the initial setup is complex, especially since we were unfamiliar with the software. We were talking to consultants who were unable to relate to us. We were coming from a mainframe world and a lot of our decisions were wrong. I don't fault Oracle for that, though. It's just part of any implementation.

Getting the right consultant is key, and sometimes rapid implementation doesn't pay.

I'm an Oracle die-hard, but I think that iRecruitment and Time & Labor are very weak.

It's out there in the market and the suite of products seem to cater really well to the business needs of our organization. When we buy Oracle's different products, we look to see how they integrate with different modules. With E-Business Suite, they all talk to each other.

So E-Business Suite is kind of one solution, and it's also a well-known product. It's highly stable and we get great support for it.

It's very stable, which directly affects our business from an assets and support perspective. It provides us with purchasing, financial, procurement, payables, and order management modules. These are all business assets for us that E-Business Suite directly affects.

The Oracle support site needs to be better. We go to it for pretty much any sort of issue we have, and I'd like for the search capability to be improved. Sometimes I can get as good if not better results from Google compared to the Oracle site.

Also, there have been issues where we've had to play with E-Business Suite to develop custom fixes because the solution itself isn't precisely catered to our requirements. We're able to get it to work, but it would be nice to not have to customize our own fixes so much.

We haven't had any issues with deployment.

There have been instances of instability, and we've been able to resolve those with custom workarounds from either the Oracle support site or from simply Googling the answers.

We haven't had any issues scaling it.

The support site is the only bad thing I've seen with Oracle. Unless you type in the exact right words, you don't get the right answers.

I think its quality seems to have gone down a little bit compared to the way it used to be when I started working when I always had good support.

I am more on the development side so I didn't install it. The initial setup was done by OBPS. It seems that because it's a popular product, we can find answers on the support site. For my part, development for it has been easy.

I think it's the leader in financial software. I've talked to people who aren't Oracle fans, but who like E-Business Suit anyways. It's a very good product.

The extensibility that we've needed over the past several years is the most valuable feature for us.

It's allowed us to add our own customizations to it, which is highly important to our organization. We have many, many customized processes that we've needed to add on top of it in order to bring value to our company.

The complexity around configuration and deployment need improving. When I look at some of my previous companies, they spent millions of dollars on deployment and even just doing an upgrade. We did an upgrade two years ago and it took quite a bit of an investment just to upgrade as-is.

Deployment is complex and expensive.

Since we upgraded two years ago, it's been very stable. We haven't had any issues with instability since then.

There have been many times in which we could have used additional initial processing power, but we were constrained by the licensing structure we were in. That's prevented us from scaling to the extent we wanted.

We just dropped our maintenance with Oracle last year and have gone to a third-party service provider. It was less than half of the cost, and we didn't see the value of the money that we were spending at the time with Oracle.

I wasn't involved with the company that I'm at now, and it was definitely complex in the previous companies that I've been with.

The re-licensing is a large cost proposition so we may be looking at alternatives, I think, in the next couple of years.

I definitely think it's an investment. It's definitely a very robust product, so it's just going to depend on what type of investment a company is willing to make and what their future plans are as well.

It's a very comprehensive solution that enables us to manage customers, customer service, finances, projects, HR, and other business operations. It adds a lot of value for us because it gives us solutions to all these areas.

There are a couple of areas for improvement, I think, which are implementation via the cloud and they need to bring down the price. Cloud implementation would make it much easier to begin, and the price is a little high.

We didn't have any issues with deployment, but, again, it would be better if we could implement that solutions via the cloud.

It's a very stable product. We haven't had any issues with instability.

It is very scalable and we've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

The technical support personnel are knowledgable, but I feel they're too aggressive and kind of pushy.

E-Business Suit setup was complex, but I think that every Oracle product has a complex setup. It wasn't easy and it wasn't straightforward. In fact, it took us one to two years to complete the setup.

Oracle scales the pricing, but E-Business Suite is still very expensive for small to mid-sized businesses. I heard that this is a common complaint throughout the market for these sorts of solutions.

Make sure that you have a very solid project management plan prior to implementing it. Be sure to assess your timeline, duration, and everything else that's relevant to successful implementation and actually using the products. It really, really helps if you have a solid assessment performance done prior to starting the implementation.

The most valuable feature is definitely the ability to go in as a manager or as an individual and do everything in one place, for example, to add/change/remove a goal. 

Mandating a goal plan was a really good idea because it forces you to actually think about it, and it makes it easier at the end of the day for a user. 

The ability to see the goals and move them over to next year in one place is really great. They can copy, extend, and delete all in one place.

We've only been playing with it less than a year - so not long - but it forced us to be able to have a change in management. It is really helping management to have a conversation about goals. 

