Why Your ERP Vendor Isn't Building This (And Won't)

The Expectation 

Controllers and operations managers evaluating AI agents often ask: "Why should we implement this separately? Why doesn't our ERP vendor just build exception handling into the product?" 

The question is reasonable. ERP vendors add features regularly. Exception handling affects every customer. The capability seems like natural product evolution. 

Understanding why vendors will not build this prevents waiting for solutions that will not arrive. 

The Core Reason 

ERP vendors build features that work identically for thousands of companies, but effective exception handling requires company-specific decision rules, communication styles, and escalation criteria that cannot be standardized across customers. 

The business model mismatch explains why this capability remains outside vendor product roadmaps. 

What ERP Vendors Build Well 

Standardizable Features 

ERP vendors excel at features that work the same way for all customers: 

Transaction processing: Invoice creation, payment application, order fulfillment follow identical workflows across companies. 

Reporting: Aged receivables reports, financial statements, inventory reports have standard definitions and formats. 

Workflow routing: Approval chains based on amount thresholds or department hierarchies use common patterns. 

Integration: API access to customer data, transactions, and master records serves all customers similarly. 

These features justify development investment because one implementation serves thousands of customers. Each customer benefits from the same code. 

Why Exception Handling Differs 

Decision Rules Are Company-Specific 

AR collections prioritization varies dramatically: 

Company A: Contact accounts over $10,000 first regardless of days overdue, then focus on 60+ days regardless of amount 

Company B: Contact all accounts at 35 days first, escalate 45+ days to controller, never contact accounts under $500 

Company C: Contact repeat offenders immediately at 30 days, give first-time overdue accounts until 50 days, prioritize industry-specific customers 

Company D: Prioritize by payment history score combining days overdue, broken commitments, dispute history, and relationship value 

ERP vendor cannot build feature that handles all four approaches without configuration so complex it requires custom development for each customer. At that point, it is consulting service, not product feature. 

Communication Style Is Company-Specific 

Collection call scripts vary by company culture: 

Formal approach: "This is Jane calling from Acme Corporation accounts receivable department regarding invoice 12345 dated January 15 for $5,432 which remains unpaid beyond terms." 

Relationship approach: "Hi Mike, this is Jane from Acme. I am following up on the January invoice. Is there anything preventing payment?" 

Direct approach: "This is Jane from Acme following up on your overdue payment. When can we expect payment?" 

Consultative approach: "Hi Mike, Jane from Acme. I noticed your January payment has not arrived. Is everything okay? How can we help resolve this?" 

Companies have established communication styles reflecting brand, culture, and customer relationships. ERP vendor cannot dictate communication approach. 

Escalation Criteria Are Company-Specific 

When to escalate to humans varies: 

Company A: Escalate any dispute, any request for extended payment terms, any hostile response, VIP customers always 

Company B: Escalate disputes over $5,000, payment plans exceeding 90 days, attorney threats, customers with strategic relationships 

Company C: Handle all disputes under $2,000 systematically through agent, escalate complex situations only, VIP status determined by account manager 

Company D: Risk-based escalation considering customer financial health, payment history, relationship value, and industry conditions 

These reflect company-specific risk tolerance, relationship strategy, and resource allocation. ERP vendor cannot standardize escalation logic. 

The Product Development Economics 

Development Cost vs. Revenue 

Standardized feature: 

• Development cost: $500,000-$2M 

• Serves: 1,000-5,000 customers without customization 

• Revenue potential: Subscription upgrade or included in base 

• Economics: Development cost recoverable across customer base 

Exception handling automation: 

• Development cost: $500,000-$2M for base capability 

• Customization required: $50,000-$100,000 per customer for rules, scripts, workflows 

• Serves: Each customer requires unique configuration 

• Economics: Becomes consulting service, not scalable product 

ERP vendors maximize revenue through features serving many customers without customization. Exception handling requires too much customization to be profitable product feature. 

