Your Business Central Implementation Project is Sideways. You’re Not Alone.
Your new D365 Business Central system was supposed to bring clarity and efficiency. Instead, you’re dealing with late reports, a confused finance team still clinging to spreadsheets, and a budget that’s gone completely off the rails. This feeling of frustration and uncertainty is incredibly common. As user communities and Reddit threads show, countless business leaders find themselves in this exact position, asking the same critical question: “Is our Dynamics 365 partner the problem—or is Business Central the problem?”
The answer determines whether you salvage a six-figure investment or write it off entirely. This article provides a clear framework for diagnosing the true root cause of your project’s struggles. We will move beyond guesswork and gut feelings to give you a strategic path forward, empowering you to make your next decision with confidence.
The Common Cries for Help: Decoding Real-World Business Central Frustrations
Before you can find a solution, it’s crucial to validate the problem. The challenges you’re facing are not unique. By examining the candid discussions happening in online user communities, we can see clear patterns of where Business Central projects typically go wrong. These are the real-world cries for help from finance and business leaders.
“Business Central implementation failing — bad partner or wrong product?”
“Is it the partner or the product?”
When a system is slow and confusing after go-live, it’s natural to question the software itself. However, when you dig into these discussions, veteran users and D365 BC implementation experts consistently point to poor solution architecture and flawed partner execution—like rushed scoping or generic setups—as the real culprits, not the core product. For finance leaders, this is the most important distinction to make. When the GL close is late and financial reporting is messy, you need to know whether to invest in remediation or pivot to a rescue team.
“Business Central partner ghosting us — can we run without a partner?”
“We’re getting no support.”
A common pain point is the post-implementation support model. Many businesses find themselves pushed into rigid, expensive retainers or, worse, facing an unresponsive partner. This forces them to consider going it alone, which is a risky proposition. If your month-end close is at risk because of a system issue, you need a partner who meets their service level agreements (SLAs) and has a clear playbook for escalating critical incidents to Microsoft. A lack of reliable support puts your core financial operations in jeopardy.
“How long should a Business Central implementation take?”
“The timeline and cost blew up.”
While implementation timelines can vary widely, a consistent theme in failed projects is the explosion of both schedule and budget. The root causes are almost always the same: over-optimistic timelines proposed during the sales cycle, a gross underestimation of the complexity of data migration, and weak change management. For a finance leader, this translates directly into scope creep and uncontrolled costs, undermining the project’s entire business case.
“Staff still living in spreadsheets after Business Central go-live — how to fix?”
“Our users hate it and still use spreadsheets.”
Low user adoption is a classic sign of a failing D365 BC implementation. If your team is reverting to old tools and legacy processes, it’s not a verdict on them or the software; it’s a symptom of poor enablement. The absence of role-based training and a lack of internal champions are direct causes of this behavior. From a finance perspective, if adoption stalls, your investment underperforms. The promised financial outcomes—a faster close, cleaner reconciliations, and fewer manual adjustments—simply cannot be realized.
“Business Central slow after update 24.x — anyone else?”
“Performance tanked after an update.”
When system performance degrades, the first instinct is often to blame the platform. However, a competent Business Central partner has a documented troubleshooting flow using diagnostic tools like telemetry and the in-client profiler. If your BC partner immediately proposes costly rework without presenting evidence-based analysis, it’s a major red flag. Lagging system performance means throughput hits the P&L—late invoicing, slow cash application, and inventory discrepancies.
These common frustrations are symptoms of deeper, systemic issues. The next step is to diagnose the root cause.
Diagnosing the Root Cause: It’s Almost Always the Business Central Implementation, Not the Software
When an ERP project is in trouble, it’s tempting to blame the software. But the evidence from countless rescue projects is conclusive: the root cause of a failing Business Central implementation lies in the implementation methodology and partner execution, not the product itself. The following red-flag patterns are the true drivers of project failure.
• Under-Scoped & Over-Promised Many projects are doomed by “Quick Start remorse,” where fast and fixed packages skip the critical discovery phase – something that 360 Visibility solves for before every Business Central implementation with the Business Impact Assessment. Without the discovery phase, this leads to generic setups that don’t fit the business, forcing expensive customizations to be bolted on late. The financial impact is immediate: budget overruns, delayed go-lives, and a chart of accounts that locks in bad data from day one.
• Data Migration Underestimated This is the silent killer of ERP projects. Partners who promise to “just import it later” are downplaying one of the most complex and critical workstreams. The result is duplicate vendors, inconsistent item masters, and stock valuation mismatches. For finance, the impact is catastrophic: inaccurate financials, manual subledger reconciliations, and chronically delayed close cycles.
• Weak Change Management & User Enablement Treating user training as an afterthought is a guaranteed path to failure. Without a structured, role-based training plan and the development of internal super-users, employees will inevitably revert to Excel and familiar legacy processes. This leads directly to low user adoption and a failed ROI, as the organization remains bogged down by the very inefficiencies the ERP was meant to solve.
• A Mismatched Support Model A partner’s support model must align with the operational realities of a finance team. Rigid retainers, slow ticket triage, and a lack of proactive guidance create friction and risk. When there are no clearly defined SLAs, the finance team is left vulnerable during crucial periods like month-end, forcing them to create shadow IT processes and workarounds.
• Poor Industry or Technical Fit When a partner lacks deep expertise in your industry, the solution suffers. You pay to “discover” basics, and the resulting design often mimics old, inefficient processes instead of leveraging modern BC patterns. This results in a generic system that fails to address the specific nuances—be it in distribution, manufacturing, or professional services—that drive your competitive advantage.
