The budget was fixed. So the scope document did the unusual thing and listed what would not be built.
An automotive retail and distribution group in Singapore was deploying procurement on a new Coupa instance, with Autoline as its dealer management system.
The budget was tight, and fixed. That leaves three options. Deliver everything and overrun, which is the usual outcome and the one nobody admits to in advance. Deliver everything badly, which is worse. Or decide up front what is not being delivered, and say so in writing.
The third option is the least comfortable conversation and the only honest one.
Valtatech implemented Coupa procure-to-pay, integrated to Autoline across three flows: master data and lookup values inbound, payment details inbound, and the OK-to-pay file outbound to the dealer management system.
The statement of work named its exclusions. Standard budget functionality was included but budget integrations were not. Standard reports and views were in; analytics was explicitly out. Standard contracts were configured, with no migration of historic contracts. Two supplier punchout catalogues, not an open-ended number.
Enablement followed the same discipline: train-the-trainer for users with one nominated client trainer, coaching for the platform administrators, and the vendor's own online documentation for suppliers, rather than a bespoke programme for each audience.
Four weeks of hypercare after go-live, then a formal transition into support.
Valtatech is software vendor agnostic. The technology named here is what this client selected; we start from requirements, operating model and existing systems. See how we approach Source to Pay →
Naming exclusions in a statement of work feels like a negative, particularly when you are trying to win the work. It is the opposite: it converts a later argument into an earlier decision, and it is the difference between a change request and a disappointment.
A fixed budget does not have to mean a compromised implementation. It means someone has to decide what matters most and be straight about the rest — before the project starts, while there is still a choice.
The renewals are the verdict. Three consecutive managed services terms says more about whether an implementation worked than anything anyone said on go-live day.
Talk to us about what this would look like in your business.
Start a conversation