Microsoft Dynamics SL Reviews

Dynamics SL is used in oil and gas and discrete manufacturing.  

I've had no complaints, and it's fairly easy to use.

It helps streamline several processes for our customers, aiming for simplification. Ultimately, not all customers want complex processes. If they can simplify and streamline, they're open to what SL recommends.

Therefore, Dynamics SL has simplified a complex business process for your organization. 

Let's look at it from the perspective of the three major brackets: CRM, ERP, and CMS. Many systems are complex due to processes required to move data between them, almost in a circular manner. 

Dynamics has helped customers avoid this by facilitating point-to-point transactions, eliminating the circular flow, and reducing data manipulation. This ensures a target system receives accurate information, minimizing errors due to data handling.

I have never had any issues with the integration capabilities. Because the ease of integration with other systems depends on the data guys. They are the ones who define the interfaces and how data streams across phases, maybe going into middleware. So, if you have good people, you won't have issues. 

People tend to overcomplicate this. I'm sure you wouldn't want to hear stories of others who had a tough time because their data definitions weren't very accurate. If you handle that well, you won't have any issues. 

If I put myself in the customer's shoes, it's easier to use.

Reporting would be a very valuable feature, but then again, integrating CoPilot would be even better. 

An area of improvement could be around automation and predictability. 

However, I'm sure Microsoft is already thinking about incorporating AI co-pilot features, which should be coming soon.

The end person who will be looking at the report is the CFO, and CFO isn't just interested in static reports but in predictive information.

Ideally, SL could use data from ERP, and CRM to provide some level of prediction. CoPilot is plugged into Dynamics, it'll be a plus and even a huge selling point over other solutions that are there in the market because now we have a component of AI. We can also give you some level of prediction.

Even if it starts with a 15% confidence level, a CFO will take that because it still allows them to increase their bets to a certain extent. So, that's something that I I will look forward to whenever Microsoft introduces it.

I have experience with this solution. I used it in specific projects. 

I have been using it for one year. 

It is a fairly stable solution. But the question is, how stable is the entire ecosystem? Complexity can bring instability to your system. If you have too many interfaces running and your middleware can't handle it, you end up with a complex and potentially unstable system. 

The role of an enterprise architect is basically to guide solution architects away from creating overly complex systems. You want to make it as simple as possible.

There are no issues with scalability. It was scalable enough for my customer's processes. 

There are around 200 end users for one of my customers. 

We never faced any problems with customer service and support. It is good. 

The initial setup is not too complex. No SI would have issues with the setup process. 

The issue happens when customization happens as it does not translate easily into the target process. This is where the issue arises. 

However, setting up the product is fairly easy. 

Most of our manufacturing customers mostly leverage on-premises deployment. 

If the value proposition is clear for the customer, they won't see it as an expensive solution. A solution becomes expensive when it doesn't do what it promises. I generally don't blame the products for that, but the people who do the business and data architecture.

So, the business architecture can become complicated. If a product can't accommodate that complexity, the customer will feel it's not good. 

But then, another product might not work either because your complicated business process might not be well-suited to it. 

So, you need to know the limits of all products and the ecosystem. With a good enterprise architect, you shouldn't fall into this complexity trap. 

It still happens, though, maybe because the business decides on a specific route, and IT isn't involved or lacks knowledge. There's inherent complexity in any ecosystem, for sure.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I'd recommend it if it fits the use case. As an enterprise architect, I start with the requirements, then I break those down into users and storage. 

If a particular product or group of products can cover them, then I recommend it. There may be use cases where Dynamics doesn't work, and another product would be better suited.

It really depends on the entire user story we are trying to solve.

Our primary use case for the platform was managing our financial and operational processes across multiple companies. We are a group with 11 to 12 companies, and Dynamics SL has been integral in managing our accounting, project management, and other critical business functions.

The product's primary improvement area would be its batch processing system. Transitioning to a transactional processing system would significantly enhance its efficiency and usability.

We have been using Microsoft Dynamics SL for more than ten years.

The solution has been very stable, with minimal downtime. The only notable issue we had was a two-hour outage last year, which was promptly addressed by technical support.

It is a scalable solution.

Our experience with customer service and support has been positive. They were proactive and helpful, especially during the rare instances of downtime.

Positive

The initial setup was relatively straightforward, and I would rate it a nine out of ten. However, some customizations were required, extending our first company's deployment time to about six months.

We implemented Dynamics SL with the help of an in-house programming team. The expertise within our team was sufficient to handle the necessary customizations.

While I don't have exact numbers, the solution has provided a good return on investment by ensuring our financial and operational information is accurate and timely.

I would rate the product pricing seven. The licensing costs were reasonable, with the last amount being around $17,000 annually for 80 users, equating to about $200 per user per year.

We did evaluate other options but chose Dynamics SL due to its comprehensive feature set and reliability at the time.

Overall, Dynamics SL served us well for many years. However, organizations should consider more modern solutions, especially those that support transactional processing, to avoid the inefficiencies associated with batch processing.

I would advise looking into more modern solutions that avoid batch processing. While it was reliable, its batch system is outdated compared to newer transactional systems.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We primarily implement the solution for our clients. The solution is an ERP (enterprise resource planning) solution.

The solution has many helpful features.

The stability is very good. Its performance is reliable.

The solution is extremely useful for e-commerce companies.

The compliance has been very useful.

The solution is quite stable.

The scalability is good.

It's pretty easy to set up.

The licensing of the solution should be adjusted. The policies aren't ideal. They should make it easier to understand. Right now, it's too confusing.

Microsoft should add some MRP solutions or MRP modules. When we compare it with SAP, for example, their MRP features are great. They're very efficient. Microsoft could add similar features in order to make themselves more competitive and to expand their offering.

Technical support could be simplified. There are too many tiers in tiers of service support and the first one isn't very helpful.

I've been using the solution for more than 13 years. It's been more than a decade. I have a lot of experience with it.

The solution seems to be very stable in general. I can't recall dealing with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is nice and easy. The process is pretty smooth. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

Technical support within Microsoft has a lot of levels. When you want some support from Microsoft, you don't get a technical engineer that will try to support you at the first level. Generally, when we have contact with the first level of the technical people, they will try to understand the problem, however, generally, they don't end up solving anything. You need to move to the second or third level, where you will get a support engineer that might be more helpful. This way of moving through tiers of support should change. It would be faster if you could get to the right person right away, and the first tier isn't that helpful.

Microsoft also has an online community where you can get support as well. You might be able to troubleshoot that way.

The initial setup was not overly complex. It was quite straightforward and easy to understand. The entire implementation process was very simple. A company shouldn't find it to be difficult.

We are a Microsoft Gold partner.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been quite happy with the capabilities of the solution overall.