What is our primary use case?
Microsoft Dynamics NAV is used for sales, purchasing inventory, manufacturing, advancing fixed assets, document integration, and now there is also a service module. This solution is now called Business Central, but it's the same product.
I have implemented Microsoft Dynamics both on cloud and on-premises, but the company I work for now has it deployed on-premises.
What is most valuable?
All of the features are valuable, depending on where you implement them. I've done implementations in 60 countries, across 86 different companies and groups, and each company has a different reason for why they want to use it. Every single feature that I've implemented has been successful, and for some companies, where they didn't use the functionality, they have moved to external products or they've integrated into other applications.
What needs improvement?
Microsoft Dynamics NAV could be improved in terms of exporting income statements and balance sheets. Currently, there is a feature, but you can only have the last three years. I spent some time trying to improve the KPI portion that exports the data, that already calculates the sub forms or subtotals, but they weren't able to break that up into different dimensions. They've now managed to crowd the separate table and you can export that, but it's only for the last three years. So, they could improve this solution by getting the chart of accounts or the account schedules to be exported, where you can go further than just three years with it.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this product for 21 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I'd say Microsoft Dynamics NAV is stable.
The SQL portion does require some maintenance. From an operational perspective, you do need to do some housekeeping to keep it up to date. In terms of maintenance, the only maintenance that you really need, from a consultant perspective, is if you want to upgrade to a new version or if you want to implement new features from the new cumulative update. But it's not really regarded as maintenance—it's more of an upgrade.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Microsoft Dynamics NAV is very easy to scale, as long as you understand the limitations of the product. There is a bit of a problem if too many people try and pro-post simultaneously to the general ledger. You do get locked out sometimes. So, you have to look at the size of the company—and you can add as many companies as you want—but when you go over 250 users, you have to start looking at a larger product. It's significantly scalable, but there is a limit to how many users per company you should have before you start getting performance issues.
I specialize in the manufacturing companies, but I've implemented this solution for companies of all sizes.
How are customer service and support?
I think that Microsoft's technical support is extremely good, but that's just because I used to deal directly with the development team at Microsoft and I used to present at events. From my experience, it's very good. There have been some instances where they didn't get it right, but the majority of the time—I'd say 99% of the time—they give good advice.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
From a business intelligence perspective, I have connected or created cubes or analytics services from multiple databases, anything from SAP, Pascal, JD Edwards, Oracle, Cognos, Executive Viewer. For ERP, I'm only working with Dynamics NAV and Business Central.
How was the initial setup?
I'm regarded as an expert, so the initial setup was easy because I've worked with it for so long and I've done so many implementations. Past partners still use me as a resource that they can lean on if they have any issues with their solutions. For me, I think the product is quite easy, but that is purely because of the experience and knowledge that I have about the product.
What about the implementation team?
I have implemented this solution myself.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The cost is one of the benefits. If you don't want to go for the full-blown finance and operations, the pricing model is a lot cheaper and has now switched to being based on a per-user subscription. So, if it's on cloud, you now have an expense instead of a large CapEx. If it's on-prem, you obviously still have to continue with the licensing model that they have, but if you compare the features and functionality, in terms of the price that you pay, I find it's better than other products.
My answer on the pricing would be slightly different, depending on the country you're in and the return on investment, based on the size of the company. It's well-priced internationally. I think the new model is priced even better because it's now subscription-based and, if you go for cloud, the return on investment is a lot quicker and if it's expense, you can cap it. If you do take the on-prem version, the licensing is still priced as what it used to be, so that would depend on what country you are in.
What other advice do I have?
My rating is biased because I'm a Microsoft resource, but I rate this solution a 10 out of 10.
To those looking into implementing this solution, I would first advise you to do your research. Make sure that the product does what you want it to do. You also need to understand the limitations of the product. If you want a payroll system, it's not a payroll system. You need to know these kinds of things.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Great solution, lots of functionality, easy to implement