Microsoft Dynamics GP Reviews

We primarily use the solution for our daily transactions, such as purchasing functions, sales functions, inventory management, and the whole general ledger, We also handle our financials and bank reconciliations such as bank management and cashbook management.

They've got a search feature called Smart Place that we find very useful. We can go through a whole lot of data from the past at any time from any origin. It actually takes you to the exporting functionality. 

The solution offers integrations with other software as well. We have integration with Microsoft Office where we can do Word and Excel, etc.

It's very convenient. 

Currently, we are actually looking at Payroll. Payroll we haven't implemented yet, however, it's there within the system. We are using a standalone payroll system as of right now. That becomes costly because it's outside the licenses that we are paying for Microsoft Dynamics GP. It will be easier and cheaper if we roll everything together, which we may do in the future.

The solution has an Integration Manager. You can actually pull a budget from Excel into the system. You can take it in and/or out.

If you have closed your year, you can reverse for one year. It has some nice functionality. If you have virtually missed something, you can go back and correct it, and reverse the year. It autocorrects your journal. You don't have to recapture everything.

It is quite a robust system.

We don't have proper data management. We have a government scheme where we service people and help them with housing. We call it the Self Help Housing Agency, where we provide funding, then you pay back the money without interest. It's one area that the system doesn't seem to handle it properly. We initially needed a system that was focused on test management in that aspect due to the fact that we wanted a revolving account where the money that you pay back goes into the fund and it funds other beneficiaries as well. That way, it never ceases to operate. You pay back, it goes into the fund, somebody also applies and then the money he pays back and it revolves like that. That said, we are not using the system for that. It doesn't work in the way we need it to. If it did, we'd definitely use it.

We also have services that are mostly data management. We only now use it for subsistence for others when they are traveling in between the jobs. For example, when you're traveling to another area, you apply for a subsistence allowance. That's the main thing that we are only using it for. That said, now, for Self Help and service leverage manuals, we need to computerize it so that it becomes part of the system as well. That's one area that needs to be looked at and improved somehow.

The budget aspect could be improved. I have to do my budgeting outside of the system on Excel, then whatever that has been approved I need to upload to GP. However, I want a system where I can start with projections. It would be great to be able to project with all the notes and have it give me my final outline and upload it automatically into that system. I don't know if that is possible. 

With payroll, the payroll that they have offers US or Canadian tax. However, here, our tax payments are different from the US and Canada. It is very difficult to put in our tax tables. We need some customization. It should be readily available for any country to use according to their tax implications. The system should know different types of tax regimes around the world so that it can accommodate. It's a little bit rigid on that.

I've been using the solution since 2008. It's been well over ten years at this point.

The solution is quite stable due to the fact that it's on-premise. It has maintenance utilities within itself, so you can just go in and run some maintenance or schedule it for daily backups and stuff like that. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

Generally, we try to handle the maintenance internally. However, we've used consultancy for support in the past and have also had to reach out to Microsoft directly.

At one of the sites, we had a big problem whereby the data was corrupted or that looked like somebody had deleted something important. The technical support did assist us. We logged the issue with Microsoft Directory. 

However, the main issue is we no longer have a go-in-between consultant or partner. Microsoft emphasizes partnership. They don't want you to deal with them directly. They'll say, "No, we've got a growing partner in the region. Try them." However, this time we went through them due to the fact that it was something that was within their system. They did ultimately help. They sent us to one of their partners in India. They helped the site get back on track. It was down for about two or three years, so they didn't close their financials for that period of time. However, now they are back on track.

We did previously use a solution called Cyborg back in the day. It had some components we needed. However, we've been with Microsoft since 1989. It's been a long time. We switched when we were able to get different modules.

I didn't handle the initial setup. It was more than ten years ago. On top of that, I might have been in support at the time. Now, I am a principal accountant. I just came into the role.

The maintenance mostly lies with the IT department. We have an IT department. They're the ones who go and do the routine maintenance for it. For major support or maintenance, normally we utilize our service level agreement and then we send tenders out. The respondents show their capabilities of skills and what their experience is. Then we adjudicate around that and select the best leader who will run a one-year or three-year contract. 

We are just coming off of a three-year contract that ended in November. Due to COVID, we couldn't send it out again. The idea going forward is to self-sustain, self-support, and to cut off outsourcing costs. We're actually training ourselves to be at the level of the consultant.

The licenses should be centralized. We, as a local authority under the ministry of local government, have the government pay on our behalf, and they are quite strict. It's an annual licensing that we are signed up for. It's quite hefty. We have 28 sites within the country and each site has to pay its own license. It means they are decentralized. If it was centralized, then it would have been easy. We are actually thinking of centralizing the whole system in one place and to cut off a whole lot of maintenance of servers. That way, licensing can be cut because it's licensed per user. The solution charges on a per user basis. 

For us, in our local currency, it costs us around 5 million Botswanan Pulas a year. It's quite a lot of money.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business arrangement with Microsoft.

