For many manufacturers, the decision to move from Microsoft Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central feels like the beginning of an ERP project.

In my experience, it is not.

The real work starts well before anyone configures Business Central, migrates a database, or trains a user. It starts when the leadership team clarifies why the organization is modernizing, what needs to change, what needs to stay, and how the business will prepare for the transition.

That distinction matters because a successful Dynamics GP migration plan is not primarily a technology plan. It is a business plan.

I have seen manufacturers approach ERP modernization from both directions. Some start with software demonstrations, feature lists, and implementation timelines. Others first examine their business objectives, processes, data, organizational readiness, and operational risks.

The second group usually enters implementation with much greater clarity.

If you have followed our previous discussions about [why manufacturers using Dynamics GP are hesitant to move to Business Central], [whether Business Central can really handle manufacturing complexity], [the real fear behind leaving Dynamics GP in manufacturing], and [why manufacturing customizations and ISVs become ERP migration roadblocks], you will recognize a common theme: the technology is only one part of the decision.

Once the decision to modernize is made, planning is the most important next step.

Table of Contents

Why Does ERP Modernization Planning Matter?

What Are the Seven Stages of Successful ERP Planning?

Why Does Manufacturing Require More ERP Planning?

What Planning Mistakes Should Manufacturers Avoid?

What Does ERP Readiness Look Like in Practice?

What Should Executives Confirm Before Implementation?

Executive Takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions

Final Thoughts

“A successful Dynamics GP migration plan isn’t primarily a technology plan. It’s a business plan.” — Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Why Does ERP Modernization Planning Matter?

When leadership teams talk about a Business Central migration, the conversation can quickly become technical.

Which data will migrate? Which integrations need to be rebuilt? Which extensions will be required? How long will implementation take?

Those are important questions. They are not the first questions.

The first questions should be business questions.

What are we trying to improve?

Where is Dynamics GP limiting the organization today?

Which processes create unnecessary effort or risk?

What capabilities will the business need in three to five years?

How will we know this modernization has been successful?

These questions turn ERP modernization planning into a strategic exercise rather than a software replacement project.

Microsoft’s own guidance for organizations preparing a Dynamics GP cloud migration recommends assessing migration readiness, determining what data should migrate, choosing a migration approach, and carefully planning the schedule before the production transition.

That technical preparation is important. For a manufacturer, however, the business preparation surrounding it is equally important.

Your ERP touches finance, purchasing, inventory, production, warehousing, sales, costing, planning, and often the shop floor. A decision made in one area can have consequences throughout the organization.

That is why I tell executives that ERP governance needs to begin before implementation.

You want agreement on objectives, decision-making authority, project ownership, priorities, and acceptable tradeoffs while you still have time to think carefully about them.

What Are the Seven Stages of Successful ERP Planning?

A good ERP migration strategy should move through a deliberate sequence. I generally think of successful planning in seven stages.

1. Executive Alignment

Start with leadership.

The CEO, CFO, COO, CIO, and other executive sponsors do not need to become Business Central experts. They do need to agree on why the company is undertaking the project.

Is the goal to support growth? Improve operational visibility? Reduce dependence on manual processes? Modernize infrastructure? Standardize processes across locations? Improve reporting? Create a stronger foundation for future digital capabilities?

There can be several objectives, but team leadership should prioritize them prior to implementation.

Without executive alignment, project teams are forced to make strategic decisions during implementation. That is where delays, scope disagreements, and expensive rework begin.

2. ERP Readiness Assessment

Next, assess the current environment honestly.

An ERP readiness assessment should look beyond whether Dynamics GP can technically be migrated.

Evaluate your current architecture, integrations, customizations, ISVs, reporting, data, security requirements, business processes, and user dependencies.

Ask which capabilities are essential and which exist because “that is how we have always done it.”

This is also where manufacturers should identify hidden dependencies. A spreadsheet maintained by one employee or an old integration that nobody discusses may be more operationally important than a highly visible customization.

Readiness means understanding those realities before they catch the project team by surprise.

3. Manufacturing Process Assessment

Do not assume every existing process should be recreated in BC.

One of the biggest opportunities in a manufacturing ERP migration is the chance to ask whether today’s processes still make sense.

Map how work actually happens across quoting, order entry, purchasing, planning, production, inventory, warehousing, shipping, costing, and financial reporting.

Pay particular attention to workarounds.

If employees routinely export data to Excel, rekey information between systems, maintain shadow databases, or rely on tribal knowledge, those behaviors tell you something important about the current environment.

Business Central supports manufacturing capabilities involving production BOMs, routings, work and machine centers, capacity and costs, production orders, supply planning, inventory, warehousing, and related processes.

The planning question is not simply, “Can BC do this?”

It is, “How should our business operate in the future?”

4. Data Readiness

Data is often treated as an implementation task. I believe it belongs in planning.

Your customer records, vendor records, items, bills of material, routings, inventory, costing information, and financial data all influence the quality of the new environment.

If the source data contains duplicates, obsolete records, inconsistent naming conventions, or years of accumulated workarounds, moving everything does not solve the problem. It relocates it.

Decide early which data has business value, which requires cleansing, which should be archived, and who owns each data domain.

This topic deserves much more attention, which is why the next article in this series will focus specifically on what data manufacturers should migrate from Dynamics GP to Business Central.

5. Organizational Readiness

ERP modernization changes how people work.

That makes change management a planning responsibility, not something to add a few weeks before go-live.

Identify the people whose jobs and workflows will change. Bring process owners into the project early. Understand where resistance is likely to emerge and, more importantly, why.

Often, resistance is not really about the new ERP. People may be concerned about losing a familiar process, giving up a trusted workaround, or being asked to adopt a new workflow without understanding the reason for it.

Good communication addresses those concerns early.

6. Implementation Planning

Only after the earlier stages are understood should you build the detailed Business Central implementation plan.

Define scope, phases, resources, responsibilities, testing expectations, training requirements, integration work, data migration activities, decision processes, and escalation paths.

For a manufacturing ERP implementation, I also recommend looking carefully at business timing.

When are your busiest production periods? When is inventory count? Are there major customer commitments, plant shutdowns, acquisitions, audits, or other initiatives competing for the same people?

An ERP project consumes organizational capacity. Plan accordingly.

7. Go-Live Preparation

Go-live planning should begin well before go-live week.

Define what must be true before the business switches systems.

Have critical processes been tested end-to-end?

Have users been trained?

Has the data been validated?

Have integrations been tested under realistic conditions?

Does everyone understand cutover responsibilities?

Is there a support and escalation plan?

What happens if an issue affects shipping, production, inventory, or invoicing?

A good go-live plan reduces uncertainty because people know what will happen, who owns each activity, and how decisions will be made.

Successful ERP modernization starts with alignment, readiness, and disciplined planning.

Why Does Manufacturing Require More ERP Planning?

Manufacturing is interconnected in ways that can make ERP modernization particularly demanding.

Consider a seemingly simple customer order.

It can affect demand planning, purchasing, material availability, scheduling, production orders, labor and machine capacity, inventory, warehouse activity, shipping, costing, invoicing, and financial reporting.

Now add multiple facilities, subcontracting, complex BOMs, routings, lot or serial tracking, specialized costing requirements, warehouse systems, MES integrations, and years of custom Dynamics GP processes.

That is why manufacturing companies should resist generic implementation thinking.

Microsoft describes production orders as a central component of Business Central manufacturing, using information from items, production BOMs, routings, machine centers, and work centers to help manufacturers plan and control production.

Those connections are exactly why preparation matters.

A decision about item setup may affect planning. A routing decision may affect scheduling and capacity. A warehouse process may affect production consumption. A costing decision may ultimately affect financial reporting.

The more connected your operation, the more valuable disciplined planning becomes.

What Planning Mistakes Should Manufacturers Avoid?

There are several patterns I see repeatedly.

Starting with software demonstrations. Demos are useful, but they should answer business questions rather than define them.

Ignoring current business processes. If you do not understand how work gets done today, it is difficult to design a better future state.

Underestimating change management. A technically successful system that employees do not adopt is not a successful modernization.

Treating ERP as an IT project. IT is essential, but ERP touches the business's operating model. Operations, finance, supply chain, manufacturing, and executive leadership all need ownership.

Weak executive sponsorship. Leadership cannot disappear after the budget is approved. Projects need timely decisions, priority setting, conflict resolution, and visible support.

There is a simple pattern underlying all five mistakes: organizations begin implementation before they are ready.

ERP risk is reduced long before go-live through disciplined planning, organizational preparation, and strong executive leadership.

What Does ERP Readiness Look Like in Practice?

Here is a composite example based on a pattern I have encountered in manufacturing assessments.

A manufacturer believes it is ready to move from Dynamics GP to BC. Leadership has discussed the need for modernization, employees are frustrated with reporting, and the company wants to reduce reliance on aging customizations.

At first, the project looks straightforward.

Then the assessment begins.

Production relies on several spreadsheets that are not formally documented. Purchasing uses a workaround created years ago for a business requirement that has since changed. Finance depends on custom reports built around historical account structures. An integration that everyone assumed was minor turns out to be critical to daily warehouse operations.

None of these discoveries mean the company should not modernize.

They mean the company now knows what it is actually modernizing.

That knowledge changes the project.

The team can decide which processes should be redesigned, which integrations should remain, which data requires cleanup, which users should participate in testing, and where change management will matter most.

The assessment did not create complexity. It exposed complexity while there was still time to manage it.

That is exactly what good ERP modernization planning should do.

“The assessment didn’t create complexity. It exposed complexity while there was still time to manage it.” — Andrew Good

What Should Executives Confirm Before Implementation?

Before approving the start of implementation, I recommend that executive teams be able to answer “yes” to most of the following:

• Do we have clearly defined business objectives for modernization?
• Is the executive team aligned on priorities and expected outcomes?
• Have we completed an ERP readiness assessment?
• Do we understand our current manufacturing processes and major workarounds?
• Have we identified critical Dynamics GP customizations, ISVs, and integrations?
• Do we know which processes should be changed rather than recreated?
• Have we established ownership for data cleansing and migration decisions?
• Have we identified process owners and key users?
• Is there a clear ERP governance and decision-making structure?
• Have we planned for change management and user adoption?
• Does the implementation schedule reflect production and business realities?
• Have we defined testing, training, cutover, and go-live readiness criteria?
• Do we know how leadership will measure the success of the project after implementation?

If several answers are “no,” that does not mean the project has failed.

It means you have identified where to focus before implementation begins.

That is valuable information.

Executive Takeaways

For CEOs, CFOs, COOs, CIOs, and manufacturing leaders considering a move from Dynamics GP to Business Central, I would leave you with five points.

First, treat ERP modernization as a business initiative. Technology enables the change, but business outcomes should drive it.

Second, invest in readiness before configuration. Understanding processes, data, integrations, people, and risks early is far less disruptive than discovering them halfway through implementation.

Third, establish executive alignment and ERP governance early. Someone needs to own priorities, decisions, and outcomes.

Fourth, use modernization to improve rather than automatically replicate. Moving every old process and workaround into a new ERP can preserve the very limitations you are trying to escape.

Fifth, remember that planning reduces uncertainty. Preparation reduces risk. Leadership determines success.

“Planning reduces uncertainty. Preparation reduces risk. Leadership determines success.” — Andrew Good

A strong Dynamics GP migration plan does not guarantee that an implementation will never encounter a surprise. Manufacturing is too complex for that.

It does make the organization much better prepared to respond to surprises.

Before You Start Your Migration, Make Sure You’re Ready

Moving from Dynamics GP to Business Central is a significant decision. But the biggest risks often are not found in the software. They are hiding in your processes, data, integrations, customizations, and assumptions about how the business actually operates.

Finding those issues during implementation can be expensive and disruptive. Finding them before implementation gives you options.

That is exactly why we recommend starting with a Manufacturing ERP Readiness Assessment.

At Liberty Grove Software, we help manufacturing leadership teams take an objective look at where they are today, identify potential migration risks and dependencies, and establish the priorities that should shape a successful Dynamics GP migration plan.

The goal is not to rush you into an implementation. It is to give your team the clarity and confidence to make the right decisions before one begins.

If you are considering a move from Dynamics GP to Business Central, talk with our team about a Manufacturing ERP Readiness Assessment. Let’s make sure your organization is ready before the implementation clock starts.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do manufacturers start planning a Dynamics GP migration?

Start with business objectives and an ERP readiness assessment rather than software configuration. Establish why the company is modernizing, identify executive sponsors, assess current processes and technology dependencies, evaluate data readiness, and define the future-state priorities that will guide the migration.

What should be included in an ERP migration plan?

An ERP migration strategy should cover executive alignment, governance, current and future business processes, data readiness, integrations and customizations, organizational change, implementation scope, resources, testing, training, cutover, go-live support, and measures of success.

What is an ERP readiness assessment?

An ERP readiness assessment evaluates how prepared an organization is for modernization. For manufacturers, the examination should cover business processes, Dynamics GP configuration, customizations, ISVs, integrations, data quality, reporting, manufacturing requirements, organizational readiness, and project governance.

Who should be involved in ERP migration planning?

ERP planning should include executive sponsors and leaders from finance, operations, manufacturing, supply chain, IT, warehousing, and other functions affected by the system. Process owners and experienced frontline users should also participate because they understand how work actually happens.

Why do ERP implementations fail?

There is rarely one cause. Common contributors include unclear objectives, weak executive sponsorship, poor governance, insufficient process discovery, underestimated data issues, inadequate testing, limited user involvement, and weak change management. Many implementation problems can be traced to decisions that leadership should have addressed during planning.

How can manufacturers reduce ERP migration risk?

Reduce risk by assessing the current environment early, documenting critical processes and dependencies, cleaning data, defining governance, involving business users, testing realistic scenarios, preparing employees for change, and establishing clear go-live criteria.

Why is executive sponsorship important in ERP modernization?

ERP projects create cross-functional decisions and competing priorities. Executive sponsors provide direction, remove roadblocks, resolve conflicts, reinforce accountability, and keep the organization focused on business outcomes rather than departmental preferences.

What should manufacturers do before a Business Central implementation?

Before implementing Business Central, manufacturers should align leadership, complete an ERP readiness assessment, document current processes, define future-state requirements, evaluate customizations and integrations, assess data, establish governance, identify project resources, and develop plans for change, testing, training, and go-live.

Final Thoughts

I have spent enough time around manufacturing ERP projects to know that implementation gets most of the attention.

Planning deserves more.

The best time to discover that a process is poorly understood is before configuration. The best time to identify bad data is before migration. The best time to resolve conflicting priorities is before they affect the project schedule. And the best time to prepare employees for change is long before go-live.

Successful manufacturing digital transformation does not begin when the new ERP is switched on.

It begins when leadership decides to understand the business it has today and deliberately design the business it wants tomorrow.

If your organization is considering a move from Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, a Manufacturing ERP Readiness Assessment can help identify the processes, data, technology dependencies, organizational considerations, and planning priorities to address before implementation begins.

In the next article in this series, I will take a closer look at one of the most consequential parts of that preparation: What Data Should Manufacturers Migrate to Business Central?

We will discuss why “migrate everything” is rarely the best strategy, which manufacturing data typically matters most, what may be better left behind, and how better data decisions can simplify your migration while creating a stronger foundation for BC.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

Introduction

For many manufacturers evaluating a move from Microsoft Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, the first questions usually focus on production.

