Does MES contribute to ERP success?

ERP offers improvements but MES may take plant performance one step further.

The major IT investment for food and beverage companies for much of the last ten years has been enterprise resource planning (ERP), while manufacturing execution systems (MES) were often ignored. Many advantages have developed from ERP but some processors are now realizing that their ability to measure and manage the performance of their plants has failed to improve. "In the ongoing saga of ERP benefits realization, we find IT groups are increasingly mandated to use the ERP system wherever possible, often without regard for functional fit," says Colin Masson of AMR Research. "For manufacturing execution, this is a naïve, risky and costly proposition."

There are three areas where ERP can fail to live up to expectations. First, investments in order-to-cash and procure-to-pay business processes have not produced the benefits expected. Oftentimes, systems that support plant applications take a back seat to ERP. The lack of manufacturing, work-in-process inventory management and plant scheduling applications resulted in lost manufacturing visibility. The supply chain is dependent on the plant but the plant is mostly invisible to the supply chain. Manufacturing, inventory and plant scheduling need to work with the supply chain in real-time to yield the visibility required for a world-class supply chain. The supply chain needs visibility into what's available, what's coming and what's possible and MES has a role in providing this information.

Another potential issue with ERP is its reliance on standard costs and fixed lead times. Actual production performance is frequently not reflected in this model. There is also a lack of timely data synchronization between ERP and plant realities. Reconciliation in the ERP world takes place on daily, weekly or even monthly intervals while the plant functions in real time. The result is two disconnected versions of the truth: one in ERP used for planning and one in production, used for scheduling and production. To optimize the supply chain and customer service, one up-to-date version is mandatory. As the drive to cut costs and maintain margins continues, ERP's financial model is not a sufficient tool to understand the realities of production costs. Accurate costing requires detailed actuals collected at the transaction level on the floor, best managed by MES.

Finally, many enterprises were searching for a lower total cost of ownership (TCO) with their ERP investments. Corporations believed ERP could be applied to the breadth and depth of manufacturing business processes. While lower TCO and the prospect of maintaining a single, omnipotent application have been seductive selling points at the corporate and plant levels, reality can be unsettling. Corporate mandates cannot improve performance if the tools and technology are not up to the task. At the plant level, ERP is often heavily customized to support manufacturing. For many of these projects, IT attempts to use ERP to accomplish objectives for which it was not designed. ERP designed to meet corporate needs, often fails to meet operational needs. "Users are better served by establishing well-defined points of integration between ERP and production systems," says Masson.

MES, then, may be a necessary component to the success of ERP and interest in it is increasing. "MES applications and services grew to an estimated $1.06 billion in 2004 from $705 million in 2001," says Masson. "We expect to see increasing emphasis on the integration between MES and ERP." Initially, forecasters expect this will take shape as shared visibility but as standards like ISA-S95 evolve, transaction-level support for key data exchange will follow.

Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to Food Engineering Magazine.

Recent Articles by Olin Thompson, Contributing Editor

You must login or register in order to post a comment.



Image Galleries

IPPE 2015

The 2015 International Production and Processing Expo (IPPE) was held in Atlanta at the Georgia World Congress Center, Jan. 27-29. More than 30,000 poultry, meat and feed industry representatives attended the event to interact with the 1,288 exhibitors on the show floor that covered more than 490,000 net square feet. At the show exhibitors demonstrated innovations in equipment, supplies and services utilized by firm in the production and processing of meat, poultry, eggs and feed products.


Burns & McDonnell project manager RJ Hope and senior project engineer Justin Hamilton discuss the distinctions between Food Safety and Food Defense as well as the implications for food manufacturers of the Food Safety Modernization Act.
More Podcasts

Food Engineering

Food Engineering March 2015 cover

2015 March

In this March 2015 issue of Food Engineering, we explore how a surprise FDA audit could be serious if you're not recording key data.

Table Of Contents Subscribe

FSMA Audit

What is the is most important step you have taken to become ready for a FSMA audit?
View Results Poll Archive


Food Authentication Using Bioorganic Molecules

This text provides critical tools and data needed to augment routine food analysis and enhance food safety by aiding in the detection of counterfeit, and potentially deleterious, foods.

More Products

Clear Seas Research

Clear Seas ResearchWith access to over one million professionals and more than 60 industry-specific publications,Clear Seas Research offers relevant insights from those who know your industry best. Let us customize a market research solution that exceeds your marketing goals.


FE recent tweets

facebook_40.pngtwitter_40px.pngyoutube_40px.png linkedin_40px.pngGoogle +

Food Master

Food Engineering Food Master 2015Food Master 2015 is now available!

Where the buying process begins in the food and beverage manufacturing market. 

Visit to learn more.