Previously, goal management wasn't something we did well. Now that we have implemented Fusion, with powerful competencies, it's simplified the process. At the end of the day, the goal thing was awesome.

The account executive was good, but when it came to training HR, it really failed - on this point I'd rate Oracle as 3/10. 

The webinars are OK but they definitely didn't hit the target. 

This application is so large for a small company like ours, so it was very hard to train everyone with such an extensive product.

We implemented it this year.

Getting everyone on-board was a tad slow, but there were no major pick-ups, and all was well for the most part.

No issues encountered.

We had other Oracle products, but I can't remember which ones.

It was seamless and went very well.

We use a vendor who is really great.

For us it's high, because now we can focus on gathering the right amount of info about our information.

We did, but I can't remember which ones.

I like the new version as it's easier to manage. The problem is that the timing is bad - they did quite a bit of work to the goals feature, and changed it around quite a bit. For me, it's hard work because I need to train everyone to use but it's much more fluid and easier to navigate.

We needed a lot more training and best practices for a small company. Oracle hasn't done a good job preparing best practices for small companies. However, it's great for goal management.

A couple of things-- one is the support for the multiple languages, locale, so the internationalization is a valuable feature. The ability to extend the system and capture the duration of data points and extensions on customer processes, so it's also adaptable. Furthermore, I like the support for mobile apps, which I think they are catching up on.

Looking at the product on a large scale, some of the features are more spreadsheet-based with data updates. Oracle does have a few data spreadsheet loaders but these are not extensive, and a lot of data screens do not give you the option to download the data, modify, and the upload it. Spreadsheets are now becoming the fastest way to download and modify data. This would be handy especially when working with larger data sections.

I've used it for 12 years.

No, you can deploy with very little downtime which is a great feature.

It all depends on what highway you are hosting it on. Based on how many resources you are provided. I've used the product across the organization for the past 12 years and depending on how much hardware, and how fast it is, in terms of design, it does have scalability built in to it.

Most of my interaction has been through the support website which is mostly technical support. Most of the support is through the customers, through the support portal. The best part about the support is the vast knowledge base. 9/10 times you can find a solution to your problem through some kind of published notes from the support website.

There were some modules that were more complicated. All I would say is that it wasn’t too simple and it wasn’t too complex.

• Integration
• Ease of use
• API interface
• Personalization capabilities

The punch-out capabilities to other vendors e-commerce sites for shopping. The county does not need to manage catalogue content. All information is exchanged electronically including purchase orders and invoices, this automation has improved county efficiencies.

Prior to Oracle, the county procurement system was antiquated and individuals typed orders on a typewriter or filled out paper forms. Orders were faxed to suppliers and delivered to a central county warehouse that farmed out orders to departments. The county was dependent upon a 20+ year old mainframe system and there was no integration between the procurement and financial systems.

With Oracle, the county switched from paper-based purchasing to an automated solution which allows departments to place orders and receive within days or a week. The Purchasing department was centralized and allows the county the ability to better manage contracts and negotiate better prices. The purchasing operations were fully integrated with back office financial systems.

Reporting, particularly in the area of public sector encumbrances.

I've used it for 11 years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

10/10.

9/10 - there is always room for improvement. Occasionally It takes too long to work problems and there is typically an unnecessary long list of information that has to be supplied before the analyst will start work on the issue.

We previously used a custom mainframe solution that was developed in house. We switched because we wanted to leverage modern technology, with a vendor who would enhance their solution, and incorporate new intellectual property through acquisitions and/or mergers.

Oracle implementations are complex and require that the customer understands, and reviews their business processes. Often time it is difficult to revert from one configuration to another. Customer need to wisely consider things like set of books and general ledger account structure and how their business processes align with best practices and what Oracle has to offer.

We used Oracle Professional Services for our implementation. The team was extremely knowledgeable.

While I cannot provide a tangible amount for the ROI, the county has definitely seen a significant return in regards to operational efficiencies.

The county spent $8million on licenses, training, and implementation services. Oracle offers the best deals at the end of their fiscal year in June. The licensing for Oracle is very complex, and it is best to buy only what you need. Oracle, like most vendors, is not amenable to removing products that you are no longer using/need.

The county did look at SAP, but decided on Oracle E-Business.

• Make sure you document and understand your business processes and how they align with the product and best practices
• Ensure that you have a plan for governance and adoption
• Limit the number of integrations and customizations. While Oracle API’s are good, they require strong technical resources to develop. Once developed, they are very stable and require little maintenance
• Make sure you have appropriate support staff. Oracle is very complex and requires a lot of expertise to support and maintain
• Make sure you have a plan to perform and keep up with upgrades. Again, upgrades require a lot of testing and it would be nice to have a dedicated team to work on upgrades
• Look at Oracle’s road map for Oracle E-Business over the years. The strategy and road map keep changing