Can Business Central support our manufacturing processes?

Will it handle our production orders?

Can it manage planning, scheduling, inventory, and purchasing?

Those are all important questions.

But after years of helping manufacturers modernize their ERP environments, I’ve found that one conversation inevitably rises to the top once executive teams move beyond functionality.

Can we trust the numbers?

For a CFO, manufacturing cost accounting isn’t simply an accounting exercise.

It influences pricing decisions.

It affects profitability.

It determines inventory valuation.

It impacts financial reporting.

And perhaps most importantly, it gives executives confidence that the information guiding business decisions accurately reflects what’s happening on the shop floor.

That is why Business Central manufacturing costing deserves far more attention during ERP modernization than many organizations initially realize.

The encouraging news is that Business Central provides manufacturers with a modern and highly capable manufacturing costing framework.

The challenge isn’t whether Business Central can calculate manufacturing costs.

The challenge is ensuring the organization’s costing methods, Bills of Material, routings, inventory practices, and financial assumptions are ready for a modern ERP platform.

“Manufacturing leaders don’t make decisions based on transactions. They make decisions based on confidence in the numbers. ERP modernization is an opportunity to improve that confidence, not simply recreate yesterday’s accounting processes.” - Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

That distinction is important.

Because the goal of modernization isn’t simply to replace Dynamics GP.

It’s to build a financial foundation that better supports growth, operational visibility, and executive decision-making.

Table of Contents

Why Manufacturing Cost Accounting Deserves Executive Attention

How Does Costing Differ Between Dynamics GP and Business Central?

Standard Costing vs Actual Costing: Understanding the Business Impact

What Happens to WIP and Manufacturing Inventory Valuation During Migration?

How Business Central Handles Manufacturing Variances

What CFOs Should Evaluate Before Migrating

A Story I See Repeatedly

How Manufacturers Can Avoid Costing Surprises During Implementation

Five Questions Every Executive Team Should Ask Before Migration

A Final Thought

Ready to Evaluate Your Manufacturing Costing Strategy?

What’s Next in This Series?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why Manufacturing Cost Accounting Deserves Executive Attention

Manufacturing costing influences far more than month-end financial reporting. Accurate cost data gives executives confidence in pricing, profitability, inventory valuation, production planning, and long-term strategic decisions.

Cost accounting touches nearly every operational and financial decision a manufacturer makes.

Executives often think of costing as something finance owns.

In reality, manufacturing costing influences:

• Product pricing
• Gross margin analysis
• Inventory valuation
• Production planning
• Capacity decisions
• Financial reporting
• Customer profitability
• Executive forecasting

When costing information is inaccurate, every downstream decision becomes more difficult.

Organizations such as the Association for Supply Chain Management (ASCM) emphasize that accurate cost and inventory information is essential for improving operational performance, planning, and supply chain decision-making.

I’ve worked with manufacturers that believed they had a production scheduling problem.

Others assumed inventory accuracy was the issue.

In several cases, neither was true.

The underlying problem was inconsistent costing data that had accumulated over years of process changes, manual adjustments, and evolving business practices.

Once those issues were addressed, the operational challenges became much easier to solve.

That’s why I encourage executive teams to think about ERP modernization as an opportunity to strengthen financial visibility, not simply migrate accounting data.

How Does Costing Differ Between Dynamics GP and Business Central?

This is one of the first questions CFOs ask.

The answer is more nuanced than many expect.

Both Dynamics GP and Business Central support manufacturing costing, but they approach costing from different perspectives.

Dynamics GP has served manufacturers well for many years, particularly organizations with mature costing models that have evolved alongside their business.

Business Central builds on that foundation while providing a more integrated approach to manufacturing, inventory, production, and financial management.

Microsoft provides detailed information on Business Central's manufacturing capabilities, including production management, planning, inventory, and costing functionality that supports modern manufacturing operations.

Rather than viewing costing as an isolated accounting function, Business Central connects manufacturing transactions directly to operational activities across purchasing, production, inventory, and finance.

That integration gives executives greater visibility into how operational decisions influence financial performance.

However, it also means manufacturers should carefully evaluate existing costing practices before migration.

“One of the biggest mistakes I see is assuming costing will work the same way simply because the products are the same. Modern ERP platforms often require organizations to rethink processes before they replicate them.” - Andrew Good

The objective should never be to recreate historical complexity.

The objective should be to improve financial visibility while supporting future growth.

Standard Costing vs Actual Costing: Understanding the Business Impact

One discussion that often surprises executive teams is the difference between standard costing and actual costing.

Both approaches have value.

Both can support successful manufacturing organizations.

The important question is which method best supports your business model and management objectives.

Standard costing provides consistency.

Organizations establish expected material, labor, and overhead costs, then measure manufacturing performance using production variances.

This approach simplifies budgeting, forecasting, and financial analysis while making operational performance easier to evaluate over time.

Actual costing, on the other hand, reflects the true cost of materials, labor, subcontracting, and overhead as production occurs.

For manufacturers experiencing significant fluctuations in material costs or production environments, actual costing may provide greater operational insight.

Microsoft explains the different costing methods available in Business Central and how each affects inventory valuation, cost flow, and financial reporting, helping manufacturers align ERP configuration with their business objectives.

Neither approach is universally better.

The right choice depends on factors such as:

• Product mix
• Production complexity
• Material price volatility
• Financial reporting requirements
• Management objectives

The key is understanding how your existing Dynamics GP costing model aligns with Business Central’s capabilities before implementation begins.

What Happens to WIP and Manufacturing Inventory Valuation During Migration?

One of the biggest concerns I hear from CFOs is straightforward.

“What happens to our inventory valuation during migration?”

It’s a fair question.

Work-in-progress inventory often represents one of the largest assets on a manufacturer’s balance sheet.

If executives lose confidence in WIP accounting or inventory valuation during an ERP implementation, confidence in the entire project can suffer.

Fortunately, Business Central provides strong capabilities for managing manufacturing inventory valuation and WIP accounting.

The challenge isn’t the software.

The challenge is ensuring that the underlying manufacturing data accurately reflects how the business operates.

Bills of Material.

Production routings.

Overhead calculations.

Labor assumptions.

Inventory transactions.

These all influence costing accuracy.

I’ve seen organizations spend weeks debating ERP configuration when the real issue was outdated production routings that no longer reflected actual manufacturing practices.

Once those routings were corrected, costing accuracy improved dramatically.

That experience reinforced something I’ve learned repeatedly.

ERP systems don’t create accurate costs.

Well-designed manufacturing processes do.

How Business Central Handles Manufacturing Variances

Manufacturing variances tell an important story.

They highlight differences between expected performance and actual operational results.

Business Central allows manufacturers to analyze a range of production variances, helping finance and operations teams identify opportunities for continuous improvement rather than simply explaining month-end results.

These insights may include:

• Material usage variances
• Capacity variances
• Labor variances
• Overhead variances
• Production efficiency variances

The goal is not merely to close the books.

The goal is to understand why performance differed from expectations and use that information to improve future operations.

Manufacturers that embrace variance analysis as a management tool often gain far more value from their ERP investment than organizations that treat it solely as an accounting requirement.

What CFOs Should Evaluate Before Migrating

Successful ERP modernization begins long before software implementation.

I’ve found that finance leaders who ask the right questions early experience far fewer surprises later.

Before migrating from Dynamics GP, I recommend evaluating:

• Current costing methodology
• Bills of Material accuracy
• Production routings
• Overhead allocation methods
• Inventory valuation processes
• WIP accounting practices
• Financial reporting requirements
• Historical manual adjustments
• Spreadsheet dependencies
• Audit and compliance requirements

One CFO I worked with initially believed the migration project would focus primarily on technology.

As we worked through costing workshops, it became clear that years of spreadsheet adjustments had gradually become part of the organization’s month-end close process.

Those spreadsheets weren’t solving ERP limitations.

They were compensating for outdated manufacturing data.

Once the organization corrected the underlying processes, month-end close became faster, reporting became more consistent, and executives spent less time debating numbers and more time discussing strategy.

“ERP modernization should improve financial confidence. If leadership finishes an implementation with the same questions they had before, we’ve missed an opportunity.” - Andrew Good

A Story I See Repeatedly

One experience stands out because it changed the way a leadership team viewed ERP modernization.

A mid-sized manufacturer had postponed moving from Dynamics GP for several years because the executive team was concerned that changing ERP systems would disrupt inventory valuation and manufacturing reporting. Their finance department had spent years refining reports, month-end procedures, and costing adjustments. From their perspective, the current system was working well enough.

As we began documenting their manufacturing costing processes, an unexpected issue emerged.

The biggest source of inconsistency wasn’t Dynamics GP.

It was the collection of manual processes that had gradually become part of their monthly close.

Different plants calculated overhead differently.

Engineering updates to Bills of Material weren’t always reflected in production routings.

Inventory adjustments were often made outside established procedures.

The ERP system wasn’t producing inaccurate information.

It was faithfully reflecting inconsistent business processes.

Once leadership recognized that, the conversation changed completely.

Instead of asking how to preserve every existing costing practice, they began asking how Business Central could help standardize them.

The implementation became more than an ERP project.

It became an opportunity to strengthen financial governance across the organization.

Several months after go-live, the CFO shared something that has stayed with me.

“For the first time, we’re spending our executive meetings discussing profitability instead of debating whether the numbers are accurate.”

That is the real value of ERP modernization: improving the quality of business decisions.

It isn’t simply replacing software.

It’s increasing confidence in the information leaders use to run the business.

How Manufacturers Can Avoid Costing Surprises During Implementation

One of the biggest misconceptions about ERP modernization is that costing decisions are made during software configuration.

In reality, the most successful projects begin long before implementation starts.

They begin with preparation.

Manufacturers that experience the smoothest transitions typically invest significant time understanding their current costing environment before making configuration decisions.

That preparation often includes:

• Reviewing Bills of Material for accuracy
• Validating production routings
• Evaluating overhead allocation methods
• Identifying spreadsheet-based calculations
• Documenting inventory valuation practices
• Confirming WIP accounting procedures
• Reviewing variance reporting requirements
• Aligning finance and operations around common costing objectives

Notice that very little on this list relates to technology.

Most of it relates to understanding how the business actually operates.

“Successful ERP implementations don’t begin with software. They begin with clarity. The more manufacturers understand their costing processes before implementation, the more confident they’ll be in the results after go-live.” - Andrew Good

Five Questions Every Executive Team Should Ask Before Migration

Before committing to a Dynamics GP migration strategy, I encourage executive teams to answer five important questions.

Do we fully understand how our current manufacturing costs are calculated?

Many organizations rely on costing rules that have evolved over many years.

Documenting those assumptions is an essential first step.

Are our Bills of Material and production routings still accurate?

ERP modernization often exposes inconsistencies that have accumulated gradually over time.

Correcting those issues before migration reduces implementation risk and improves long-term reporting.

Which manual processes have become part of month-end close?

Spreadsheets and manual adjustments frequently compensate for outdated processes rather than ERP limitations.

Understanding those dependencies creates opportunities for simplification.

Does our current costing model support where the business is going?

Growth through acquisitions, product expansion, new facilities, or increased automation may require a different level of financial visibility than today’s environment provides.

5. Are we treating migration as a technology project or a business improvement initiative?

This may be the most important question of all.

The manufacturers that achieve the greatest return from ERP modernization are the ones that treat implementation as a business improvement initiative, not simply a software replacement.

A Final Thought

Manufacturing cost accounting is about far more than calculating inventory values or closing the books each month.

It provides the financial foundation for pricing decisions.

It supports operational planning.

It influences profitability analysis.

It gives executives confidence that strategic decisions are based on accurate information.

After working with manufacturers for more than two decades, I’ve become convinced that the most successful ERP modernization projects share one characteristic.

They don’t focus exclusively on technology.

They focus on improving the business.

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) continues to highlight digital transformation, operational resilience, and data-driven decision-making as critical priorities for manufacturers seeking long-term competitiveness.

Business Central gives manufacturers an opportunity to modernize costing practices, strengthen financial visibility, simplify reporting, and create greater confidence across finance and operations.

That opportunity should never be wasted by simply recreating yesterday’s processes.

“ERP modernization isn’t about proving that your old system was wrong. It’s about preparing your business for what’s next. When manufacturers improve the quality of their costing information, they improve the quality of every decision that follows.” - Andrew Good

Ready to Strengthen Your Manufacturing Costing Strategy?

Before migrating from Dynamics GP to Business Central, manufacturers should understand how their current costing model supports the business today and whether it will support the business tomorrow.

Liberty Grove Software works with manufacturers to evaluate manufacturing costing, WIP accounting, inventory valuation, production reporting, and financial processes before implementation begins.

Our team helps organizations identify potential costing risks, validate manufacturing data, and develop ERP modernization strategies that improve financial visibility while reducing implementation risk.

Whether you’re evaluating standard costing, actual costing, manufacturing inventory valuation, or Business Central manufacturing costing capabilities, we’ll help you build a roadmap that aligns technology with your long-term business objectives.

Schedule a Manufacturing ERP Costing Assessment with Liberty Grove Software and see how a well-planned migration can strengthen financial confidence across your organization.

What’s Next in This Series?

Throughout this series, we’ve explored the most important questions manufacturers face when evaluating a move from Dynamics GP to Business Central.

We’ve discussed Microsoft’s product roadmap, manufacturing functionality, organizational readiness, ERP change management, customizations, ISV dependencies, technical debt, and now the financial implications of manufacturing costing.

Together, these topics reinforce one important message:

Successful ERP modernization is not about replacing software. It’s about improving the business.

In our final article, we’ll examine one of the most common questions manufacturers ask when considering their long-term ERP strategy:

Should we host Dynamics GP in the cloud, or is it time to move to Business Central?

We’ll explore:

• The advantages and limitations of Hosted GP
• Why cloud hosting is not the same as ERP modernization
• When Hosted GP makes strategic sense
• When Business Central becomes the better long-term investment
• How manufacturers should evaluate cloud ERP strategies based on growth, scalability, and operational objectives

We’ll also help manufacturing leaders distinguish between extending the life of an existing ERP system and preparing the organization for the future.

Read Next

Hosted GP vs. Business Central: What Manufacturers Need to Consider

The final article in this series will help executives evaluate whether hosting Dynamics GP is a practical interim solution or whether Business Central is the stronger long-term strategy for improving modernization, scalability, and competitive advantage.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does Business Central handle manufacturing costing?

Business Central provides integrated manufacturing costing capabilities that connect production, inventory, purchasing, and finance. It supports standard costing, actual costing, manufacturing variances, WIP accounting, and inventory valuation, giving manufacturers greater visibility into production costs and financial performance.

How does costing differ between Dynamics GP and Business Central?

Both platforms support manufacturing costing, but Business Central offers a more integrated approach that connects operational transactions with financial reporting. Many manufacturers also benefit from improved visibility into production variances, inventory movements, and manufacturing performance.

What happens to WIP and inventory valuation during migration?

WIP accounting and inventory valuation do not simply transfer automatically. Manufacturers should validate Bills of Material, production routings, inventory transactions, and costing methods before migration to ensure accurate financial reporting after go-live.