Recognizing these patterns is the first step. The next is to engage in a formal process to prove the diagnosis and build a plan to fix it.
The Strategic Solution: A Business Central System Review to Get a Definitive Answer
Recognizing the patterns of a failing BC implementation—from under-scoping to poor data migration—is the first step. However, moving from frustration to clarity requires a structured, expert-led diagnostic process, not more guesswork. To get a definitive answer about what’s wrong with your Business Central system, you need a formal methodology. This is the purpose of a Dynamics 365 Business Central System Review, a specialized variant of the Business Impact Assessment (BIA).
A System Review BIA is defined as a “thorough audit of the current state, priorities, and expectations” for organizations whose systems are slow, unstable, or underutilized. It’s designed to uncover inefficiencies and diagnose the root causes of underperformance. The review moves beyond identifying problems to prescribing specific, actionable solutions.
The table below illustrates how this process turns a high-level problem into a concrete, high-value recommendation:
| Identified Problem (The “What”) | Actionable Recommendation (The “So What?”) |
| “Individuals can modify vendor bank accounts without any required approval, a practice that presents a potential risk for fraudulent activity and may prompt audit inquiries.” | “Enable the Vendor Bank Account Approval workflow via an extension that formally notifies designated users and holds the vendor record until the change is approved.” |
The key deliverable of the System Review is “a report of key findings and recommendations to enhance, implement, or reconfigure the solution.” This document provides the evidence-based, actionable steps required to maximize the value of your existing investment. It becomes your roadmap out of the current crisis.
The Path Forward: What a Successful Dynamics 365 Partner ‘Rescue’ Looks Like
A credible D365 BC partner rescue isn’t a chaotic scramble to fix bugs; it’s a disciplined, phased approach to stabilize and optimize a failing Business Central implementation. This proven “triage → plan → execute” model provides a structured path from crisis to control.
1. Phase 1: Triage & Assessment (The System Review BIA). This initial phase is a deep diagnostic. A skilled Business Central partner performs an exhaustive review, creating an archive of the original scope, an inventory of the current environment, and a catalogue of all extensions. They run telemetry and profiler traces to gather hard data on performance bottlenecks. Finally, they conduct a gap analysis comparing the system’s current state against the original project objectives to understand where the implementation truly went off track.
2. Phase 2: The Recovery Roadmap. The findings from the System Review BIA become the official recovery roadmap. This plan prioritizes ruthlessly, focusing on stabilizing core finance functions first—posting, bank reconciliations, and subledger integrity. Only then does it phase in operational modules. The roadmap makes critical decisions on whether to refactor or replace faulty customizations and lays out a detailed, role-based training plan to address user adoption issues head-on.
3. Phase 3: Execution & Customer Care. This is where the roadmap is implemented. Key activities include fixing fundamental architectural issues (like dimensions and posting groups) and cleansing master data files. Crucially, this phase includes “Customer Care”—an intense level of support provided around critical business periods like your month-end close—to ensure the newly stabilized system performs under pressure and builds user confidence.
This structured process moves your project from a state of emergency to one of predictable, managed improvement.
Justifying the Change: A Finance Leader’s Checklist for a New Dynamics 365 Business Central Partner
To justify a Business Central partner change, you must move from anecdotal frustration to hard, CFO-friendly signals. This is about making a case with evidence, not vibes.
First, look for clear decision triggers that indicate the current partnership is fundamentally broken:
• Missed, measurable service levels (e.g., >24-hour average first response on critical P1 incidents).
• Repeated scope changes that occur without new business drivers, indicating poor initial discovery.
• Data integrity issues (like inventory valuation or subledger mismatches) that persist for more than two closing cycles post-go-live.
• Low adoption metrics (e.g., fewer than 60% of licensed users are active) with no partner-led plan to improve them.
Once the decision to switch is made, the evaluation of a potential new partner must be equally rigorous. Use this finance-first evaluation checklist to get evidence, not platitudes:
• Close Acceleration: “Show me how you’ll shorten our month-end by X days. What have you done for a similar client?”
• Data Readiness: “How will you profile and cleanse our data before migration? Who owns deduplication?”
• Telemetry & Performance: “Which telemetry views will you monitor weekly? Can I see a sample report?”
• Support SLAs & Escalation: “What’s your P1/P2 SLA and when do you escalate to Microsoft?”
• Vertical Fit: “Walk me through two implementations in our industry and the specific Business Central patterns you used to solve their challenges.”
• Scope Governance: “How will you prevent scope creep, and what is the RACI for change control?”
• Adoption Plan: “What role-based training paths and super-user model will you establish to ensure our team actually uses the system?”
Choosing the right Business Central partner can make or break your ERP success.
Don’t leave it to chance—learn what to look for, the questions to ask, and how to avoid costly mistakes in our latest guide:
How to Choose a Business Central Implementation Partner
Set your business up for a smooth implementation and long-term success. Read the full post now!
The Difference Between a Project and a Partnership
A failing Business Central implementation is rarely a verdict on the software. More often, it is a symptom of a flawed process and a misaligned partnership. The path to success does not begin with more coding or frantic bug fixes; it begins with a strategic diagnosis to eliminate guesswork and create a predictable, actionable roadmap.
A Business Impact Assessment provides that clarity. It transforms uncertainty into a structured plan, ensuring that your next steps are the right ones. A great partner doesn’t just sell software; they deliver a partnership built on Meticulous Scoping to guarantee on-time, on-budget delivery; Transparency, Always, with no surprises or hidden fees; and strategic guidance from true Experts—Not Salespeople. This is the difference between simply starting a project and building a partnership that drives lasting business value.
Start a Business Impact Assessment Today – Turn Uncertainty into Strategic Clarity.
