The implementation of a ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) It's a strategic investment. This system facilitates the integration of key business areas, such as accounting, sales, purchasing, inventory, and human resources, into a single platform. It allows for the centralization of information, the automation of processes, and improved decision-making.
However, many projects end up doubling their initial cost or generating serious conflicts between client and supplier.
The cause is rarely technological.
The problem is usually in the contract.
In this practical analysis we address the Three most frequent contractual errors in ERP projects which explain most economic deviations:
- Insufficient definition of scope.
- Lack of enforceable SLA.
- Lack of control in change management.
Diffuse scope: when nobody knows exactly what has been contracted
The most expensive (and most common) mistake
One of the most common legal problems in the implementation of enterprise software is a poorly defined scope.
This occurs when:
- Specific functionalities are not detailed.
- Standard configurations are not distinguished from custom developments.
- Key integrations or processes are not documented.
What happens in practice
The client believes they have contracted a system tailored to their business.
The supplier understands that it has sold a standard solution with limited adjustments.
Both interpretations may be reasonable… but incompatible.
Legal risk
When the scope is ambiguous:
- It is difficult to prove breaches.
- The customer's position is weakened.
- This opens the door to additional billing.
How to avoid it (in practical terms)
- Define specific business processes.
- Document specific functionalities.
- Clearly separate standard vs development.
- Clearly identify what is excluded.
Lawyers specializing in international and technology companies in Spain
Non-existent SLA: the contract without control mechanisms
A silent error… until the system fails
Many ERP contracts do not include a real SLA or do so in an irrelevant way.
This means there are no:
- Defined response times.
- Resolution commitments.
- Consequences for non-compliance.
Impact on the company
When the ERP fails:
- Operations are halted.
- Sales are lost.
- Internal costs are generated.
Without an SLA, these situations are left virtually without contractual coverage.
object lesson
Company with ERP implemented:
- Critical incident for 2 days.
- No effective response from the supplier.
Result
- Significant economic losses.
- Inability to demand clear accountability.
Legal risk
Without SLA:
- There is no objective reference to non-compliance.
- Any claim is made difficult.
- It increases dependence on the supplier.
What should always exist?
- Incident criticality levels.
- Maximum response times.
- Resolution times.
- Consequences for non-compliance.
Uncontrolled change management: the direct path to cost overruns
The reality: all projects change
- In any ERP implementation, the following arise:
- New requirements.
- Functional adjustments.
- Unforeseen needs.
- The problem is not change.
- The problem is not regulating it.
What happens when there is no control?
- Modifications are accumulating.
- They are billed as extras.
- Economic traceability is lost.
Realistic example
Project initially closed:
- Budget: €60.000.
During execution:
- Small but continuous changes.
- Lack of formal control.
Final result:
- Total cost close to double.
Legal risks
- Questionable billing.
- Conflicts over the approval of work.
- Difficulty in auditing costs.
Good contractual practices (without going into specific wording)
- Establish a formal change process.
- Require prior validation.
- Define impact on cost and time.
- Maintain document traceability.
Comparative table: risk vs control
| Element | Out of control | With proper control |
| Scope | Divergent interpretations | Aligned expectations |
| SLA | Diffuse breaches | Clear obligations |
| Exchanges | Unforeseen cost overruns | Controlled costs |
Recurring problems in ERP projects (especially Odoo)
In professional practice, very specific patterns are repeated:
- Underestimation of customizations.
- Over-reliance on standard solutions.
- Dependence on the technology partner.
- Lack of contractual documentation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Different interpretations arise.
This usually translates into additional costs and difficulty in demanding accountability.
It depends on the contract and how the project is regulated.
In ambiguous scenarios, disputes about additional work often arise.
The customer loses the ability to demand response times or solutions.
This can have a direct impact on the business.
Through formal systems of:
Application
Evaluation
Approval
Impact control
Without this system, the project is exposed to economic deviations.
Generic service descriptions
Lack of functional documentation
Lack of service metrics
Changes without a defined procedure
A vague contract not only creates legal uncertainty.
It generates, above all, avoidable extra costs.
Therefore, the key is not to complain afterwards.
It's in define correctly before.
In technology implementations, the difference between a successful and a failed project isn't always the software. Often, it's the contract that no one reviewed in enough detail.
RRYP Global, International and Technology Business Lawyers in Spain.