How are manufacturing variances handled in Business Central?

Business Central captures and reports manufacturing variances related to materials, labor, overhead, capacity, and production efficiency. These insights help finance and operations teams identify opportunities to improve profitability and operational performance.

What should CFOs evaluate before migrating from Dynamics GP?

CFOs should review costing methodologies, inventory valuation practices, WIP accounting, Bills of Material, production routings, overhead allocation, reporting requirements, manual adjustments, spreadsheet dependencies, and audit considerations before implementation begins.

How can manufacturers avoid costing surprises during implementation?

The most successful manufacturers begin by documenting current costing processes, validating manufacturing master data, aligning finance and operations, and correcting inconsistencies before ERP configuration starts. Preparation significantly reduces implementation risk.

Is Business Central better than Dynamics GP for manufacturing costing?

For many manufacturers, Business Central provides stronger integration between manufacturing operations and financial reporting. However, the greatest benefits are achieved when organizations use the migration as an opportunity to modernize costing practices rather than simply replicate legacy processes.

Can manufacturers continue using standard costing in Business Central?

Yes. Business Central supports standard costing as well as other costing methods. The appropriate approach depends on your manufacturing environment, financial reporting requirements, and management objectives.

Why is manufacturing cost accounting important during ERP modernization?

Manufacturing costing affects inventory valuation, profitability, pricing, production planning, financial reporting, and executive decision-making. Evaluating costing processes before migration helps ensure that ERP modernization strengthens both operational performance and financial confidence.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

When manufacturers begin evaluating a move from Dynamics GP to Business Central, the conversation usually starts with software.

• Can Business Central handle our manufacturing requirements?
• Will it support our production processes?
• What about production planning, inventory control, shop floor operations, scheduling, quality management, engineering change management, inventory costing, and operational reporting.

Those are important questions.

But after years of helping manufacturers modernize ERP systems, I've found that the biggest data migration risks rarely come from Business Central.

They come from years of undocumented decisions, forgotten integrations, custom reports, third-party applications, and business processes nobody realized the company still depended on.

Many executives assume they're replacing an ERP system.

In reality, they're often replacing an ecosystem.

And that distinction changes everything.

"One of the biggest surprises manufacturers encounter during ERP modernization is realizing they're not dependent on Dynamics GP. They're dependent on everything that's been built around it. Before you can plan where you're going, you need to understand what your business actually relies on today." — Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

I've worked with manufacturers who believed they had a straightforward Dynamics GP migration ahead of them. Once we began assessing the environment, we discovered dozens of customizations, multiple GP ISV solutions, legacy integrations, spreadsheets supporting critical processes, and business logic that had evolved over fifteen years.

The software wasn't the obstacle.

The complexity surrounding it was.

That’s why manufacturing customizations and ISV dependencies frequently become the biggest roadblocks in ERP migrations.

Not because they're inherently bad.

But because most organizations don't fully understand how deeply embedded they have become.

Table of Contents

The Dependency Trap Most Manufacturers Don't See Coming

Why Dynamics GP Customizations Become Migration Roadblocks

Executive Insight: Complexity Is Not the Same as Competitive Advantage

Why GP ISV Solutions Frequently Delay ERP Modernization

The Hidden Risk of Dynamics GP Integrations

ERP Technical Debt Is a Business Problem, Not an IT Problem

Should Manufacturers Recreate Every Customization in Business Central?

A Practical Framework for Evaluating Customizations and ISVs

The ERP Modernization Opportunity Most Manufacturers Miss

A Story I See Repeatedly

A Final Thought

Ready to Understand Your ERP Environment?

Frequently Asked Questions

The Dependency Trap Most Manufacturers Don't See Coming

ERP modernization should focus on preserving business value, not preserving complexity. Manufacturers that evaluate customizations, ISVs, integrations, and manual processes individually often discover opportunities to simplify their future ERP environment.

One of the most common discoveries during an ERP assessment is that manufacturers are not actually dependent on Dynamics GP.

They're dependent on everything surrounding Dynamics GP.

The ERP system becomes the hub.

Customizations become the spokes.

Third-party applications fill functionality gaps.

Integrations connect operational systems.

Manual processes compensate for historical limitations.

Over time, these solutions become part of how the business operates.

Nobody questions them.

Nobody documents them.

Nobody evaluates whether they are still necessary.

Then modernization begins.

Leadership starts discussing timelines, budgets, and implementation strategies.

Suddenly, a simple question emerges:

"What happens to everything we've built around GP?"

That is often when project complexity increases dramatically.

"One of the most valuable outcomes of an ERP assessment isn't identifying what needs to be migrated. It's identifying what doesn't. The goal of modernization isn't to preserve complexity. It's to determine which processes still create value and which ones are simply creating maintenance." — Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Why Dynamics GP Customizations Become Migration Roadblocks

Most Dynamics GP customizations were created for legitimate business reasons.

A production process required additional functionality.

A customer demanded a unique workflow.

A reporting gap needed to be addressed.

An operational challenge required a workaround.

Individually, these decisions made sense.

Collectively, they often create a modernization challenge.

The issue is not the customization itself.

The issue is understanding what depends on it.

I've seen manufacturers discover that a customization originally created to support a customer-specific production workflow was connected to inventory transactions, production orders, reporting systems, warehouse operations, and shipping processes.

On paper, it appeared to be a simple modification.

In reality, it impacted multiple departments and several business-critical processes.

That's the type of dependency that often surprises organizations during ERP modernization.

It has become part of the organization's operating model.

The challenge isn't rebuilding the customization.

The challenge is understanding what breaks if you don't.

That is what transforms a customization into a migration roadblock.

Executive Insight: Complexity Is Not the Same as Competitive Advantage

One of the most common assumptions I hear from leadership teams is:

"We've customized GP because our business is unique."

Sometimes that's true.

Sometimes it isn't.

I've seen manufacturers maintain custom functionality for years because it solved a problem that existed a decade ago.

The business evolved.

The technology evolved.

But the customization remained.

Over time, familiarity becomes mistaken for necessity.

One of the most valuable questions executives can ask during ERP modernization is:

If we were implementing an ERP system today, would we choose to build this customization again?

The answer often reveals opportunities to simplify rather than replicate.

Why GP ISV Solutions Frequently Delay ERP Modernization

For many manufacturers, the biggest surprise is not the number of customizations.

It's the number of third-party solutions supporting critical business processes.

Over the years, organizations have added GP ISV solutions to address specific operational needs.

• Warehouse management
• EDI and supplier collaboration
• Quality management
• Advanced production scheduling
• Engineering change management
• Shop floor data collection
• Production reporting
• Product configuration management

Each solution solves a problem.

The challenge is that every solution introduces another dependency.

I've seen manufacturers delay ERP projects by months while trying to answer a simple question:

"What happens to all of our ISVs?"

Some GP ISV solutions have Business Central versions.

Some have modern alternatives.

Some are no longer actively developed.

Some have become so deeply embedded in operations that replacing them feels riskier than staying on GP.

At that point, the discussion shifts from software to business continuity.

That's why early ISV assessments are crucial in any ERP modernization strategy, helping organizations identify potential delays and plan accordingly.

As manufacturers evaluate their long-term ERP strategy, it's important to understand Microsoft's ongoing support plans and product direction for Dynamics GP.

The Hidden Risk of Dynamics GP Integrations

Integrations are often where migration complexity becomes most apparent.

Most manufacturers have spent years connecting Dynamics GP to other operational systems.

Common examples include:

• Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES)
• Warehouse Management Systems (WMS)
• EDI platforms
• Shipping systems
• CRM applications
• Quality management software
• Product lifecycle management systems
• Business intelligence platforms
• CAD systems
• Engineering systems
• Product configuration tools
• Automated production equipment

Every integration serves a purpose.

The challenge is that many organizations lack full visibility into how their integrations function, risking operational disruptions during migration.

I've seen manufacturers discover undocumented integrations supporting critical processes.

I've also seen key integrations maintained by a single employee approaching retirement.

Those situations create risk that extends far beyond ERP migration.

They create operational dependency.

Before discussing future-state architecture, organizations need a clear understanding of their current environment, empowering IT managers to lead the migration with confidence and control.

ERP Technical Debt Is a Business Problem, Not an IT Problem

What Complexity Is Really Costing You

Most manufacturers understand that complexity creates challenges. What they often underestimate is the financial impact. Every customization, ISV dependency, integration, and manual workaround carries a cost that extends far beyond the IT department.

Consulting Costs

The more customized an ERP environment becomes, the more specialized expertise is required to maintain it. Organizations often find themselves dependent on consultants who understand legacy code, aging integrations, and custom business logic, increasing both support expenses and project costs.

Support Costs

Every customization and third-party solution introduces another component that must be monitored, maintained, tested, and supported. As environments become more complex, support requirements increase, consuming both internal resources and external support budgets.

Delayed Upgrades

Legacy customizations and ISV dependencies can make upgrades significantly more difficult. Manufacturers often postpone modernization initiatives because of concerns about what might break, creating a cycle in which aging technology becomes increasingly expensive and risky to maintain.

Lost Productivity

Complex ERP environments often rely on manual workarounds, spreadsheets, duplicate data entry, and undocumented processes. While these inefficiencies may seem minor individually, they can collectively consume hundreds of employee hours each year and reduce operational efficiency across the organization.

Cybersecurity Exposure

Unsupported customizations, outdated integrations, and aging third-party applications can create security vulnerabilities that are difficult to identify and remediate. As cyber threats continue to evolve, older ERP ecosystems often present a larger risk profile than many organizations realize.

Employee Dependency

Many manufacturers rely on a small number of long-tenured employees who understand how customizations, integrations, and manual processes work. When that knowledge resides with only a few individuals, employee turnover, retirement, or organizational change can create significant operational risk.

Industry Perspective

According to Gartner, technical debt represents the future cost organizations incur when short-term technology decisions create long-term complexity. For manufacturers, that complexity often appears in the form of legacy customizations, unsupported integrations, and aging third-party solutions that make ERP modernization more difficult.

The cumulative impact of these costs is often substantial. What appears to be a stable ERP environment may actually be limiting agility, increasing risk, and making future modernization efforts more expensive than necessary.

Technical debt is often treated as a technology issue.

Manufacturing executives should view it differently.

Technical debt impacts business agility.

It affects scalability.

It increases risk.

It slows decision-making.

For manufacturers pursuing growth through acquisitions, facility expansion, or new product lines, technical debt can become a significant barrier to scalability.

ERP technical debt accumulates over time through customizations, ISV dependencies, integrations, manual workarounds, and aging technology. While often viewed as an IT issue, technical debt ultimately impacts agility, scalability, profitability, compliance, and long-term business growth.

Over time, technical debt accumulates through:

• Legacy customizations
• Manual workarounds
• Spreadsheet-driven processes
• Unsupported integrations
• Aging ISV solutions
• Outdated reporting tools

Individually, each item seems manageable.

Collectively, they create a level of complexity that can significantly increase migration risk.

"Technical debt rarely appears all at once. It accumulates through years of reasonable decisions made to solve immediate business challenges. The problem isn't that those decisions were wrong. The problem is that eventually complexity begins limiting growth, agility, and the organization's ability to move forward." — Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

One CFO recently described it perfectly:

"The software still works. What worries me is how much of the business depends on things nobody fully understands anymore."

That's the real issue.

Should Manufacturers Recreate Every Customization in Business Central?

In most cases, no.

One of the biggest mistakes manufacturers make is assuming modernization means rebuilding everything exactly as it exists today.

That approach often preserves complexity rather than eliminating it.

Modernization should be an opportunity to challenge assumptions.

Questions worth asking include:

• Does this customization still support the business?
• Does Business Central already provide this functionality?
• Is there a simpler way to achieve the same outcome?
• Is this process still relevant to future business goals?

ERP modernization should focus on preserving business value, not preserving complexity. Manufacturers that evaluate customizations, ISVs, integrations, and manual processes individually often discover opportunities to simplify their future ERP environment.

I've seen manufacturers spend months planning how to recreate custom functionality only to discover Business Central already addressed the requirement through standard capabilities.

The goal should not be replication.

The goal should be optimization.

A Practical Framework for Evaluating Customizations and ISVs

I recommend that manufacturers classify every customization, ISV, and integration into one of three categories.

Strategic Differentiators

These directly support how the business competes.

Examples may include:

• Proprietary production processes
• Specialized manufacturing workflows
• Engineering-to-order requirements
• Product configuration capabilities
• Industry-specific compliance processes

Operational Enhancements

These improve efficiency but do not necessarily create a competitive advantage.

Examples include:

• Reporting improvements
• Workflow automation
• Productivity enhancements

Historical Artifacts

These exist because they have always existed.

They may no longer provide meaningful business value.

In many assessments, this category is larger than executives expect.

And it often represents the greatest opportunity for simplification.

In many cases, standard functionality available within Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central can replace custom solutions that were originally developed to address historical limitations.

Manufacturers are often surprised by how much functionality is now available through Business Central’s standard manufacturing capabilities.

The ERP Modernization Opportunity Most Manufacturers Miss

Many organizations approach ERP migration as a technology replacement project.

The most successful manufacturers approach it as a business simplification initiative.

Every customization.

Every ISV.

Every integration.

Every workaround.

Every manual process.

Should be evaluated through the lens of future business objectives.

The goal is not preserving complexity.

The goal is to reduce it.

Manufacturers that embrace this mindset often discover that modernization becomes less intimidating and significantly more valuable.

A Story I See Repeatedly

During a recent assessment, a manufacturer believed its production scheduling and warehouse management customization was mission-critical.

Once documented, the team discovered that most of the functionality was already available through modern Business Central capabilities.

What initially appeared to be a major migration obstacle became a simplification opportunity.

Leadership assumed every customization was mission-critical.

Every integration was essential.

Every ISV was irreplaceable.

Then we began documenting the environment.

What we discovered surprised everyone.

Several customizations solved problems that no longer existed.

Some integrations were no longer actively used.

A few ISV solutions had already been replaced by standard Business Central functionality.

Only a handful of dependencies were truly strategic.

The lesson wasn't that customizations are bad.

The lesson was that visibility matters.

Most manufacturers don't have a customization problem.

They have a visibility problem.

Until you understand why a customization exists, it's impossible to determine whether it deserves a place in your future ERP environment.

"The manufacturers that navigate ERP modernization most successfully aren't the ones with the fewest customizations or integrations. They're the ones with the clearest understanding of why those dependencies exist and whether they still support the future business." — Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

A Final Thought

After years of helping manufacturers modernize ERP systems, I've come to believe that customizations themselves are rarely the problem.

The real challenge is dependency.

Dependency creates risk.

Dependency increases cost.

Dependency slows modernization.

Dependency makes change feel more difficult than it often needs to be.

The manufacturers that achieve the best outcomes aren't the ones with the fewest customizations.

They're the ones that understand their environment well enough to make informed decisions about what belongs in the future and what should remain in the past.

Before asking how to migrate every customization, ask a different question:

Which of these dependencies still support our future business?

The answer may dramatically simplify your ERP modernization journey.

Ready to Understand Your ERP Environment?

Before committing to a Dynamics GP migration strategy, manufacturers need a clear understanding of the customizations, ISVs, integrations, and technical debt shaping their current environment.

