A few weeks ago, we ran a simple poll.
Nothing complex. No trick phrasing. Just one question:
What best describes your ERP testing maturity right now?
The responses were… telling.
At face value, you might read that as a fairly even spread of challenges.
It’s not. It’s something much more structural.
This isn’t four problems. It’s one system failing in different ways.
Each of these answers looks distinct, but they all point to the same underlying issue:
Testing is not positioned as a first-class discipline within ERP transformation.
Instead, it’s:
- Deferred
- Distributed
- Or dependent
And that’s where things start to go wrong. (Quietly, early, and expensively).
1: “No independent QA” (37%) — the biggest signal
This is the standout result. Over a third of respondents are effectively saying:
“The people building the solution are also responsible for assuring its quality.”
That might sound efficient. It rarely is.
Without independence:
- Defects become subjective (“that’s acceptable” vs “that’s correct”)
- Commercial pressure influences quality decisions
- Critical design flaws go unchallenged
Most importantly, it removes the last meaningful checkpoint before compromise sets in.
If you think about the “Compromise Line,” this is often where organisations cross it without realising.
2: “Low confidence in integrations” (25%) — where complexity bites
This one is predictable but still concerning.
ERP transformations don’t fail because a single module doesn’t work. They fail because everything needs to work together.
Low confidence here suggests:
- Integration testing is too late or too shallow
- Environments don’t reflect reality
- Ownership across systems is fragmented
And this is where that NIST insight becomes very real:
If issues originate in design, integrations are where they surface violently.
By the time you’re finding them here, you’re already deep into that cost multiplier curve.
3: “No test ownership/strategy” (25%) — the silent enabler
This is the one that enables all the others.
No ownership means:
- No one defines what “good” looks like
- No one is accountable for risk coverage
- Testing becomes reactive rather than designed
In most programmes, this shows up as:
- Late test planning
- Inconsistent tooling
- Gaps between functional, integration, and UAT phases
It’s not that testing isn’t happening.
It’s that it isn’t orchestrated.
4: “Testing lags behind delivery” (12%) — the visible symptom
Interestingly, this is the lowest response. Not because it’s rare but because it’s obvious.
When testing lags:
- Everyone can see it
- It gets discussed in steering meetings
- It becomes a delivery problem
But here’s the nuance:
This is often a downstream symptom, not the root cause.
Testing lags because:
- There’s no strategy
- There’s no independence
- Integration complexity wasn’t accounted for early
Fixing this alone rarely solves the bigger issue.
So, what do these results actually tell us?
If you step back, the pattern is clear:
Most organisations are not failing at execution. They are under-investing in assurance at the point where it matters most: design and early planning.
Which brings us back to the original premise.
- 70% of defects originate early
- But the majority of organisations are structurally set up to find them late
That gap is where the Compromise Line lives.
And based on this data, a significant proportion of organisations are already on the wrong side of it long before go-live is even in sight.
A more uncomfortable question:
The poll was sparked by a claim that some sectors may be 20 years behind in test maturity.
But looking at these results, a better question might be:
Is industry really as far ahead as we think it is?
Because if over a third of programmes lack independent QA, and half lack either integration confidence or test strategy…
This isn’t a sector-specific issue. It’s systemic.
Where this goes next:
The interesting part isn’t diagnosing the problem.
It’s understanding what good actually looks like in practice:
- What does independent QA really mean in an ERP context?
- How early should testing be influencing design?
- And how do you stop crossing the Compromise Line in the first place?
If this prompts questions, or you’d like to explore how other organisations are tackling these exact issues, we’d be happy to chat.
Book a short call with us and we’ll share real‑world examples of how teams are navigating ERP transformation more effectively — and what’s actually working in practice.