Industry Trends

AI in ERP

ERP Strategy

Our Convictions for 2026 in ERP Transformation

by
Marino Kurtović
January 2, 2026

How AI, Governance Pressure, and Delivery Economics Will Reshape SAP and Broader ERP Programs

ERP transformations are entering a structural break. The 2020–2025 playbook—heavy discovery, workshop-centric alignment, manual documentation, and "train-the-users-at-the-end" change management—will not survive 2026's combined pressures: constrained transformation budgets, talent scarcity, compliance scrutiny, and accelerating AI capability.¹

This article presents Qorelo's three convictions for 2026. We argue that the primary unit of progress will shift from meetings to auditable deliverables, that adoption will be treated as a measured operational outcome rather than a training activity, and that "ERP transformation" will increasingly behave like a continuous operating system rather than a one-off program. We outline the theoretical lens behind each conviction, why we believe it is already unfolding, what it implies for leaders, and why Qorelo is building directly into this future.

Introduction: Why 2026 Is Different

ERP programs have always been complex, but complexity used to be "priced in." In 2026, that changes. Boards and CFOs are no longer funding transformation overhead as a blank check; they are funding outcomes—faster cycle times, better working capital, compliant controls, and measurable adoption. Meanwhile, AI has crossed a threshold where it can reliably produce structured outputs from unstructured inputs—if it is constrained by domain rules, governance, and traceability.

Our view is simple: the transformation bottleneck is no longer configuration capacity. It is discovery throughput and decision latency. The organizations that win in 2026 will compress the distance between stakeholder intent and execution-grade artifacts—without sacrificing control.

How We Formed These Convictions

This is not a forecast built on novelty. It is built on recurring patterns we see across ERP transformations:

  1. Where time really goes: Consolidation, rewriting, chasing alignment, re-running workshops, and reconstructing context lost between phases
  2. Where risk concentrates: Undocumented decisions, unclear process ownership, weak role clarity, inconsistent fit–gap rationale, and non-auditable handovers
  3. Where value is delayed: Adoption and behavioral change, not technical cutover

We turn those observations into three bold claims.

Conviction 1 (Louis Schmidlin): ERP Transformation Pricing Will Shift From Daily Rates to Outcome-Based Contracts

Theoretical Framework: Transformation as an Information Supply Chain

In most ERP programs, discovery produces "raw material," while delivery requires "finished goods." When the conversion from raw material to finished goods is slow or inconsistent, programs accumulate inventory, increase rework, and delay downstream execution.

The key implication is commercial: once outputs can be standardized, counted, reviewed, and traced, transformation can be priced like production—by units of value delivered, not by time spent.²

Why We Believe This

In 2026, consultancies will face an uncomfortable reality: the market is no longer willing to pay a premium for "presence." It will pay for progress.

  • CFO scrutiny increases: Daily-rate burn without tangible weekly outputs will become harder to defend
  • Delivery capacity is constrained: Talent is scarce, so wasting senior time in low-yield workshops becomes economically irrational
  • AI raises the baseline: When the market knows that synthesis work can be accelerated, tolerance for slow manual throughput collapses
  • Governance demands evidence: Auditability, traceability, and decision logs move from "nice-to-have" to expectation

Conviction: In 2026, ERP transformation pricing will increasingly move from day-rate / time-and-materials to outcome-based pricing—and consultancies will feel direct pressure to prove quality and throughput.

What "Outcome-Based" Means in Practice

This is not vague "value pricing." It becomes concrete and testable:

  • Fixed price for the Solution Proposal
  • Fixed price per user story with predefined acceptance criteria
  • Fixed price for integrating a specific module, contingent on successful user adoption metrics

The outcome is that delivery organizations must operationalize quality: standard formats, review workflows, versioning, and measurable throughput—because those become the basis for commercial trust.

How Qorelo Plays Into This

Qorelo is designed for a world where transformation must be priced and governed by deliverables. We convert scattered discovery inputs into execution-grade outputs with traceability back to source material, so progress is visible and reviewable, not anecdotal.