Liberty Grove Software helps manufacturers identify hidden dependencies, evaluate modernization risks, and build practical ERP roadmaps that support long-term business goals.

If you're considering a move from Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, let's start with a conversation.

Our team can help you:

• Assess Dynamics GP customizations
• Evaluate GP ISV solutions
• Identify integration risks
• Reduce ERP technical debt
• Develop a practical ERP modernization strategy

Before investing in migration planning, make sure you understand what your business truly depends on.

Schedule a Manufacturing ERP Assessment with Liberty Grove Software to identify hidden dependencies, reduce modernization risk, and build a roadmap aligned with your long-term business objectives.

What's Next in This Series?

In this article, we've explored one of the most overlooked aspects of ERP modernization: the human side of change. We discussed why manufacturers often hesitate to move away from Dynamics GP, the fears that drive resistance to modernization, and how ERP change management, user adoption, leadership alignment, and risk mitigation play critical roles in long-term project success.

The key takeaway is simple: successful ERP modernization is not just about technology. It's about helping people navigate change with confidence.

But once manufacturers address concerns about disruption, adoption, and organizational readiness, another important question emerges:

Can Business Central actually handle the complexity of a manufacturing environment?

In the next article in this series, we'll explore:

• Whether Business Central can support complex manufacturing operations
• Common misconceptions about manufacturing functionality in Business Central
• How manufacturers should evaluate ERP capabilities beyond feature lists
• What production, inventory, planning, and operational leaders should consider during ERP selection
• Why many manufacturers underestimate the evolution of Microsoft's ERP platform

We'll also examine the difference between recreating existing processes and modernizing them, helping manufacturing executives evaluate whether Business Central is prepared to support future growth, scalability, and operational complexity.

Read Next: Can Business Central Really Handle Manufacturing Complexity?

This next article shifts the conversation from organizational readiness to platform readiness, helping manufacturing leaders evaluate whether Business Central can support the realities of modern manufacturing operations.

What's Next: The Real Fear Behind Leaving Dynamics GP in Manufacturing

In this article, we've explored one of the most overlooked challenges in ERP modernization: the hidden complexity surrounding Dynamics GP. We discussed how customizations, GP ISV solutions, integrations, and ERP technical debt can become significant migration roadblocks when manufacturers don't fully understand the dependencies supporting their operations. We also examined why modernization should focus on optimization rather than simply recreating the past.

But technical complexity is only part of the story.

Even when manufacturers understand their customizations, integrations, and migration requirements, many organizations still hesitate to move forward.

Why?

Because the biggest challenge is often not technical.

It's human.

In the next article, "The Real Fear Behind Leaving Dynamics GP in Manufacturing," we'll explore the organizational and leadership concerns that frequently delay ERP modernization initiatives, including:

• What manufacturers are actually afraid of when leaving Dynamics GP
• Why operations teams often resist ERP projects
• How leaders can reduce ERP migration risk
• The role of ERP change management in successful implementations
• How manufacturers can improve ERP user adoption and business readiness

We'll also discuss why many modernization projects struggle not because of technology limitations, but because organizations underestimate the importance of communication, training, stakeholder engagement, and change management.

Read Next: The Real Fear Behind Leaving Dynamics GP in Manufacturing: Why ERP Success Depends on More Than Technology

This next article shifts the conversation from technical readiness to organizational readiness, helping manufacturing leaders understand how to navigate the people side of ERP modernization with confidence.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why do Dynamics GP customizations become ERP migration roadblocks?

Dynamics GP customizations become migration roadblocks when organizations no longer understand how many business processes depend on them. The challenge is often determining what operational impact occurs if the customization is modified, replaced, or removed.

What Should Manufacturers Assess Before Migrating from Dynamics GP?

Manufacturers should assess their Dynamics GP customizations, GP ISV solutions, integrations, business processes, data quality, and ERP technical debt before migration. Understanding these dependencies helps reduce risk, control costs, and build a more effective ERP modernization strategy.

What happens to GP ISV solutions when moving to Business Central?

Some GP ISV solutions have Business Central equivalents, while others may be replaced by native functionality or alternative applications. Each ISV should be evaluated individually as part of the migration planning process.

Why are ISV dependencies a risk during ERP modernization?

ISV dependencies can increase migration complexity because they often support critical operational processes. Organizations need to understand whether those solutions can be migrated, replaced, or retired before modernization begins.

How do Dynamics GP integrations affect migration projects?

Integrations frequently connect ERP systems to manufacturing, warehouse, quality, and customer-facing applications. Undocumented or poorly understood integrations can significantly increase migration risk and project timelines.

What is ERP technical debt?

ERP technical debt is the accumulated complexity created by customizations, integrations, manual workarounds, spreadsheets, and legacy technologies that increase maintenance costs and modernization risk.

Should manufacturers recreate every customization in Business Central?

No. ERP modernization should include evaluating whether existing customizations still support business objectives and whether standard Business Central functionality can provide a simpler alternative.

What is the first step in an ERP modernization strategy?

The first step is understanding your current environment, including customizations, ISV dependencies, integrations, manual processes, and technical debt. Without that visibility, modernization planning becomes much more difficult.

Can Business Central Replace Most Dynamics GP ISV Solutions?

In many cases, yes. Business Central now includes functionality that often reduces or eliminates the need for some GP ISV solutions. However, each ISV should be evaluated individually to determine whether standard Business Central capabilities, a Business Central-compatible solution, or a different approach can replace it.

How Do I Know Which Dynamics GP Customizations Are Still Needed?

Start by identifying the business process each customization supports and the impact of removing it. Ask whether the customization still delivers value, creates a competitive advantage, or addresses a requirement that Business Central cannot handle natively. Many manufacturers discover that some customizations are no longer necessary and can be retired during modernization.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

For years, Dynamics GP has been a reliable platform for manufacturers.

It processes orders.

Supports production.

Manages inventory.

Runs financials.

Generates reports.

The business knows how it works.

The team knows where to find information.

Processes have been built around it.

People trust it.

Which is why so many manufacturers hesitate when the conversation turns to modernization.

At first glance, it appears to be a technology decision.

Should we move to Business Central?

Can the new Business Central platform support our manufacturing environment?

Will the functionality meet our requirements?

Those questions matter.

But after helping manufacturers evaluate and execute ERP modernization initiatives, I've learned that the biggest challenge is rarely the software itself.

The real challenge is uncertainty.

Manufacturers are not usually afraid of Business Central.

They are afraid of what might happen to the business during the transition.

Will operations be disrupted?

Will employees embrace the change?

Will production slow down?

Will critical data be lost?

Will customers feel the impact?

Will the project succeed?

Those concerns are understandable.

They are also exactly why successful ERP modernization requires more than technology planning.

It requires leadership, communication, and change management.

Microsoft's Dynamics 365 Business Central platform continues to evolve as the company's primary cloud ERP solution for small and midsized organizations.

As Andrew Good often says:

"Manufacturers rarely resist new technology. They resist unnecessary risk. The organizations that modernize successfully are the ones that reduce uncertainty before asking people to change."

That distinction is important.

Because the real fear behind leaving Dynamics GP is not the software.

It is the fear of disrupting the business.

Table of Contents

Why Manufacturers Hesitate to Leave Dynamics GP

What Are Manufacturers Actually Afraid of When Moving Off GP?

How Much Operational Disruption Should Manufacturers Expect?

Why ERP Projects Face Resistance From Operations Teams

The Hidden Cost of Waiting Too Long

How Manufacturers Can Reduce ERP Migration Risk

What Role Does Change Management Play in ERP Success?

A Story I See Repeatedly

Manufacturing Digital Transformation Is Ultimately About Confidence

A Final Thought

Ready to Reduce ERP Migration Risk?

Why Manufacturers Hesitate to Leave Dynamics GP

Executives often tell me the same thing.

"We know we need to modernize."

I've sat in dozens of executive planning sessions where leadership teams agree that modernization is necessary. The challenge isn't recognizing the need for change. The challenge is deciding when and how to make it happen without disrupting the business.

Yet months or even years pass before a decision is made.

Why?

Because Dynamics GP still works.

The business has adapted to it.

Processes have been built around it.

Employees understand it.

Leadership knows its limitations.

There is comfort in familiarity.

Even when executives recognize that modernization is necessary, familiarity often feels safer than change.

The challenge is that familiarity can create a false sense of security.

Many manufacturers assume that staying on a familiar platform reduces risk.

Manufacturers might also consider Microsoft's published Dynamics GP lifecycle roadmap when evaluating long-term modernization plans.

In reality, delaying modernization can introduce new risks:

• Increasing technical debt
• Rising support costs
• Aging integrations
• Cybersecurity concerns
• Limited scalability
• Reduced visibility
• Difficulty attracting modern ERP talent

The decision is not whether change will happen.

The decision is whether the organization will manage change proactively or react to it later.

As manufacturers evaluate aging technology environments, cybersecurity risk has become an increasingly important consideration for executive leadership teams.

What Are Manufacturers Actually Afraid of When Moving Off GP?

In my experience, manufacturers are not afraid of software.

They are afraid of consequences.

Specifically:

Production Disruption

Manufacturing leaders worry that implementation challenges will impact production schedules, customer commitments, and operational performance.

For manufacturers, concerns often center around production schedules, inventory accuracy, shipping commitments, quality processes, and customer service levels.

Employee Resistance

Managers know that change creates uncertainty.

If users struggle to adopt new processes, productivity may suffer.

Loss of Institutional Knowledge

Long-tenured employees often understand critical processes, reports, and workarounds.

Organizations fear losing that knowledge during modernization.

Project Failure

ERP implementations require investment.

Executives want confidence that the project will deliver business value.

Customer Impact

Manufacturers work hard to build trust with customers.

No leadership team wants ERP disruption to affect service levels or delivery performance.

Andrew often frames it this way:

"Most manufacturers are not worried about learning new software. They're worried about protecting the business while change is happening."

That is the real concern.

How Much Operational Disruption Should Manufacturers Expect?

This is one of the most common questions executives ask.

The answer surprises many leaders.

One of the biggest misconceptions I encounter is that ERP modernization automatically means months of operational disruption.

The manufacturers that experience the smoothest transitions are usually the organizations that spend the most time preparing before implementation begins.

Well-managed ERP modernization projects typically involve far less disruption than organizations expect.

The key phrase is well-managed.

Successful projects do not rely on luck.

They rely on planning.

Strong implementations include:

• Process documentation
• Data preparation
• User training
• Pilot testing
• Executive sponsorship
• Change management
• Clear communication

Organizations that invest in these activities generally experience smoother transitions than those focused exclusively on technical deployment.

The goal should not be avoiding disruption entirely.

The goal should be to manage disruption so the business continues to operate effectively throughout the transition.

Why ERP Projects Face Resistance From Operations Teams

Operations teams are measured on performance.

Production output.

Inventory accuracy.

Customer delivery.

Quality metrics.

Downtime.

Efficiency.

When ERP modernization is introduced, operations leaders often view it through a different lens than executives.

Executives see opportunity.

Operations teams see risk.

Both perspectives are valid.

One experience stands out from a manufacturing ERP assessment I led several years ago.

The executive team was eager to modernize and viewed the project as a necessary step toward growth and improved visibility.

However, the operations team was hesitant from the beginning. Leadership initially interpreted that hesitation as resistance to change.

What we eventually discovered was something very different.

The operations managers weren't resisting modernization; they were protecting production schedules, customer commitments, inventory accuracy, and delivery performance.

They understood exactly where disruptions could occur because they lived with those processes every day.

Once those leaders were brought into planning discussions, their concerns became valuable input rather than obstacles. In fact, several of the safeguards that ultimately contributed to a successful implementation came directly from the operations team.

I've seen this pattern repeated many times. The people who appear most resistant to ERP change are often the people who understand the business best.

One manufacturing executive shared a lesson that has stayed with me.

When leadership announced an ERP modernization initiative, operations managers immediately started listing potential problems.

Executives initially interpreted the reaction as resistance.

In reality, it was expertise.

The operations team understood exactly where disruptions could occur.

Once leadership involved operations teams early in planning, the conversation shifted from resistance to collaboration, significantly reducing risk and increasing the likelihood of project success.

The managers who initially seemed resistant became some of the strongest advocates for the project.

The lesson is simple.

People support what they help create.

ERP change management is not about convincing people to accept change.

It is about involving them early enough that they become part of the solution.

The Hidden Cost of Waiting Too Long

Many manufacturers believe delaying ERP modernization reduces risk.

Sometimes the opposite is true.

I have seen organizations postpone decisions for years because they were worried about implementation challenges.

During that time:

• Technical debt increased
• Integrations became harder to support
• Customizations became more complex
• Reporting challenges multiplied
• Talent gaps widened

Eventually, the business faced even greater modernization risk than it would have encountered years earlier.

Legacy ERP environments often create costs that are not immediately visible to leadership.

Support expenses increase, decision-making slows, and scalability becomes more difficult as technical debt accumulates.

Growth initiatives such as acquisitions, new facilities, product expansion, or operational automation can become harder to execute because systems and processes were never designed to support the next stage of the business.

What initially feels like a strategy for avoiding risk can ultimately become a barrier to profitability, agility, and long-term growth.

Andrew often tells clients:

"The cost of change is visible. The cost of delay is often hidden until it becomes impossible to ignore."

That is an important leadership consideration.

One manufacturer delayed modernization for three years because leadership was concerned about disruption. During that period, the company completed two acquisitions and struggled to integrate reporting, inventory visibility, and financial processes across locations. By the time modernization began, the project scope and cost had grown significantly beyond what would have been required earlier.

How Manufacturers Can Reduce ERP Migration Risk

Reducing ERP migration risk starts with preparation.

The strongest projects focus on business readiness as much as technical readiness.

Key areas include:

Executive Alignment

Leadership teams must agree on objectives, priorities, and expected outcomes.

Process Assessment

Document how work is performed today and identify opportunities for improvement.

Data Readiness

Clean, accurate data reduces implementation complexity.

User Engagement

Involve users early and often.

Training Programs

Invest in practical, role-based education.

Change Management

Build a structured plan to support adoption and communication.

Partner Selection

Work with implementation partners who understand manufacturing operations, not just software.

ERP migration risk is rarely reduced by technology alone.

It is reduced through preparation.

What Role Does Change Management Play in ERP Success?

Change management is one of the most overlooked drivers of ERP success.

Research consistently shows that projects with strong change management practices are significantly more likely to achieve their objectives.

Many organizations treat ERP implementation as a technology project.

The most successful manufacturers treat it as a business transformation initiative.

Technology enables change.

People determine whether change succeeds.

Strong change management helps organizations:

• Build trust
• Reduce uncertainty
• Increase user adoption
• Improve communication
• Strengthen training outcomes
• Support leadership alignment

Without change management, even technically successful implementations can struggle.

With it, organizations are far more likely to realize the business benefits they expected.

Andrew summarizes it perfectly:

"ERP success isn't determined by go-live. It's determined by what happens after go-live. Adoption is where the real return on investment is created."

A Story I See Repeatedly

One manufacturer spent nearly two years debating whether to move forward with ERP modernization.

The leadership team worried about disruption.

Operations leadership worried about productivity.

Finance worried about risk.

Everyone agreed that change was necessary.

No one wanted to be responsible for making the decision.

Eventually, leadership conducted a formal ERP assessment.

