please give me bold point from this case so i can understand easily learn

The initial focus of this organization's ERP strategy was on human resources and payroll. The objective was to replace the 13 existing legacy systems that performed these functions. Executive participation beyond two project managers was not evidenced. Those charged with responsibility for ERP had a limited understanding of the organizations business practices. The policies and procedures that existed did not fully describe or adequately define business processes. ERP team members with functional backgrounds were focused on a specific functionality as provided within one of the 13 legacy systems. Their experience and business knowledge was limited to their interaction with one of these systems. Requirements for an ERP system were written at a high level and did not address business processes, data relationships or workflows. For example, the functional requirements document specified that the ERP implementation must be transparent to the users, could not impact personnel activities, must only replace field entry systems, must support existing business processes and interfaces to the 13 legacy systems must not impact existing systems or require changes to those systems. The functional requirements also included a specification that the system must distribute data across approximately 300 locations. Prior to procuring the ERP package, a fit analysis was conducted indicating no better than a 30% fit with the software from a leading ERP vendor. In spite of this finding, the ERP software was procured from this vendor. To address the gap between what the software provided and the requirements identified by the organization, significant customizations were required. Additional customization was undertaken to insure that processes that currently existed within the legacy systems were maintained. No investigation was conducted to determine if those processes could be improved, modified or even adapted to the new product. Customizations were also required for interfaces to the new system and to give the new product the same look and feel as the legacy systems. The first phase was deployed with 95% customized software. ERP was not viewed as a long-term process or as a long-standing program. It was identified as an IS department project with an expected duration of 18 months. Two project teams were setup to implement the selected product a functional project team responsible for functional requirements and a technical project team responsible for customizations. This separation of responsibilities complicated project coordination. The project managers did not view their involvement as long-term and saw their role as limited to their area of responsibility. Functional baselines, allocated baselines and product baselines were not defined and release planning was non-existent. No education was provided to the users or project team members prior to the selection of the ERP product solution. Product training was provided to key personnel. These key personnel received training from the vendor and also worked directly with the implementation contractor to produce customized training for the organization. Training was provided 3 months prior to the initial expected go-live date for the first phase of the project. This occurred 21 months later. During this time span, software was not available for practicing skills taught during training nor was additional training provided. The business case presented to justify an ERP system was heavily weighted with estimates of cost savings in the area of IS support. Excluding implementation costs, savings that might result from the replacement of two legacy systems were offset by the support costs incurred for the new system. These costs are estimated to be four times greater than that expended for the systems being replaced. Murray & Coffin/Success Factors in ERP System Implementation 2001 Seventh Americas Conference on Information Systems 1017 The project was initially expected to take eighteen months. The first implementation phase took 3 and years and provided less than 50% of the functionality specified in the requirements document. Eighteen months later, the development of the remaining functionality was still ongoing.