I'm using the 2016 version of the solution 2016 due to the fact that I'm working for a local authority here. It's a standard across the country. We are with the local government.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I'm a consultant and I don't use it personally, but our different clients use it for different purposes. It is mainly used for accounting, tracking different transactions into inventory, sales, and purchasing.

The solution is easy to use. 

As technology changes, the chart-up account needs improvement because the chart-up account is a string. They should make it more flexible. 

I have been using Microsoft Dynamics GP for over twenty years.

The solution is mostly stable but there are bugs. 

The scalability is good. I rate the availablity a ten out of ten. 

The technical support team is good. 

The initial setup is easy. The deployment takes a few minutes time. 

It is an affordable solution. 

It's the easiest ERP system out there to implement.

I will rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

It is an ERP and a small and midsize business enterprise resource planning solution.

It is strong in integration, and in this particular business, you have a lot of independent software vendors that do products for vertical markets that integrate directly into GP. So, we tend to sell the strengths and not the weaknesses. But, if you want software that can run a bank, you need a system built from the ground up to run a bank, and this solution can't do that. So, when we purchase, we deal directly with Microsoft and don't go through the channel to buy our product.

It is a very good product and is priced well. If you look at current reviews, they are not on the top of the list, but our customers also think it's an excellent product.

It is very powerful for core financials.

The shortcoming of this solution is that part of it is written in 32-bit, and the world is moving to 64-bit and Business Central is completely 64-bit. This could be a limitation, not within the product itself, depending on what you want to interface and integrate.

We have been using this solution for a long time.

The database is SQL Server, which utilizes store procedures, and the store procedures are on SQL Server. So, to some extent, the product is scalable, but it's not one size fits all. For example, if you're running three big companies, it could probably scale to handle them. Still, if you are running 30 small companies, it probably couldn't take 30 small companies properly because of the functionality. Therefore, you have to know the marketplace. We have close to 100 customers using the solution.

It requires a lot of expertise to implement, and a customer can't buy it on the shelf and run it. We don't need more than two people to implement it because the customer does most of the work, and we train them. We do the project, set up the implementation framework, design the processes and run the system once it's implemented.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, find a reseller who understands the solution.

We currently use the solution for our fixed assets and payroll.

The fixed assets, payroll, the data module, and user-friendliness are most valuable.

Improvement should be in the reporting features. Something that is quite flexible that can include my balance sheets, so I don't need to depend on a consultant to do it for me. 

There should also be extra redundancy when posting to modules. We use different sets of books such as CashBook and CheckBooks therefore if I select the wrong one the solution allows the transaction to just pass without warning. This causes extra work outside of the solution and our reconciliations do not match most of our transactions.

I have been using the solution for 14 years.

The solution is stable. It is on a standalone server and the security is not as hectic as it might be on the cloud. It is implemented on-site.

The scalability of the solution is fine. There is no problem with it.

It is ideal for small businesses or private companies, but for larger organizations with different tax regions from South America and the US, it requires a lot of customization.

There is local IT support and a dedicated support department that is centralized across 38 sites. When there is an issue, calls are logged in and they assist where they can, otherwise it is escalated to Microsoft.

Positive

The solution I previously used was Management Reporter, a legacy system that was slow.

The solution's price is steep. The licensing model is per user.

I rate Microsoft Dynamics GP an eight out of ten.

The solution has been great to work with so far. It offers a lot of control, which we really appreciate.

The product is very user-friendly and is easy to navigate.

You can track everything from beginning to end quite easily.

Their reporting is very extensive. If they cannot provide a certain report, they have a tool that is similar to a report writer that you can connect to and really customize the reports you need.

The purchase order and processing aspects of the solution should be improved.

In this latest version, they included mostly everything we currently require. The only thing that can be improved on is the way that transactions, for example, in account receivable, take place. When a customer makes a payment to us, it's unclear how to connect the software with the bank in order to properly identify the invoices and the amount of the payment the customer is paying us in order to apply those accounting and then close the invoices that are open. This would really save us a lot of time and energy if that aspect could be clarified or streamlined.

I've been working with the solution for about five years now, give or take.

The stability is good. We didn't have any issues with bugs or glitches. It's reliable.

The technical support is good. The company has its own developers on hand to answer any questions we might have. We're satisfied with the level of service we received.

The initial setup was a little complex. It's always uncomfortable when you are doing migrations from one system to the other and get the people to accept the new software or the newer ERP after they have worked for so long with another. 

You have to learn a lot to set it up after the data is collected. We needed to make sure everything was properly displayed to the developers.

For us, the most complicated part is that it's a US-based software and we had to deal with a lot of tax regulations in Puerto Rico.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft.

I'm not sure of the exact version we are using currently. It might be version 10.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Reporting capabilities: Other than integrity, the most important function of an ERP system.

With a use of a third-party product, which GP has many, we streamlined the inventory process by directly importing count sheets from Excel spreadsheets from our many branches, reducing time and accuracy.