What they discovered was surprising.

The greatest risk was not migration.

The greatest risk was standing still.

Aging technology, unsupported processes, growing technical debt, and increasing operational complexity posed a larger threat to the business than modernization itself.

Once leadership understood the actual risks, the conversation changed.

The project moved forward.

The focus shifted from fear to preparation.

That shift made all the difference.

Manufacturing Digital Transformation Is Ultimately About Confidence

Successful manufacturers do not modernize because technology changes.

One thing I've learned over the years is that the strongest modernization initiatives are rarely driven by technology alone.

They are driven by business leaders who recognize that future growth, visibility, scalability, and competitiveness require a different foundation than what worked ten years ago.

Manufacturers modernize because business requirements change.

Growth.

Visibility.

Scalability.

Customer expectations.

Workforce challenges.

Competitive pressure.

Digital transformation is not about replacing software.

It is about creating confidence in the future.

Confidence that systems can scale.

Confidence that teams can adapt.

Confidence that operations can support growth.

Confidence that leadership can make better decisions.

The manufacturers that succeed are not the ones that eliminate uncertainty.

They are the ones who manage it effectively.

Digital transformation initiatives are increasingly focused on creating organizational agility, operational visibility, and long-term scalability.

A Final Thought

The biggest challenge in Dynamics GP migrations is rarely technology.

It is fear.

Fear of disruption.

Fear of failure.

Fear of operational impact.

Fear of making the wrong decision.

Those concerns are understandable.

But they should not prevent manufacturers from evaluating what is best for the future business.

Modernization succeeds when organizations replace uncertainty with preparation, communication, and leadership.

As Andrew Good often reminds manufacturing executives:

"The goal is not to avoid change. The goal is to create enough clarity that change becomes manageable."

That is where successful ERP modernization begins.

Ready to Reduce ERP Migration Risk?

If your organization is evaluating a move from Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, Liberty Grove Software can help.

We work with manufacturers to assess readiness, identify migration risks, support ERP change management, and develop modernization strategies aligned with long-term business objectives.

Before investing in migration planning, make sure you understand what your business truly depends on.

Schedule a Manufacturing ERP Assessment with Liberty Grove Software to better understand your current environment, future requirements, and the path forward.

What's Next in This Series?

In this article, we've explored one of the most overlooked challenges in ERP modernization: the human side of change.

We discussed why manufacturers often hesitate to leave Dynamics GP, the fears that drive resistance to modernization, and how leadership, communication, user adoption, and ERP change management play critical roles in reducing risk and improving project outcomes.

The key takeaway is simple:

Most ERP modernization challenges are not technology challenges. They are business challenges.

Successful manufacturers replace uncertainty with preparation, involve stakeholders early, and recognize that organizational readiness is just as important as technical readiness.

But once leadership teams understand the risks, align stakeholders, and build confidence in the future, another important question emerges:

What does a successful Dynamics GP to Business Central migration actually look like?

In the next article in this series, we'll explore:

• How manufacturers should prepare for a Dynamics GP migration
• Common mistakes that create unnecessary project risk
• What should happen before implementation begins
• How to evaluate data, processes, integrations, and reporting requirements
• Best practices for reducing disruption during ERP modernization
• What successful manufacturers do differently during migration planning

We'll also discuss how organizations can move beyond simply replacing software and use ERP modernization as an opportunity to improve processes, increase visibility, and create a stronger foundation for future growth.

Read Next:

From Planning to Execution: How Manufacturers Can Successfully Migrate from Dynamics GP to Business Central

This next article will focus on the practical side of ERP modernization, helping manufacturing leaders understand how to reduce risk, avoid common pitfalls, and build a migration strategy that supports long-term business success.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are manufacturers actually afraid of when moving off GP?

Most manufacturers are concerned about operational disruption, employee adoption, project risk, customer impact, and business continuity during ERP modernization.

How much operational disruption should manufacturers expect?

With proper planning, training, testing, and change management, operational disruption is often far less significant than organizations initially expect.

Why do ERP projects face resistance from operations teams?

Operations teams are responsible for daily performance. Resistance often reflects concern about business impact rather than opposition to modernization itself.

How can manufacturers reduce ERP migration risk?

Manufacturers can reduce risk through executive alignment, process assessment, data readiness, user engagement, training, structured change management, and experienced implementation partners.

What role does change management play in ERP success?

Change management helps improve communication, increase user adoption, reduce uncertainty, and support long-term business outcomes after go-live.

What are the risks of moving from Dynamics GP to Business Central?

Potential risks include operational disruption, user adoption challenges, data migration issues, and project delays. However, these risks can be significantly reduced through proper planning, stakeholder engagement, and change management.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

In my experience, this question is rarely about functionality.

It is usually about confidence.

Manufacturing leaders want to know whether Business Central can support the realities of their operation: production schedules that cannot slip, inventory that must be accurate, customer commitments that must be met, and teams that depend on reliable information every day.

The concern isn't whether Business Central has manufacturing features. The concern is whether those features can support the business when complexity increases.

In the first article, "Why Manufacturers Using Dynamics GP Are Hesitant to Move to Business Central," we explored why manufacturers tend to approach ERP modernization differently from other Dynamics GP customers.

The conversation was never really about Microsoft Dynamics GP.

It was about risk.

Manufacturing executives rely on ERP systems to orchestrate production, inventory, scheduling, procurement, cost control, quality assurance, and fulfillment of customer commitments. Given this centrality to daily operations, any platform change is a strategic move.

That is why one question comes up in almost every manufacturing ERP assessment:

Can Business Central really handle manufacturing complexity?

Most manufacturers are not simply asking about Business Central's manufacturing functionality.

They have a more important concern.

Can it support how we operate today and where we need to go tomorrow?

Can it enable our targeted growth and evolving strategies?

One operations leader recently told us:

“We’re not worried about replacing GP. We’re worried about replacing everything we’ve built around GP.”

That concern is understandable.

Many manufacturers have spent years building processes, customizations, reports, integrations, and workarounds around Dynamics GP. The ERP system is only part of what is being evaluated.

The good news is that many perceptions about Business Central's manufacturing capabilities are based on outdated information.

Microsoft has invested heavily in Business Central manufacturing functionality, and the platform has evolved significantly over the last several years.

Before making a decision, executives should understand Business Central’s capabilities within a broader, long-term manufacturing technology strategy.

What We See Most Often

Most manufacturers do not begin ERP evaluations by asking whether Business Central can create a production order.

They begin by asking whether it can support the operational complexity they have accumulated over years of growth.

We frequently hear concerns about:

• multi-site production
• custom scheduling processes
• production costing
• quality management
• warehouse operations
• engineer-to-order requirements

In many cases, the concern is not that Business Central lacks functionality. It is uncertainty about how current processes will translate into a modern ERP environment.

One manufacturer we worked with was particularly concerned about production costing. Over the years, the company had built custom reports, spreadsheets, and review processes around Dynamics GP to analyze product profitability and monitor cost variances across multiple product lines.

Their leadership team initially assumed those processes would be difficult to replicate in Business Central. However, after evaluating the requirements more closely, they discovered that much of the complexity was not tied to the ERP platform itself. It was tied to reporting practices and manual processes that had evolved over time.

That realization shifted the conversation from "Can Business Central handle our costing requirements?" to "Which parts of our costing process actually create value today?"

Table of Contents

What We See Most Often

Four Questions Every Manufacturer Should Ask Before Evaluating Business Central

Can Business Central Support Make-to-Stock, Make-to-Order, and Engineer-to-Order Manufacturing?

How Does Business Central Handle Production Orders and Routings?

Can Business Central Provide Shop Floor Visibility?

What Manufacturing Functionality Is Native Versus Requiring ISVs?

Is Business Central Robust Enough for Complex Manufacturing Operations?

Why Manufacturers Should Stop Comparing Business Central to GP Feature-by-Feature

What Manufacturers Should Do Next

The Bottom Line

Frequently Asked Questions

Four Questions Every Manufacturer Should Ask Before Evaluating Business Central

The Wrong Question

Many manufacturers ask:

"Can Business Central do what GP does?"

A better question is:

"Can Business Central support where the business needs to go next?"

The most successful ERP modernization projects focus less on replicating existing processes and more on creating a platform that supports future growth.

When evaluating Business Central, executive discussions should start with strategic business objectives rather than features.

It should begin with a strategy.

Leadership teams should examine four essential questions before focusing on software capabilities.

1. Are We Solving for Today’s Processes or Tomorrow’s Growth?

Many ERP evaluations focus on recreating current workflows.

The more powerful consideration is whether those workflows will support the business’s strategic direction over the next five years.

2. Which Manufacturing Capabilities Truly Differentiate Our Business?

Not every customization creates value.

Some drive competitive advantage.

Others simply preserve historical habits.

Many manufacturers assume every customization is mission-critical. During assessments, we often discover that only a small percentage of custom processes actually create competitive advantage.

The goal is to separate what truly differentiates the business from what has simply become familiar over time.

3. Which Customizations Have Become Technical Debt?

Many manufacturers discover that years of modifications have created complexity that slows innovation rather than enabling it.

Over the years, many ERP environments accumulate reports, integrations, spreadsheets, and custom workflows that were created to solve legitimate business problems.

The challenge is determining which of those solutions still provide value and which now create unnecessary complexity. What once improved efficiency can eventually make modernization more difficult and expensive.

4. What Is the Cost of Waiting?

The risk is rarely that Dynamics GP suddenly stops working.

The greater executive risk lies in postponing modernization until operational bottlenecks translate into business constraints.

These questions guide executive decision-making more effectively than a functionality checklist.

Most organizations evaluate the cost of modernization. Far fewer evaluate the cost of waiting. Delaying decisions can mean continuing to invest in aging customizations, manual workarounds, and increasingly complex support requirements.

The earlier organizations begin planning, the more options they typically have available.

Can Business Central Support Make-to-Stock, Make-to-Order, and Engineer-to-Order Manufacturing?

One of the most common misconceptions we encounter is that Business Central only supports simple manufacturing environments.

The reality is far different.

Business Central supports multiple manufacturing models, including make-to-stock, make-to-order, and many engineer-to-order environments.

Make-to-Stock Manufacturing

Manufacturers operating a make-to-stock model rely on forecasting, inventory optimization, and production planning to meet customer demand.

Business Central supports:

• Demand forecasting
• Inventory replenishment planning
• Production scheduling
• Material requirements planning
• Capacity management
• Supply chain visibility

These capabilities help manufacturers balance inventory investment with customer service requirements.

Make-to-Order Manufacturing

A make-to-order environment requires close alignment between customer demand and production activity.

Business Central supports:

• Sales-order-driven production
• Demand linking
• Material allocation
• Production scheduling
• Order tracking

This enables manufacturers to maintain visibility into customer-specific production while managing inventory and capacity constraints.

Engineer-to-Order Manufacturing

Engineer-to-order environments often represent the highest level of manufacturing complexity.

Business Central can support many engineer-to-order requirements, particularly when paired with complementary engineering, configuration, or product lifecycle management solutions.

The key takeaway is straightforward.

Business Central supports multiple manufacturing models.

The more strategic question is whether it aligns with your operating model and vision.

During one assessment, a manufacturer assumed Business Central would struggle with its engineer-to-order environment because of the number of custom processes involved.

After mapping the workflows, we discovered that most of the complexity was not in the ERP system itself. It existed in approvals, spreadsheets, reporting processes, and engineering handoffs that had evolved around the ERP over time.

Once the team separated true ERP requirements from historical workarounds, the Business Central evaluation became much more straightforward.

How Does Business Central Handle Production Orders and Routings?

Production management sits at the core of every manufacturing ERP platform.

Without strong production controls, manufacturers struggle to maintain efficiency, visibility, and profitability.

Business Central provides native support for:

• Planned production orders
• Firm planned production orders
• Released production orders
• Finished production orders
• Work centers
• Machine centers
• Routing management
• Capacity planning

Manufacturers can build routings that reflect real-world production processes while tracking labor, machine time, and operational progress.

For many organizations moving from Dynamics GP, these capabilities exceed expectations.

One plant manager recently summarized the issue this way:

“I don’t need another report. I need to know what’s happening on the floor before the shift ends.”

That expectation is becoming increasingly common across manufacturing organizations.

Can Business Central Provide Shop Floor Visibility?

Manufacturing leaders want more than historical reporting.

They want operational visibility while decisions can still influence outcomes.

Business Central provides access to:

• Production status
• Inventory availability
• Material consumption
• Capacity utilization
• Work center performance
• Order progress

However, Business Central is not a manufacturing execution system.

One misconception is that ERP systems should perform every manufacturing function.

Modern manufacturing technology strategies increasingly rely on connected platforms. ERP, MES, quality systems, warehouse systems, and analytics tools each play distinct roles.

The goal is not to force Business Central to become everything. The goal is to ensure it serves as the operational and financial foundation connecting those systems.

Organizations requiring advanced machine monitoring, automated data collection, barcode-driven reporting, or detailed production execution often supplement Business Central with MES solutions.

This is not a weakness.

It reflects a modern technology strategy.

Business Central serves as the operational and financial foundation, while specialized solutions extend functionality where necessary.

What Manufacturing Functionality Is Native Versus Requiring ISVs?

One of the most important ERP evaluation questions is understanding what is included natively and what may require third-party solutions.

Native Business Central Manufacturing Features

Business Central includes:

• Bills of materials
• Routings
• Production orders
• Inventory management
• Warehouse management
• Planning worksheets
• Capacity planning
• Demand forecasting
• Supply planning
• Standard costing

For many manufacturers, these capabilities satisfy most operational requirements.

Where ISVs Extend Functionality

Independent software vendors commonly enhance Business Central in areas such as:

• Advanced planning and scheduling
• Quality management
• Product configuration
• Manufacturing execution
• Compliance management
• Warehouse automation

This flexibility allows manufacturers to create a solution ecosystem aligned to their specific needs.

Manufacturers can also leverage Microsoft's AppSource ecosystem to extend Business Central with industry-specific manufacturing capabilities when required.

Is Business Central Robust Enough for Complex Manufacturing Operations?

The answer depends on how complexity is defined.

Complex manufacturing environments may include:

• Multiple facilities
• International operations
• Engineer-to-order workflows
• Highly regulated industries
• Large product catalogs
• Complex supply chains
• Automation initiatives

Business Central successfully supports manufacturers operating in each of these environments today.

Success is determined by strategy and leadership, not just software capabilities.

Implementation strategy matters.

Business process design matters.

Organizational readiness matters.

Manufacturers that view ERP modernization as a business transformation initiative often achieve stronger outcomes than those treating it as a software replacement project.

Why Manufacturers Should Stop Comparing Business Central to GP Feature-by-Feature

This is one of the most important lessons manufacturers learn during ERP evaluations.

Many organizations begin by comparing every screen, report, customization, and workflow between GP and Business Central.

At first, this feels logical.

In practice, it often creates unnecessary limitations.

Feature comparisons feel objective because they can be measured.

Unfortunately, they often focus attention on the past rather than the future.

The manufacturers that achieve the best outcomes rarely ask whether every screen looks the same. They ask whether the new platform enables better decisions, greater visibility, and stronger scalability.

One CFO recently told us:

“We’re spending too much time asking whether Business Central has the same features as GP and not enough time asking whether our current processes still make sense.”