Maintenance Burden 

Standardized features: 

• One codebase serves all customers 

• Bug fixes apply universally 

• Updates deploy to everyone 

• Testing covers standard workflows 

Customized features: 

• Each customer has unique configuration 

• Bug fixes may require customer-specific testing 

• Updates risk breaking customizations 

• Support burden increases exponentially with customization 

ERP vendors avoid features requiring ongoing custom support per customer. 

What ERP Vendors Provide Instead 

Platform Capabilities 

Vendors provide building blocks that enable exception automation: 

APIs: Data access to customers, invoices, payments, activity logs 

Webhooks: Event notifications when exceptions occur 

Custom fields: Storage for agent-generated data 

Workflow engine: Routing and escalation capabilities 

These platform capabilities enable third-party solutions without requiring vendor to customize exception handling for each customer. 

Marketplace Ecosystem 

Vendors encourage third-party solutions through marketplace or partner programs: 

Acumatica Marketplace: Third-party apps including specialized automation 

NetSuite SuiteApp: Partner solutions for specific industries or processes 

Dynamics AppSource: Independent software vendor solutions 

SAP App Center: Partner applications extending capabilities 

This model lets vendors provide customer choice without bearing customization burden. 

The Historical Pattern 

Previous Automation Waves 

This pattern repeats with each automation technology: 

RPA (2015-2020): Customers asked: "Why doesn't our ERP vendor build RPA into the product?"  

Answer: RPA automates customer-specific workflows that vary too much to standardize.  

Outcome: RPA vendors emerged as separate market. 

Workflow Automation (2010-2015): Customers asked: "Why doesn't our ERP include advanced workflow?"  

Answer: Each company's approval processes differ significantly.  

Outcome: Workflow tools remained separate products or required heavy ERP customization. 

EDI Integration (2000-2010): Customers asked: "Why doesn't our ERP handle EDI natively?"  

Answer: Trading partner requirements vary by relationship and industry.  

Outcome: EDI specialists emerged as separate service providers. 

The current AI agent pattern follows the same trajectory. 

When Vendors Do Build 

Vendors build automation features when: 

Sufficient standardization emerges: If 70%+ of customers use identical rules and scripts, vendor economics improve 

Regulatory requirements mandate capability: Compliance features get built because all customers need identical functionality 

Competitive pressure threatens core business: If customers switch vendors for missing capability, development gets prioritized 

Exception handling does not meet these criteria. Rules remain too varied across customers. 

The Partnership Model 

How It Works 

ERP vendor provides: Platform capabilities (APIs, data access, custom fields) 

Implementation partner provides: Exception handling configuration customized to your business rules 

AI platform providers provide: Underlying AI and voice capabilities 

Customer owns: Decision rules, communication scripts, escalation logic 

This separation of concerns lets each party focus on their expertise without forcing ERP vendor to become AI services company. 

What This Means for You 

Do Not Wait 

If your strategy is "wait for vendor to build this," you will wait indefinitely. Exception handling will not become standard ERP feature in foreseeable future. 

Evaluate Partnerships 

Look for implementation partners experienced with your ERP platform. They know the APIs, understand integration patterns, and can deliver faster than generalist AI consultants. 

Maintain Flexibility 

Avoid solutions that lock you into proprietary platforms. Use partners who build on standard AI platforms and maintain your ability to change implementation partners if needed. 

Own Your Rules 

Your decision rules, communication scripts, and escalation logic are intellectual property reflecting your business strategy. Ensure these remain your property regardless of implementation partner. 

The Reality 

ERP vendors build standardizable features serving thousands of customers with minimal customization. Exception handling requires company-specific rules, communication styles, and escalation criteria that cannot be standardized profitably. 

This is not vendor limitation. This is business model reality. Waiting for vendor to build exception handling means perpetual manual coordination while exception volume grows. 

The pathway forward is implementation partnership using ERP platform capabilities, not waiting for vendor product evolution that will not occur. 

About the Author 

This content is published by ERP AI Agent, a consulting practice specializing in AI agents for mid-market ERP exception processes. 

Published: January 2025 Last Updated: January 2025 Reading Time: 7 minutes