Every major business project carries a degree of risk. For Keim, a fourth-generation family-owned company with a proud history of exceptional customer service and deep ties to our Amish community, our decision several years ago to upgrade our enterprise resource planning (ERP) system felt more like a mandate than a choice; our former system was soon to be obsolete. Unfortunately, after two months of struggling with the new system, we decided to go back to our former system. While on the surface it was a failure, it became a powerful, if expensive, learning tool.

Keim is a distribution, manufacturing, and retail destination for the building industry. We are a company built on a foundation of trust, customer service, and a unique cultural identity shaped by our predominantly Old Order Amish workforce. Because of the ways in which we are unique, we have a special relationship with our customers. Out of 872 business-to-business customer satisfaction surveys returned in 2024, Keim achieved a 100% overall satisfaction score.

A key part of our success comes from the strong sense of responsibility our employees carry. We’ve done StrengthsFinder assessments with 160 employees, and 66% score high in “responsibility,” compared to a national average of 19%. That sense of accountability and follow-through is embedded in everything we do. We are very proud of our ability to take care of our customers well in ways that often defy conventional business practices. I like to tell people, Keim is where best practices go to die. Of course we do implement some best practices, but we simply operate on a different level of customer care and employee engagement, and that makes us a tough match for cookie-cutter solutions. This is important context for the story of our recent ERP initiative.

When Keim embarked on our ERP project, the project was driven by our desire to modernize and streamline operations. Just like any other company ready to take this step, we began the process of investigating various systems, talking to various sales reps, and evaluating our options. In hindsight, this is where our problems began, because we laid aside our significantly unique identity and approached this process as if we were a typical distribution, manufacturing, and retail business. We are not!

Fairly quickly, it became clear that we had a problem. So many aspects of the implementation and training processes simply didn’t allow for the ways in which we were different from the norm. Our team put their heads down and tried their best, but it didn’t allow them to do their jobs in the way they were accustomed to doing it, and morale took a hit. They tried to be good sports and minimize complaints, but that became a problem in itself later on.

While we struggled internally to adopt new processes and norms that did not allow us to be us, we also quickly started to receive feedback from our customers that validated our impression that it was not working. Two examples really hit home for me. In the first one, a customer arrived to pick up a product that was sitting in plain sight. However, the new warehouse management System (WMS) we’d adopted with the ERP wasn’t working. Our employee couldn’t process the transaction and had to tell the customer that he’d have to return later for the product. The one that was sitting right in front of them both.

On another day, a customer came in attempting to exchange an item. We were not able to make his exchange on the spot like we would have in the past. It caused unnecessary delays, and spurred him to tell us, “You’re becoming like Walmart.” That was a knife to the heart for a company that prides itself on being the antithesis of big-box stores.

These stories and others like them spread quickly in Keim’s tight-knit community, which further damaged the company’s reputation. As a result, we began losing customers and some employees were threatening to leave. I explained the situation to my owners, the Keim’s, and they responded without hesitation “We want the company to be in the family for another 100 years, do what is best for our long-term sustainability.” So, we did the unthinkable–we shut down the ERP implementation and ate the enormous cost.

As we processed the whole fiasco in the aftermath, our missteps became glaringly clear. First and foremost, we had partnered with a software program that simply did not match our unique culture. The ERP was designed for businesses with vastly different operating models, without room for the customer care for which we were known, among other things. As we investigated options, we’d just assumed that it was up to us to change to match the programs that were out there. As we learned, burying our values was a sure recipe for disaster.

Beyond the cultural and values mismatch, we saw in hindsight that the pairing of a new ERP at the same time as the new WMS had been a mistake. It was simply too much change too fast.
Finally, because the ERP was highly technical and a bit intimidating, We expected the IT department to do the implementation work. This was also a mistake; we realized after the fact that the project must be cooperative across all departments, but led by the team whose work would be most affected, in our case the operations team.

How did we make the determination to return to our old system? In every meeting where we were discussing the situation we had our mission statement in front of the room and kept asking “Can we achieve that with the new system?” As a result, we made the decision to abandon it within weeks. We launched it in January, and by April, we were back to our old system. It was incredibly expensive, but it was the right thing to do for our customers and employees.

As we picked ourselves up and looked to the future, we decided to use the experience as a catalyst for cultural and operational change. We conducted a thorough post-mortem and developed a “theology of technology” to guide future decisions.

With our new approach, we have agreed that technology should enhance Keim’s mission, vision, and culture—not displace or diminish it. We agreed that in the future the operating divisions would partner with IT to lead technology change. We committed to pacing change at Keim, adopting a “minimum viable product” approach, testing and refining systems before full implementation. And instead of relying on a single vendor, we committed to using best-of-breed systems to retain control over processes.

Beyond technology, we had identified some cultural challenges that needed to be addressed. Many employees had been struggling with the changes but reluctant to speak up. We’ve now adopted a model we call “healthy me, strong we.” Going forward, we committed to encouraging everyone to “speak their truth” and share concerns without fear of judgment—a shift that required deep introspection and intentional development.

Armed with these lessons, we have embarked on a new ERP implementation, this time taking a phased approach over 18 months. Manufacturing was successfully transitioned last October, which was developed internally with a software partner, and the final ERP system is scheduled to go live this summer. This time, we selected a partner that allowed us to customize the program and the implementation plan to fit us, not the other way around. This time, the operating divisions led the way, determining what they needed, and as partners, IT figured out how to deliver it. We’ve also prioritized employee training and communication, setting aside other initiatives to focus on the ERP’s success.

Although most companies are not unique in the ways Keim is unique, every company is different and has a distinct culture and set of values. Based on this experience, what advice would I have going forward? First, understand how technology aligns with your values and ways of working. If there’s a mismatch, don’t force it. Next, empower those closest to the work to lead decisions. IT should support, not dictate. Third, focus on your team members’ capacity to change with grace and the collective ability of your teams to be truth-tellers. Finally, implement change incrementally to minimize risk and build confidence.

Failure is never easy, but it can be a great teacher. For us, this experience not only reshaped how we approach technology but strengthened our culture. In the end, it wasn’t just about fixing a system—it was about developing a new set of skills that will pay off for us for the next 100 years.