That observation captures the challenge perfectly.

ERP modernization should not focus on rebuilding the past.

It should focus on building the future.

The manufacturers that gain the most value from Business Central are often the ones willing to challenge assumptions, simplify workflows, reduce customization debt, and embrace better ways of operating.

Business Central provides an opportunity to:

• Simplify workflows
• Reduce customization debt
• Improve visibility
• Increase automation
• Enhance reporting
• Improve decision-making

Modern capabilities such as AI-assisted workflows, automation, and cloud-based analytics are increasingly becoming part of manufacturing technology roadmaps.

The goal is not to recreate Dynamics GP in a new environment.

The goal is to create a more agile foundation for long-term growth.

What Manufacturers Should Do Next

If you're evaluating Business Central, begin by documenting your manufacturing processes rather than your software requirements.

Identify which capabilities create competitive advantage, which customizations create complexity, and which operational challenges are limiting growth today.

The objective is not to determine whether Business Central can replicate the past.

The objective is to determine whether it can support the future.

The Bottom Line

Can Business Central handle manufacturing complexity?

For many manufacturers, yes.

Business Central supports make-to-stock, make-to-order, and many engineer-to-order environments. It provides production planning, inventory management, routing control, capacity management, and operational visibility while integrating effectively with specialized manufacturing technologies.

The better question is not whether Business Central can support manufacturing.

The better question is whether your organization is prepared to take advantage of what ERP modernization makes possible.

Manufacturers that approach Business Central strategically often discover the platform supports both current requirements and future growth.

Ready to Evaluate Business Central for Your Manufacturing Operation?

Every manufacturer is different.

The right ERP strategy depends on your operational complexity, growth objectives, production model, and long-term vision.

At Liberty Grove Software, we help manufacturers assess manufacturing ERP modernization capabilities against real-world business requirements so they can make informed decisions with confidence.

Schedule a Manufacturing ERP Assessment with Liberty Grove Software today and discover whether Business Central is the right platform to support your next stage of growth.

Coming Next in This Series: The Real Fear Behind Leaving Dynamics GP in Manufacturing

Technology is rarely the biggest obstacle to ERP modernization.

People are.

In the next article, we’ll explore what manufacturers are afraid of when considering a Dynamics GP migration. We’ll examine concerns about operational disruption, employee resistance, implementation risk, user adoption, and change management.

More importantly, we’ll discuss why some manufacturing ERP implementation projects succeed while others struggle, and what leaders can do to reduce risk before migration begins.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can Business Central handle manufacturing?

Yes. Business Central includes native manufacturing functionality for production orders, routings, bills of materials, inventory management, capacity planning, and forecasting.

Is Business Central good for manufacturing?

Business Central is a strong manufacturing ERP platform for many small- and mid-sized manufacturers, particularly when combined with industry-specific extensions as needed.

Can Business Central support make-to-order manufacturing?

Yes. Business Central supports make-to-order manufacturing through sales-order-driven production, demand linking, scheduling, and material planning.

Can Business Central integrate with MES systems?

Yes. Business Central integrates with many manufacturing execution systems to provide enhanced shop floor visibility and operational control.

What manufacturing functionality is native in Business Central?

Native capabilities include bills of materials, routings, production orders, planning worksheets, inventory management, warehouse management, forecasting, and capacity planning.

Is Business Central better than Dynamics GP?

Business Central offers modern cloud architecture, continuous innovation, enhanced Microsoft integration, and greater scalability. The right choice depends on your organization’s requirements and long-term strategy.

How difficult is a Dynamics GP migration?

Migration complexity varies based on customizations, integrations, data quality, manufacturing processes, and organizational readiness. Proper planning significantly reduces risk.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

Dynamics GP Has Been the Backbone of Manufacturing Operations for Years

For many manufacturers, Dynamics GP is far more than an accounting system. It supports critical business functions, including inventory management, procurement, production planning, cost accounting, warehouse operations, and financial management.

Over the years, and often decades, manufacturers have customized Dynamics GP to reflect the realities of their operations. Processes have been refined, integrations have been built, and teams have developed workflows that rely heavily on the system.

This deep operational integration explains why manufacturers often approach a Dynamics GP to Business Central migration differently than other organizations.

While distributors, professional services firms, and other Dynamics GP customers may see a relatively straightforward path to modernization, manufacturers face a more complex reality. Their ERP environments are often tightly connected to production processes, supply chains, inventory management, and operational performance.

As Microsoft continues investing in cloud-based ERP innovation through Dynamics 365 Business Central, manufacturing leaders are increasingly evaluating what that shift means for their organizations.

The challenge is not determining whether Dynamics GP still works today.

For most manufacturers, it does.

The real question is whether it will continue to support the business objectives, technology initiatives, and competitive requirements that will define success over the next decade.

Table of Contents

Why Are Manufacturers More Hesitant Than Other GP Customers to Move to Business Central?

What Does Microsoft's Dynamics GP Roadmap Mean for Manufacturing Companies?

Can Manufacturers Stay on GP Safely, and for How Long?

What Are the Biggest Risks of Delaying ERP Modernization?

How Should Manufacturers Evaluate Hosted GP Versus Business Central?

Should Manufacturers Move from Dynamics GP to Business Central?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why Are Manufacturers More Hesitant Than Other GP Customers to Move to Business Central?

Having spent time in manufacturing environments myself, I've learned that ERP decisions are rarely technology decisions. They're production decisions. Every change gets evaluated through the lens of operational continuity.

Unlike businesses that primarily rely on ERP systems for financial management, manufacturers depend on ERP platforms to support:

• Production planning and scheduling
• Bills of materials (BOMs)
• Routings and work centers
• Inventory and warehouse management
• Cost accounting
• Quality management processes
• Procurement and supply chain coordination
• Shop floor operations

Over time, many manufacturers have invested heavily in customizations and third-party solutions that extend Dynamics GP beyond its original capabilities.

As a result, one question consistently arises:

Will Business Central support the way we run our business today?

This concern is valid.

A manufacturing ERP system is rarely just software. It represents years of operational knowledge, process optimization, and institutional expertise.

I recently spoke with a manufacturer whose scheduling process depended on a series of custom GP workflows that had evolved over more than a decade.

Their concern wasn't whether Business Central could replace Dynamics GP.

Their concern was whether it could support the operational habits, planning processes, and production routines the business had built around it.

That's a common theme in manufacturing. ERP systems often become deeply embedded in day-to-day operations, making modernization as much an operational decision as a technology decision.

Manufacturing executives often worry that modernization could require:

• Rebuilding critical integrations
• Replacing customized functionality
• Retraining users
• Disrupting production workflows
• Introducing unnecessary operational risk

For manufacturers, hesitation is not about resisting change.

It is about protecting operational continuity while preparing for the future.

What Does Microsoft’s Dynamics GP Roadmap Mean for Manufacturing Companies?

One reason ERP modernization discussions have become more urgent is Microsoft’s continued focus on cloud-first business applications.

While Dynamics GP remains supported, Microsoft’s innovation investments are increasingly concentrated on Dynamics 365 Business Central, Power Platform, Microsoft Fabric, Copilot, and the broader Microsoft cloud ecosystem.

Understanding the Microsoft Dynamics GP roadmap is now a critical component of long-term ERP planning.

This distinction is important because support and innovation are not the same thing.

An ERP platform can remain fully supported while gradually becoming disconnected from emerging technologies and modern business capabilities.

Manufacturers evaluating their long-term ERP strategy should therefore consider more than support timelines. They should evaluate how future initiatives align with Microsoft’s technology roadmap.

Key considerations include:

Talent Availability

As fewer organizations implement new Dynamics GP systems, experienced GP consultants, developers, and administrators may become increasingly difficult to find.

Technology Integration

Modern Microsoft technologies, including AI-powered Copilot capabilities, Power BI, Power Automate, and cloud services, are increasingly optimized for Business Central.

Microsoft’s manufacturing technology strategy also emphasizes AI, industrial data integration, automation, and connected operations delivered through cloud platforms.

Software Ecosystem Evolution

Many ISVs and technology vendors are directing product development toward cloud ERP environments rather than traditional on-premises systems.

Long-Term Strategic Planning

Manufacturers making ERP decisions today must consider where the business will be in five to ten years, not simply where it is today.

The Microsoft Dynamics GP roadmap provides continued support for existing customers while clearly signaling Microsoft’s long-term direction toward cloud ERP innovation.

The question is no longer whether Dynamics GP can support current operations.

The question is whether it can support future transformation initiatives as effectively as modern cloud ERP platforms.

Can Manufacturers Stay on GP Safely, and for How Long?

For many organizations, the answer is yes.

A stable Dynamics GP environment can continue operating successfully for years when properly maintained and supported.

However, the long-term viability of remaining on GP depends on several factors.

Infrastructure Readiness

Organizations with secure, well-maintained infrastructure may have greater flexibility in determining modernization timelines.

Customization Complexity

Highly customized environments often require careful evaluation to ensure long-term maintainability and supportability.

Regulatory Requirements

Manufacturers operating in highly regulated industries may face evolving compliance and cybersecurity requirements that influence technology decisions.

Growth Objectives

Companies pursuing acquisitions, expansion, automation, advanced analytics, or digital transformation initiatives may encounter limitations sooner than organizations focused primarily on maintaining existing operations.

The risk is not that Dynamics GP will suddenly stop functioning.

While Microsoft has not announced an immediate Dynamics GP end-of-life, manufacturers should recognize that support timelines and innovation roadmaps are distinct considerations.

The larger concern is whether remaining on GP continues to align with the organization’s long-term strategic goals.

What Are the Biggest Risks of Delaying ERP Modernization?

Many organizations assume that delaying ERP modernization reduces risk.

In reality, postponing modernization often shifts risk rather than eliminating it.

Several challenges tend to increase over time.

Growing Technical Debt

During a recent ERP assessment, a leadership team came to an important realization.

Their biggest challenge wasn't Dynamics GP itself.

It was the growing number of spreadsheets, manual workarounds, disconnected applications, and shadow processes that had developed around the ERP system over time.

In many cases, technical debt isn't created by the ERP platform alone. It's the result of years of incremental fixes designed to compensate for evolving business requirements.

Years of customizations, integrations, and workarounds create complexity that becomes increasingly difficult and expensive to maintain.

As technical debt grows, organizations often spend more time maintaining legacy processes and less time investing in innovation.

Increasing Support Challenges

As the pool of experienced Dynamics GP resources shrinks, maintaining specialized environments may require greater investment.

Security and Infrastructure Demands

Older systems often require additional effort to maintain modern security, reliability, and performance standards.

Reduced Agility

Today’s manufacturers increasingly rely on:

• Real-time analytics
• Cloud collaboration
• Process automation
• AI-driven insights
• Connected business applications

Legacy environments can make these initiatives more difficult to implement and scale.

Competitive Pressure

Organizations that postpone ERP modernization for manufacturers for too long often face larger, more disruptive projects later when change becomes unavoidable.

The objective is not modernization for its own sake.

The objective is to reduce risk, increase agility, and position the business for future growth.

How Should Manufacturers Evaluate Hosted GP Versus Business Central?

One of the most important decisions manufacturers face today is whether to move Dynamics GP to a hosted environment or migrate to Business Central.

Although these options are often discussed together, they solve different business challenges.

Hosted GP

Hosted GP moves an existing Dynamics GP environment to cloud infrastructure while preserving the current application.

Benefits often include:

• Reduced on-premises infrastructure management
• Improved remote accessibility
• Enhanced disaster recovery
• Extended life of existing investments
• Lower short-term disruption

For organizations seeking operational continuity, hosted GP can be an attractive option.

One CFO described hosted GP to me as "buying time." The organization wasn't ready for a full ERP transformation, but it needed to address aging infrastructure, improve remote accessibility, and reduce the burden of maintaining on-premises systems.

That perspective highlights an important distinction.

Hosted GP can solve infrastructure challenges relatively quickly, but it does not necessarily address the broader modernization opportunities many manufacturers are evaluating.

However, it is important to recognize that hosted GP is primarily an infrastructure strategy, not necessarily a Dynamics GP migration strategy.

The underlying ERP platform remains Dynamics GP.

Business Central

Business Central represents a broader transformation of the ERP platform itself.

Potential benefits include:

• Continuous cloud updates
• Modern user experience
• Native Microsoft ecosystem integration
• Advanced reporting and analytics
• Greater scalability
• Access to AI-enabled capabilities

Many executives evaluating Business Central manufacturing capabilities are also looking for stronger analytics, improved automation, and greater flexibility to support future growth.

However, achieving these benefits typically requires more organizational change, planning, and process evaluation.

The Strategic Question

Rather than asking:

“Which option is less expensive?”

Manufacturing leaders should ask:

“Which option best supports our business goals over the next five to ten years?”

For some organizations, hosted GP may provide an effective transitional strategy.

For others, a Dynamics GP-to-Business Central strategy for manufacturers may offer a stronger long-term foundation for growth and innovation.

The right answer depends on operational requirements, business objectives, risk tolerance, budget, and organizational readiness.

Should Manufacturers Move from Dynamics GP to Business Central?

There is no universal answer.

Some manufacturers are excellent candidates for Business Central today.

Others may benefit from a phased modernization approach that includes hosted GP, infrastructure improvements, process optimization, or organizational preparation before a full ERP migration.

The most successful ERP initiatives begin with business strategy, not software selection.

Manufacturing leaders should evaluate:

• Current operational challenges
• Future growth plans
• Technology roadmap requirements
• Existing customizations
• Integration dependencies
• Internal resource availability
• Change management readiness

The goal is not simply to replace Dynamics GP.

The goal is to establish an ERP foundation that supports long-term business success.

When approached strategically, a Dynamics GP-to-Business Central initiative for manufacturers becomes less about software replacement and more about enabling business transformation.

The Bottom Line

Manufacturers have legitimate reasons to approach ERP modernization cautiously.

Their environments are more complex, their operational risks are higher, and the consequences of disruption can be significant.

However, delaying the conversation indefinitely is not a strategy.

Microsoft’s ERP roadmap, evolving technology expectations, increasing technical debt, and growing competitive pressures are prompting manufacturers to evaluate their options more carefully than ever.

Whether the path forward involves hosted Dynamics GP, Business Central manufacturing solutions, or a phased ERP modernization strategy for manufacturers, the most important step is understanding the business implications before making a technology decision.

Organizations that begin planning today will have far more flexibility than those forced to react later.

Ready to Evaluate Your ERP Future?

If you’re currently running Dynamics GP and wondering what your next move should be, start with a strategic assessment rather than a software demo.

At Liberty Grove Software, we help manufacturers evaluate their ERP landscape, understand modernization risks, and build practical roadmaps that align technology decisions with business goals.

Schedule a Dynamics GP Modernization Assessment with Liberty Grove Software and gain a clear understanding of your options, risks, and opportunities before making your next ERP decision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Dynamics GP being discontinued?

Microsoft continues to support Dynamics GP and provide updates. However, Microsoft’s primary ERP innovation investments are focused on Dynamics 365 Business Central and cloud-based technologies.

What is replacing Dynamics GP?

For most small and mid-sized organizations, Dynamics 365 Business Central is considered Microsoft’s strategic successor ERP platform.

Should manufacturers move from GP to Business Central?