Continuity between modules: Keystroke functionality is not consistent. It appears to me that teams that develop the different modules need more collaboration. For example, when you enter a range of criteria in the starting field, it defaults on the same ID number in the end range in some modules but not others.

Another example: In some windows, you hit the clear button and nothing happens. A thing that happened to me just the day before I wrote this review: I was in an inventory transfer window in Project and no matter what I did, I could not get out of the screen, so I had to use Task Manager to kill GP, which is always a last resort.

We had to make another change recently. Users would get random SQL errors doing various things in GP; all unrelated. After running some SQL scripts, I determined that their password expired and thus gave the error. It would be nice if there would be a notification that the password was about to expire. I had to turn off password expiration altogether.

It would also be nice if you could print more than one report at a time. I get often requests that reporting isn’t working, only to find out they have a print job open and the new print job stays in the queue until the earlier job is cleared.

There are several of these little nuances that happen, but I don’t want to sound too critical of GP; overall, it does what you tell it. As an administrator, users like to blame the system for things that go wrong, but my saying is “garbage in, garbage out”.

On a positive note, the help function is really beneficial, getting users to use it is another issue…

I have been using it for 22 years.

There have been some issues but there are generally fixes; some simple and some more complex, using the backend (SQL) to do corrections.

We have not encountered any noteworthy scalability issues; it’s a matter of increasing the power of the servers and hardware/software that it runs on. We are a tier 4 (highest level of complexity) and are running fine, doing several thousand transactions per month.

I don’t use support too often, but they are responsive and stick with the issue until it is resolved.

I’ve used other software solutions but not for this business.

I’ve installed GP for a handful of companies over the years and it generally goes as planned, so I would say the installation/implementation process has improved over the years. The key is in the planning more than the execution.

The pricing and licensing models are aligned with the product in the market. My only caveat is to be careful of customizations, as it will greatly increase the costs/effort to upgrade going forward.

I was not here for the decision to evaluate the options. Other comparable options are products like NetSuite and Sage 300.

Create an internal team, listen to your VAR, and plan, in-depth, all functionality that you need and want. Know the difference between wants and needs, and what effort they all will take initially and long term. Don’t over complicate the system; things can always be bolted on later, outside of the core functionality.

Both the fact that it is highly customizable, as well as the reporting capabilities, are valuable.

I worked with GP 2013 at a previous employer, where we had upgraded two full versions in my time there. All versions were exceptional at making our accounting staff's jobs far easier. The reporting simplified monthly and quarterly metrics and saved everyone a great deal of time from working with spreadsheets, where manual data entry was required.

With the exception of the great deal of work we put into customizing the system for our inventory needs, the only suggestion for improvement would be to simplify even further the administration and customization side of things.

I have used it for five years.

Although I had to completely rebuild the host server due to hardware failures, the deployment was straightforward and no issues were encountered.

No stability issues encountered.

No scalability issues encountered, including when we tied Microsoft Dynamics CRM into the system.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

We did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was straightforward; the only complexity was based on our specific business needs.

It was originally implemented through vendor; then, final implementation was handled in-house.

Customizations can significantly increase the cost, including when upgrading versions.

Evaluations were completed prior to my joining the company

If a team is not available to manage the system, be sure the best systems administrator is familiar with the system, and work closely with your preferred VAR.

We primarily use the solution for accounting. We only use the accounting aspect of the product.

The initial setup was very easy. You do not need a lot of technical in-depth knowledge to handle the implementation.

The stability is reliable. It's quite stable.

Overall, the solution wasn't that great.

The product doesn't do consolidations. It was hard to navigate the solution and the UI, the user interface, wasn't any good, to be honest.

We found it hard to navigate and it had a very outdated UI so that the user experience wasn't good at all.

This is now a legacy product, so they're phasing it out over time. 

The scalability was never very good.

We've been using the solution for the last 12 months or so. I've personally been using it for five-plus years or so. It's been a while.

The stability was good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance is mostly reliable.

The scalability is poor. If it wasn't getting pushed out, it could be something that they improved on. However, Microsoft is no longer continuing with the product.

I had up to 25 to 30 users. They were accounts payable clerks, accounting managers, controllers, et cetera.

I can't speak to if the company plans to increase usage, as I no longer work there anymore.

We had technical support through an integrator and not necessarily through Microsoft directly.

We previously used QuickBooks. We're implementing Dynamics right now.

While I wasn't at the company for the initial setup, it is my understanding that the initial setup is not complex. It's pretty straightforward and simple to execute.

I can't speak to how long the deployment took as I wasn't present during the process. It happened before I arrived.

We had in-house staff that managed the maintenance. We didn't require any new staff to manage it.

Our company used third-party integrators to handle the initial setup.

There is a yearly licensing fee that the company would have to pay, plus the cost of hosting and hybrid cloud costs.

We are end-users and direct customers. We don't have a partnership or business relationship with Microsoft.

This product is at end-of-life and is an outdated product. Therefore, I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to others. There are other options on the market.

In general, I would rate the solution at a three out of ten.