We build and run Retail Commerce OS — our own commerce platform, in production. Meet Retail Commerce OSSee what it does
Enterprise-grade systems designed to streamline operations.
We design and implement ERP and enterprise resource management systems that unify inventory, finance, and operations into one platform.
Most businesses do not decide to buy an ERP. They reach a point where the spreadsheets stop agreeing with each other — stock on hand says one thing, the finance sheet says another, and nobody can say which is right without a day of manual reconciliation. ERP is the decision to keep that data in one place instead of several.
That framing matters, because it determines what a good implementation looks like. The goal is not to install software. It is to get to a single version of your operational truth, with the fewest possible people needing to change how they work to get there.
We map your actual workflow before recommending a platform — how an order moves from enquiry to dispatch to invoice, where stock is counted, who approves what, and which steps are genuinely rules-based versus judgement calls that should stay with a person.
Only then does platform selection make sense. Sometimes a packaged system fits well and the right advice is to configure it and resist customising. Sometimes the process is the competitive advantage and forcing it into a packaged model would damage the business — that is when custom modules are worth their cost. We will tell you which situation you are in, including when the honest answer is that you do not need an ERP yet.
The risk in an ERP project is rarely the software. It is the cutover — the moment the business has to start trusting the new system with live operations. We plan that explicitly: what data moves, how it is validated before go-live, what the fallback is if something is wrong on day one, and who is responsible for each decision during the switch.
Where the risk profile justifies it, we roll out module by module rather than switching everything at once. Inventory first, then purchasing, then finance is slower on paper and considerably safer in practice.
An ERP that does not talk to your storefront, CRM, accounting package and warehouse system just relocates the reconciliation problem. Integration is scoped as part of the implementation, not as a later phase — including what happens when an integration fails, which is the part most implementations leave undefined until it happens.
If you are a single-location business running on one set of well-maintained spreadsheets and month-end takes an afternoon, an ERP will cost you more in disruption than it returns. The honest trigger is multiple locations or channels whose data has to agree, or a reconciliation burden that is already consuming real staff time every month.
We map your workflow before recommending a platform, so the system fits the business instead of the other way around.
Module-by-module rollout available to reduce risk and operational disruption during go-live.
We hold no reseller margin on any ERP platform, so the recommendation is based on fit rather than on what earns us a commission.
Connections to commerce, CRM and accounting are part of the implementation plan, including defined failure handling — not a later phase.
Common signs: your inventory and finance data live in disconnected spreadsheets, month-end close takes days of manual reconciliation, or you can't get an accurate real-time view of stock across locations.
Both, depending on fit — we'll recommend a packaged platform where one genuinely matches your process, and scope custom modules only where it doesn't.
It depends heavily on scope — a focused single-department rollout can run 6-10 weeks; a multi-department implementation with data migration typically runs longer.
Three things, in our experience of how these projects fail generally: scope that grows because process mapping was skipped at the start; a cutover planned as an event rather than a rehearsed procedure; and no named owner inside the business for decisions, so the project stalls waiting for sign-off. All three are avoidable, and all three are cheaper to avoid than to fix.
More than most vendors admit. Process mapping needs the people who actually do the work, not just management, and data cleanup before migration is genuinely your team's job because only they know which records are real. We front-load that ask so you can plan for it rather than discovering it mid-project.
Usually yes, and often you should. If your accountants are productive in the current package and it handles your compliance requirements, integrating it is generally cheaper and less disruptive than replacing it. We treat replacing working software as a cost to be justified, not a default.
It is inventoried and classified early: what has to migrate for operations, what has to be retained for compliance, and what can be archived rather than carried forward. Migrating everything indiscriminately is a common and expensive mistake — it slows the new system and imports old data quality problems along with it.
Yes. Go-live is the point of maximum risk, not the finish line. We stay engaged through the first full operating cycles — typically the first month-end close — because that is when the gaps between how the system was configured and how the business really works actually surface.
Too variable to quote meaningfully without scope, and any firm that quotes before mapping your process is guessing. The cost drivers are the number of departments in scope, how much data migration and cleanup is needed, how many integrations are required, and whether custom modules are genuinely necessary. We scope discovery as a separate, smaller first engagement so you get a real number before committing to the full project.
Drop us a line. Tell us what you're trying to fix and we'll tell you what we'd build — including when the honest answer is that you don't need us yet.