It depends on operational complexity, existing customizations, growth plans, and modernization goals. Every manufacturer should conduct a strategic assessment before making a migration decision.

Can Business Central handle manufacturing?

Yes. Business Central includes native manufacturing functionality and supports make-to-stock, make-to-order, and other production processes. The suitability depends on operational complexity and specific business requirements.

Is Business Central better than Dynamics GP?

Neither platform is universally better. The right choice depends on business goals, technology strategy, scalability requirements, and future growth plans.

How difficult is it to migrate from GP to Business Central?

Migration complexity varies based on customizations, integrations, manufacturing processes, data quality, and organizational readiness. Proper planning significantly reduces risk.

Can I move GP to the cloud without moving to Business Central?

Yes. Hosted GP environments allow organizations to gain the benefits of cloud infrastructure while continuing to use Dynamics GP.

What are the biggest ERP migration risks for manufacturers?

The most common risks include inadequate planning, unsupported customizations, integration challenges, operational disruption, user adoption issues, and insufficient change management.

Coming Next in This Series

Can Business Central Really Handle Manufacturing Complexity?

One of the most common concerns among manufacturing leaders is whether Business Central's manufacturing capabilities can support complex production environments.

In the next article, we’ll examine:

• Manufacturing functionality in Business Central
• Production orders, routings, and BOM management
• Make-to-stock and make-to-order capabilities
• Inventory visibility and planning tools
• When third-party manufacturing solutions may be required

We’ll also explore:

• The Real Fear Behind Leaving Dynamics GP in Manufacturing
• Why Manufacturing Customizations and ISVs Become ERP Migration Roadblocks
• Cost Accounting Differences Between GP and Business Central
• Hosted GP vs Business Central: What Manufacturers Need to Consider

Together, these articles will help manufacturers build a practical roadmap for ERP modernization and make informed decisions about their long-term technology strategy.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

The latest Wave 1 2026 update to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is not just another incremental release; it is a clear signal of where ERP is headed. Microsoft continues to invest in AI, usability, and extensibility in ways that are practical for mid-market organizations, not theoretical.

I spend a lot of time with CFOs, CIOs, and operations leaders who are trying to separate real innovation from marketing noise. This release makes that distinction easier. There are tangible improvements here that can drive efficiency, reduce friction, and improve decision-making without requiring a complete transformation initiative.

Let’s break down what matters most.

AI That Actually Fits into Business Workflows

The continued expansion of Copilot capabilities is one of the most important themes in this release. What stands out is not just that AI exists in Business Central, but how it is being applied.

Microsoft is embedding AI into everyday workflows; not as a separate tool, but as a natural extension of how users already work.

Key enhancements include:

• Improved financial summarization
  Users can generate contextual summaries of financial data directly within the application. This reduces the need to export reports or to interpret large datasets manually.
• Enhanced forecasting support
  AI-assisted forecasting continues to evolve, helping finance teams model scenarios more quickly and with greater confidence.
• Context-aware assistance
  Copilot can now provide more relevant suggestions based on user activity and data context, making it more useful in real operational situations.

The important point here is governance. AI in ERP must operate within defined permissions and controls. Microsoft is clearly building these capabilities with enterprise-grade security in mind; that should give leadership teams confidence to adopt, not hesitate.

A More Intuitive and Personalized User Experience

User adoption remains one of the biggest barriers to ERP success. Microsoft is addressing this directly with meaningful UX improvements.

Wave 1 2026 introduces:

• Enhanced role-based experiences
  Interfaces are becoming more tailored to specific roles: finance, operations, and sales. This reduces cognitive overload and shortens training cycles.
• Improved navigation and search
  Finding data and actions is faster and more intuitive. This may sound minor, but over time, it has a significant impact on productivity.
• Better data presentation
  Lists, dashboards, and reports are easier to interpret, helping users move from data to insight more efficiently.

These are not cosmetic changes. They directly affect how quickly teams can execute and how effectively they can use the system.

Deeper Integration Across the Microsoft Ecosystem

Business Central continues to strengthen its integration with the broader Microsoft stack; this is one of its most strategic advantages.

In this release, we see:

• Tighter integration with Microsoft 365 tools
  Users can interact with ERP data in familiar environments such as Excel and Teams, reducing context switching.
• Improved Power Platform connectivity
  Enhancements to Power BI, Power Automate, and Power Apps integrations enable organizations to extend functionality without heavy development.
• Streamlined data sharing
  Data flows more seamlessly across systems, supporting a more unified digital architecture.

For organizations thinking about long-term scalability, this matters. ERP should not be a silo; it should be part of a connected ecosystem that supports the entire business.

Automation That Reduces Manual Work

Automation is not new in Business Central, but it is becoming more intelligent and easier to implement.

Wave 1 2026 includes:

• Expanded workflow automation capabilities
  More processes can be automated out of the box, reducing reliance on custom development.
• Improved approval processes
  Approval workflows are more flexible and easier to manage, supporting better governance.
• Background processing enhancements
  Tasks can run more efficiently in the background, improving system performance and user experience.

The goal here is clear: eliminate repetitive tasks so teams can focus on higher-value work.

Stronger Development and Extensibility Framework

For partners and organizations that customize Business Central, this release brings important improvements.

Highlights include:

• Enhanced AL development environment
  Developers have better tools for building, testing, and deploying extensions.
• Improved APIs and integration points
  Easier connectivity with external systems supports more complex business scenarios.
• Upgrade-friendly customizations
  Microsoft continues to prioritize extensibility models that survive upgrades; this is critical for long-term sustainability.

From my perspective, this is one of the most underappreciated areas of innovation. A modern ERP must be adaptable without becoming fragile.

Data, Reporting, and Decision-Making

Data remains at the core of ERP value, and Microsoft is continuing to improve how organizations access and use it.

This release introduces:

• More powerful reporting capabilities
  Users can generate insights faster without relying heavily on IT.
• Better integration with analytics tools
  Power BI connectivity continues to improve, enabling richer visualizations and real-time dashboards.
• Improved data consistency and governance
  Enhancements help ensure that decision-makers work with accurate, reliable data.

For leadership teams, this translates directly into better decisions and faster response times.

What This Means for Your Organization

It is easy to look at a release like this and focus on features. The more important question is what it enables.

Wave 1 2026 reinforces several strategic realities:

• AI is becoming embedded in core business processes; not optional but expected.
• User experience is a competitive advantage; systems must be intuitive to drive adoption.
• Integration is no longer a nice-to-have; it is foundational to digital transformation.
• Automation is essential for scalability; manual processes do not scale.

Organizations that embrace these shifts will move faster and operate more efficiently than those that do not.

A Practical Approach to Adoption

One mistake I see companies make is trying to adopt everything at once. That rarely works.

Instead, focus on:

• Identifying high-impact use cases for AI and automation
• Prioritizing user experience improvements that drive adoption
• Leveraging integrations that eliminate data silos
• Ensuring governance and security are in place from the start

This is not about chasing features. It is about aligning technology with business outcomes.

Final Thoughts

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central Wave 1 2026 is a strong release; not because it introduces flashy capabilities, but because it delivers practical improvements that organizations can use today.

As ERP continues to evolve, the gap between companies that effectively leverage these tools and those that do not will widen.

The opportunity is clear. The question is whether organizations are ready to take advantage of it.

Ready to turn the latest Business Central innovations into real business value?

Let’s talk.

At Liberty Grove Software, we work with clients to turn these capabilities into measurable business value. That is where the real impact lies.Contact Liberty Grove Software today to identify the highest-impact opportunities for AI, automation, and integration in your organization, and build a practical roadmap that delivers measurable results.

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

Artificial intelligence has become one of the most discussed topics in enterprise technology, but for CIOs and CTOs evaluating ERP modernization, the real question is not whether AI matters. The question is whether AI within Business Central ERP delivers measurable value without introducing unnecessary risk.

For organizations considering a move from Microsoft Dynamics GP to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, AI is increasingly part of that evaluation.

Boards are asking about AI readiness. CEOs want automation gains. Finance leaders want faster forecasting and sharper insights.

The challenge for IT leadership is separating hype from operational reality.

What does AI in Business Central actually do today?

How risky is it?

And can it scale as your organization grows?

Does Business Central Include AI?

Yes.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central includes AI-powered capabilities through Microsoft Copilot and embedded intelligent features designed to improve productivity across finance, operations, and supply chain workflows.

Current AI-enabled capabilities include:

• Cash flow forecasting
• Predictive inventory insights
• Sales forecasting assistance
• AI-generated summaries of records and reports
• Automated content suggestions for product descriptions and communications

Microsoft continues expanding these capabilities through Copilot releases integrated into Business Central’s roadmap.

For reference, Microsoft’s official overview of Copilot in Business Central explains how these tools are evolving within ERP workflows.

The important distinction for executives is this:

AI in Business Central is not experimental bolt-on technology.

It is becoming embedded in core ERP workflows.

What AI in ERP Actually Changes

Traditional ERP systems require users to search, navigate dashboards, build reports, and manually interpret data.

AI changes that interaction model.

Instead of only retrieving data, users can increasingly:

• Ask natural-language questions
• Generate summaries instantly
• Identify anomalies faster
• Receive predictive recommendations

This shifts ERP from a passive record system into an active decision-support platform.

For CIOs, this means AI is not simply a feature enhancement.

It is a transformation in how enterprise systems are used.

Is AI in ERP Risky?

AI in ERP introduces real governance considerations, but the associated risks are often misunderstood.

The core issue is not that AI creates uncontrolled access.

The issue is whether your existing permissions, governance policies, and validation processes are mature enough to support AI-assisted workflows.

AI should always operate within:

• Defined role-based permissions
• Identity governance controls
• Audit logging frameworks
• Human review checkpoints

In Business Central, Copilot works within the user’s existing permission model.

That means that if users already have overly broad ERP access, AI may make that problem more visible.

AI does not create weak governance.

It reveals it.

For Microsoft guidance on responsible AI governance, the Microsoft Trust Center provides useful security and compliance context.

Accuracy Still Requires Human Oversight

One concern many executives raise is:

What happens if AI gets it wrong?

This is the right question.

AI-generated forecasts, summaries, and recommendations should support human decision-making, not replace it.

Examples:

• Forecast models still require a finance review
• Summaries may omit nuance
• Suggested actions require business validation

The strongest AI governance models use what is often called: Human-in-the-loop validation.

This ensures that critical ERP decisions remain accountable, explainable, and reviewable.

AI Governance Is Becoming a CIO Responsibility

As AI adoption expands, CIO and CTO leadership responsibilities grow accordingly.

AI in ERP now requires oversight across:

Identity and Access

Who can use AI features, and what data can they access?

Data Governance

Is sensitive data properly classified and protected?

Prompt and Usage Policies

What kinds of queries are acceptable?

Auditability

Can AI-driven outputs be traced and reviewed?

These governance layers are becoming as essential as cybersecurity frameworks.

Is Business Central Scalable?

Yes.

One of the strongest advantages of Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is that it runs on Microsoft Azure, providing scalable capacity as organizations grow.

Business Central scales across:

• Expanding user counts
• Additional legal entities
• Growing transaction volumes
• Multi-location operations
• International business expansion

Because Azure infrastructure dynamically scales resources, organizations avoid many of the hardware constraints common in legacy on-premises ERP systems.

For CIOs planning long-term ERP modernization, scalability is not just about system size.

It is about ensuring that AI capabilities continue to perform reliably as operational complexity increases.

Why AI and Scalability Are Connected

AI performance depends heavily on the scale of the infrastructure.

As data volumes grow, AI models require:

• Faster compute resources
• Reliable uptime
• Elastic processing capacity
• Secure cloud storage integration

Legacy systems often struggle here.

Cloud-native ERP platforms like Business Central are designed for this future state.

That is one reason AI readiness increasingly overlaps with cloud ERP readiness.

What We Covered Earlier in This Series

In Blog #1, we examined the strategic modernization question facing GP leaders: how to evaluate ERP readiness before 2029 and assess whether Business Central aligns with long-term business goals.

In Blog #2, we addressed cloud ERP security, financial governance, and control, including how CIOs can evaluate cloud risk, subscription predictability, and compliance readiness.

Together, those discussions create the foundation for this third question:

What role should AI play in ERP decision-making today?

AI Hype vs AI Reality: What CIOs Should Focus On

Not every AI feature creates immediate value.

CIOs should prioritize AI use cases that improve measurable business outcomes, such as:

• Faster month-end close reporting
• Reduced manual forecasting effort
• Improved demand planning accuracy
• Faster exception detection in operations

The right AI question is not:

“Do we have AI?”

The better question is:

“Where does AI create controlled, measurable operational advantage?”

A Practical Liberty Grove Resource

For organizations evaluating how AI fits into ERP modernization, Liberty Grove’s Business Central solutions page provides a useful overview of platform capabilities and deployment options.

This is especially valuable for leadership teams as they compare current GP environments with future AI-enabled ERP models.

Key Takeaways

• Business Central already includes meaningful AI capabilities through Copilot
• AI in ERP is powerful, but only safe within strong governance frameworks
• Human oversight remains essential for accuracy and accountability
• Business Central scales effectively through Azure infrastructure
• AI readiness should be evaluated as part of a broader ERP modernization strategy

The Balanced View: AI Is Real, But Governance Determines Value

AI in ERP is no longer theoretical.

It is already reshaping how organizations forecast, summarize, automate, and make decisions.

But for CIOs and CTOs, successful AI adoption is not about quickly turning on features.

It is about implementing them responsibly.

Organizations that gain the most value from AI in Business Central will be those that combine innovation with governance, automation with oversight, and scalability with strategic discipline.

Assess Your ERP AI Readiness

If your organization is evaluating whether AI-enabled ERP belongs in your modernization roadmap, Liberty Grove Software can help assess:

• AI governance readiness
• Security and permissions posture
• Business Central scalability fit
• Strategic migration timing from GP

The goal is simple:

Adopt AI where it creates measurable value, without introducing avoidable risk.

Contact Liberty Grove Software today to begin a practical assessment of your AI-ready ERP future.

If you’d like to understand where your organization stands before enabling BC Copilot, let’s talk.

Schedule a BC Copilot Readiness Discussion

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

For many CIOs and CTOs running Microsoft Dynamics GP, the conversation about modernization is no longer theoretical, and the phrase on everyone’s lips is “Cloud ERP Security”.

It’s operational.

With 2029 on the horizon, leadership teams are being asked to evaluate what comes next, and increasingly, that conversation leads to the cloud.

But alongside that opportunity comes a familiar set of concerns:

• Is cloud ERP actually secure?
• Are we giving up control over our systems?
• Will subscription pricing become unpredictable over time?

These are not objections to dismiss.

They are the right questions to ask.

Moving from an on-premises ERP like GP to a cloud platform such as Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central is not just a technology shift.

It’s a transformation of the governance, security, and financial models.

With these questions in mind, let's turn to the bigger context: is taking on cloud ERP truly about risk – or about reallocating responsibility?

When executives ask whether cloud ERP is “worth the risk,” the more accurate question is:

Where does the responsibility for risk sit today – and where should it sit in the future?

In on-premises environments like Microsoft Dynamics GP, your organization is responsible for:

• Infrastructure security
• Patch management
• Backup and disaster recovery
• System availability
• Compliance readiness

In a cloud model powered by Microsoft, much of that responsibility shifts to a provider operating at a global scale.

This doesn’t remove control.

It’s a reallocation of operational burden, from internal IT teams to enterprise-grade infrastructure.

With this mind shift, security remains at the forefront. Is cloud ERP secure?

The short answer: yes, but not automatically.

Platforms like Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central are built on Microsoft Azure, which provides enterprise-grade protection through its Microsoft Azure security infrastructure:

• Global data centers with physical and network security
• Continuous monitoring and threat detection
• Built-in encryption at rest and in transit
• Compliance with international standards (ISO, SOC, GDPR, and more), supported by Microsoft compliance and certification standards

For most mid-market and enterprise organizations, replicating this level of security internally is not realistic.

However, cloud security still depends on how the system is configured and governed.

Key areas that remain your responsibility:

• User access and identity management
• Role-based permissions
• Data governance policies
• Monitoring and audit processes

Cloud ERP is secure by design and effective with strong governance.

Identity Is the New Security Perimeter

In cloud environments, the traditional network perimeter disappears.

Security shifts to identity.

Using Microsoft Entra ID, organizations can enforce:

• Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
• Conditional access policies
• Device and location-based restrictions
• Centralized identity governance

This creates a more dynamic and controllable security model than traditional on-premises systems.

But it also introduces a new leadership requirement:

Identity strategy is now core to ERP security.

Security isn't the only concern – control also matters. Can we still control updates in the cloud?

One of the most common concerns among GP users is loss of control over system changes.

In on-premises environments, upgrades are:

• Infrequent
• Highly customized
• Often delayed due to cost and complexity

In the cloud, updates in Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central follow a different model.

Microsoft provides:

• Scheduled release waves (typically twice per year), aligned with the Dynamics 365 release wave schedule
• Advance visibility into upcoming changes
• Sandbox environments for testing
• Configurable update windows

This allows organizations to:

• Validate updates before production deployment
• Train users ahead of changes
• Reduce disruption through smaller, incremental improvements

The result isn’t less control, but more predictable control.

Subscription vs CapEx: The Financial Shift

For many executives, the move to cloud ERP raises an equally important question:

How does the financial model change?

With Microsoft Dynamics GP, costs are typically:

• Upfront license purchases (CapEx)
• Infrastructure investments
• Ongoing maintenance and upgrade costs

With Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, the model shifts to:

• Subscription-based pricing (OpEx)
• Per-user licensing
• Bundled infrastructure and platform services

Is Subscription Pricing Predictable?

In most cases, yes.

Subscription pricing is:

• Tied to user count and license type
• Scalable with organizational growth
• Easier to forecast based on hiring plans

This creates financial alignment between ERP cost and business activity.

However, predictability depends on governance.

Organizations must manage:

• License allocation and usage
• Role-based licensing tiers
• Expansion of environments or integrations

Without oversight, costs can drift.

With governance in place, they remain highly controllable.

Hidden Costs vs Visible Costs

One of the most important shifts in moving to cloud ERP is cost transparency.

On-premises systems often carry hidden costs:

• Server maintenance
• Downtime risk
• Security tooling
• IT labor for patching and upgrades

Cloud ERP consolidates these into a visible, recurring model.

This doesn’t necessarily reduce total cost in every case.

But it does make measuring cost:

• More predictable
• Easier to align with value
• Simpler to justify at the executive level 

Governance in the Cloud Era

Cloud ERP does not eliminate governance; it elevates it.

Executives must think beyond infrastructure and focus on:

• Access governance: Who can see and do what
• Data governance: How information is classified and protected
• Financial governance: How licensing and usage are controlled
• Operational governance: How updates and changes are managed

This is particularly important for organizations transitioning from legacy systems like Microsoft Dynamics GP, where governance may have evolved organically over time.

Cloud platforms provide the tools.

Leadership provides the discipline.

Compliance and Audit Readiness

For organizations in regulated industries, cloud ERP introduces an important advantage:

Built-in compliance capabilities.

With Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central and the broader Microsoft ecosystem, organizations can leverage:

• Audit trails and activity logging
• Role-based access controls
• Data retention policies
• Integration with compliance and security tools

This makes it easier to:

• Demonstrate control during audits
• Maintain consistent policies across systems
• Respond to regulatory requirements

The Balanced View: Control Without Complexity

It’s understandable to think cloud ERP reduces control, but that’s incomplete.

The change is in how control is exercised.

Instead of managing infrastructure manually, organizations define control through:

• Policies
• Identity frameworks
• Governance structures
• Monitoring systems

The result is often:

• Stronger security
• Greater visibility
• More predictable costs
• Reduced operational burden

Key Takeaways

• Cloud ERP shifts responsibility, not risk elimination.
• Security is strengthened through Microsoft Azure infrastructure and identity controls.
• Updates are structured, predictable, and testable.
• Subscription pricing is scalable and forecastable with governance.
• Cloud platforms improve transparency across both cost and compliance.

What Comes Next in This Series?

In our first article, we explored the strategic question many executives are asking: what does long-term ERP readiness look like as 2029 approaches, and how should leaders evaluate modernization beyond urgency alone?

This article addressed a core operational concern:

“Is cloud ERP secure, controllable, and financially viable?”

The next step is more strategic:

How do we decide when – and how – to move from GP to Business Central? In the next article, we’ll explore:

• Migration timing considerations
• Risk-aware transition strategies
• How to evaluate readiness for modernization

Because the decision is not just about technology.

It’s about aligning your ERP platform with where your business is going next.

Assess Your ERP Strategy with Confidence

If your organization is evaluating whether to remain on Microsoft Dynamics GP or transition to Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, Liberty Grove Software can help you assess:

• Security and compliance posture
• Cost modeling and licensing strategy
• Governance readiness for cloud ERP

The goal is simple: make a clear, informed decision, without unnecessary risk.

You can also explore Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central solutions to better understand how a modern cloud ERP platform supports security, cost control, and governance.

Contact Liberty Grove Software today to schedule a personalized assessment and determine the best path to a secure, cost-effective cloud ERP future for your organization.

If you’d like to understand where your organization stands before enabling BC Copilot, let’s talk.

Schedule a BC Copilot Readiness Discussion

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn

Boards are asking about AI. CEOs are asking about AI. And increasingly, CIOs and CTOs are being asked a new question: “When are we turning on Business Central Copilot?” As organizations evaluate Business Central Copilot implementation, the real challenge is not simply about enabling a new AI feature within the ERP. It’s ensuring the organization has the governance, security controls, and operational discipline required to deploy AI responsibly.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central (BC) Copilot is one of the most significant advancements in modern ERP platforms. Embedded AI can streamline reporting, accelerate decision-making, and automate time-consuming tasks across finance, operations, and supply chain workflows.

But implementing Business Central Copilot is not simply enabling a new feature.

It represents a shift in how organizations interact with their ERP systems.

The organizations that realize the most value from AI in ERP environments are not the ones that deploy it fastest; they are the ones that deploy it with governance, security design, and operational discipline.

Copilot is powerful. Responsible implementation amplifies value while minimizing avoidable risk.

Why Business Central Copilot Is a Strategic ERP Shift

Historically, ERP systems required users to navigate menus, reports, and dashboards to find the information they needed.

Business Central Copilot changes that model.

AI now sits inside the application experience, helping users:

• Generate financial summaries
• Draft reports and documentation
• Identify operational insights
• Analyze data faster than traditional reporting workflows

This shift transforms ERP from a system of record into a decision intelligence platform.

For CIOs and CTOs, that means AI adoption inside ERP is not simply a technical deployment. It is an organizational change initiative involving governance, identity management, security controls, and user training.

Before enabling Copilot broadly, leadership teams must ensure their ERP environment is ready.

The Six Leadership Questions CIOs Must Answer

Before deploying Business Central Copilot, IT leadership should evaluate six key questions.

These questions form a practical readiness framework for responsible AI adoption inside ERP systems.

1. Where Can Microsoft Business Central Copilot Safely Add Value?

Not every workflow should be AI-assisted immediately.

Early Copilot use cases often include:

• Financial reporting summaries
• Operational insights
• Draft documentation
• Data exploration

Starting with low-risk, high-productivity scenarios allows organizations to learn how Copilot interacts with their ERP data.

2. What Data Should Microsoft Business Central Copilot Access?

MS BC Copilot operates within the permissions of the user interacting with it.

That means existing role-based permissions define ERP data access.

If permission sets are overly broad, Copilot may surface data users technically have access to but rarely see in normal workflows.

Before rollout, organizations should review:

• Permission sets
• Role assignments
• Sensitive financial fields
• Vendor and payroll data access

Data exposure risk often comes from configuration decisions, not from Copilot itself.

3. How Will Identity and Permissions in BC Copilot Be Controlled?

Strong identity controls are foundational for AI-enabled systems.

Organizations deploying Business Central Copilot should confirm:

• Microsoft Entra ID identity governance
• Multi-factor authentication enforcement
• Role-based access control
• Least-privilege permission design

These controls ensure BC Copilot interactions respect the same security boundaries as traditional ERP activity.

We’ll explore the full Copilot data security framework in the next article of this series.

4. How Will Usage of Dynamics 365 Copilot Be Monitored?

As with any emerging technology, visibility matters.

CIOs should ensure the organization can monitor:

• BC Copilot interactions
• Data access patterns
• Reporting queries
• Export activity

Audit logging and monitoring capabilities provide accountability and help organizations detect unusual usage patterns early.

5. How Will Users Be Trained on BC Copilot?

AI tools change how employees interact with enterprise systems.

Users must understand:

• When BC Copilot suggestions should be validated
• What types of data should not be shared in prompts?
• How to interpret AI-generated summaries

Without proper guidance, employees may over-trust AI-generated outputs or misuse the tool unintentionally.

Training and acceptable-use policies are critical for responsible adoption.

6. How Will We Measure the ROI of Microsoft BC Copilot?

The fastest way to undermine an AI initiative is to deploy it without measuring results.

Business Central Copilot should be evaluated against measurable outcomes such as:

• Reduced report generation time
• Faster financial analysis
• Improved operational insight
• Increased productivity for finance and operations teams

Structured adoption programs help CIOs demonstrate real business value.

Data Security and Oversharing Considerations

A common concern when deploying AI within ERP systems is data oversharing.

In most cases, the underlying issue is not the AI technology; it is the organization’s permission model.

Many ERP environments accumulate permission complexity over time:

• Broad roles granted for convenience
• Legacy permission sets
• Shared accounts or overprovisioned users

Before enabling BC Copilot, CIOs should review their least-privilege access model and verify that users have access only to the data required for their roles.

Identity governance through Microsoft Entra ID, combined with disciplined permission management inside Business Central, helps ensure Copilot interactions remain within appropriate boundaries.

Many organizations are moving away from legacy on-premises ERP systems like GP toward cloud platforms that offer stronger security and scalability. Learn more about the benefits of cloud vs on-premises ERP systems.

In our next article, we’ll explore a more comprehensive Business Central Copilot security framework to protect sensitive ERP data.

Governance, Compliance, and Auditability in BC Copilot

Beyond access control, organizations must also consider how AI usage aligns with governance and compliance obligations.

Key considerations include:

• Audit logging of BC Copilot interactions
• Data retention policies
• Data loss prevention (DLP) controls
• Regulatory reporting requirements

For organizations in regulated industries, establishing clear oversight mechanisms before deploying BC Copilot ensures AI activity remains defensible and compliant.

Governance is not about slowing innovation.

It is about enabling responsible AI adoption.

Operational and Cultural Readiness for BC Copilot

Technology readiness alone does not ensure successful AI adoption.

Organizations must also prepare for the operational and cultural impact of Copilot.

This includes:

• Change management planning
• Acceptable-use policies for AI tools
• Human-in-the-loop validation workflows
• Clear guidance on when AI suggestions require review

AI should assist decision-making, not replace human accountability.

In the third article of this series, we’ll explore an operational rollout checklist for Business Central Copilot, including adoption strategies and productivity measurement.

The Balanced View: Value With Responsibility

When implemented thoughtfully, Business Central Copilot can deliver meaningful business benefits:

• Faster financial reporting
• Improved operational visibility
• Reduced administrative workload
• More informed decision-making

But successful organizations approach AI deployment with a balanced perspective.

They combine innovation with governance, security with productivity, and automation with human oversight.

Copilot is powerful.

Responsible implementation ensures that power translates into sustainable value.

Key Takeaways

• Business Central Copilot represents a strategic shift in ERP workflows.
• Governance and identity controls should precede broad rollout.
• Permission design and least-privilege access define risk posture.
• Human validation remains essential for AI-assisted insights.
• Measured adoption enables sustainable ROI.

A successful Business Central Copilot implementation begins with strong governance, validated identity controls, and a clear operational rollout strategy.

Executive BC Copilot Readiness Checklist

Before enabling Business Central Copilot, CIOs should confirm:

1. Inventory current permission sets
2. Audit sensitive ERP data fields
3. Validate Microsoft Entra ID identity policies
4. Confirm multi-factor authentication enforcement
5. Define an AI acceptable-use policy
6. Establish audit logging review processes
7. Implement data loss prevention controls
8. Define human validation workflows
9. Train power users first
10. Pilot in a low-risk department
11. Track productivity KPIs
12. Document governance framework

What Comes Next in This Series

In the next article, we’ll explore a deeper question many CIOs are asking:

In our next blog, we'll discuss Cloud ERP Security & Cost, and the final article in this series will address AI in Business Central

Most organizations evaluating Microsoft BC Copilot fall into one of three categories:

• Ready to move forward but unsure how to govern it
• Interested, but concerned about security and data exposure
• Under pressure to adopt AI without a clear rollout strategy

If you’re evaluating Copilot for your organization, the most valuable first step is not licensing; it’s readiness.

At Liberty Grove Software, we help CIOs and CTOs conduct a Copilot Strategic Readiness Assessment, examining:

• Data exposure and permission structure
• Identity and security controls
• Governance and acceptable use policies
• Practical rollout and adoption strategy

The goal is simple: enable AI adoption with confidence, not uncertainty.

If your organization is considering leaving Dynamics GP, following a structured ERP migration roadmap to Business Central can help reduce risk and ensure a smooth transition.

If you’d like to understand where your organization stands before enabling BC Copilot, let’s talk.

Schedule a BC Copilot Readiness Discussion

About Andrew Good

Andrew Good, CEO, Liberty Grove Software

Andrew Good, CEO of Liberty Grove Software, a leader in digital transformation, directs the company with strategic insights that deliver impactful results. With over two decades of expertise in Microsoft technologies, Andrew has guided businesses through digital transformation across manufacturing, finance, and healthcare.

Andrew's extensive knowledge comes from personal experiences with various companies. His hands-on operational knowledge comes from Engineering, Maintenance, and operational roles at Unilever and Sony Music. Fourteen years of working with Microsoft Dynamics BC/NAV follows successful projects in ERP, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (EAM), and quality systems.

His passion for technology is matched by his love for sailing, which inspires his leadership. Andrew parallels the precision of navigating the seas and the challenges of steering a successful company. Under his leadership, Liberty Grove Software thrives, offering tailored solutions to empower clients and optimize operations with innovative Microsoft-based systems.

Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn

Subscribe to Andrew’s Newsletter on LinkedIn