Conviction 2 (Nicholas Torabi): Explore Will Collapse Into a Deliverables-First Operating Model

Theoretical Framework: Transformation as an Information Supply Chain

In most ERP programs, discovery creates "raw material" (notes, transcripts, emails, BRDs, workshop outputs). Delivery requires "finished goods" (requirements, fit–gap decisions, process flows, backlog items, test cases). The failure mode is the same as in any supply chain: if you cannot convert raw material into standardized outputs quickly and consistently, you build inventory (meetings), increase rework (repeat workshops), and delay shipments (build).³

Why We Believe This

In 2026, the economics of discovery become intolerable:

  • Workshop time is expensive: Senior stakeholders, consultants, process owners—yet the output is often non-standard and non-reusable
  • Decision latency compounds: Every week of delayed fit–gap and process alignment pushes design, build, testing, and adoption
  • Leadership attention is scarce: Programs that require repeated alignment rituals will lose internal sponsorship

Bold claim: By end of 2026, high-performing ERP programs will treat "workshops" as a last resort—not a default. They will run fewer meetings, but produce more deliverables per week.

How Qorelo Plays Into This

Qorelo is built around a deliverables-first doctrine: convert scattered discovery inputs into execution-grade outputs with traceability back to sources. That means:

  • Turning transcripts, MoMs, and documents into structured requirements and decisions
  • Producing fit–gap logs and mappings aligned to ERP best practices
  • Generating Signavio/BPMN-ready process flows that are consistent and reviewable
  • Standardizing outputs so that handover from Explore to Build stops being a reinvention exercise

Conviction 3 (Marino Kurtovic): AI Will Be Allowed Into ERP Delivery Only Under "Enterprise-Grade Control"—And That Will Redefine the Toolchain

Theoretical Framework: AI as a Regulated Production System

AI is not a feature; it is a production capability. In ERP, production capabilities must satisfy enterprise constraints:

  • Data security and privacy boundaries
  • Access controls and least privilege
  • Traceability and audit logs
  • Deterministic output formats and review workflows
  • Versioning and governance over "what changed" and "why"

The organizations that treat AI as a controlled production system will scale it. Those who treat it as a generic assistant will keep it in experimentation.

Why We Believe This

Two forces collide in 2026:

  1. AI capability rises (especially in parsing unstructured inputs and generating structured artifacts)
  2. Governance pressure rises (security, procurement scrutiny, audit readiness, and model risk management)

Bold claim: The winning AI in ERP will not be the model with the best prose. It will be the system with the best control plane: permissions, traceability, output standards, integration into delivery workflows, and defensible governance.

How Qorelo Plays Into This

Qorelo is engineered to be compatible with enterprise delivery realities:

  • Structured outputs designed for ERP delivery artifacts (requirements, fit–gap, process flows)
  • Traceability to inputs to support review and audit
  • A workflow that is compatible with consulting and in-house governance models
  • Integration-ready posture for the tools where work actually lives (process modeling, ALM/backlogs, knowledge repositories)

What This Means for ERP Leaders in 2026

If these convictions hold, the practical guidance is clear:

  1. Manage discovery as a production system: Define standard outputs, review checkpoints, and throughput targets
  2. Instrument adoption early: Decide what "adoption success" means in operational metrics, not slideware
  3. Choose AI with governance, not hype: Demand traceability, standardization, and integration into your delivery toolchain
  4. Reduce meeting inventory: Fewer workshops, more artifacts, faster decisions, tighter feedback loops

Closing Thesis

2026 will be remembered as the year ERP transformations stopped being primarily a coordination problem and started becoming an artifact and execution problem. The organizations that win will convert stakeholder intent into auditable deliverables faster than everyone else—and they will treat adoption as an operational KPI, not an afterthought. That is the future Qorelo is building for.

References

  1. Sunyaev, A., et al. (2023). The Future of Enterprise Information Systems. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65(6), 731.
  2. Nalam, S. M. V. (2025). Event-Driven Architecture: The Backbone of Real-Time Enterprise Integration. International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering, 11(4).
  3. Franceschetto, S., et al. (2023). Improving Supply Chain in the Automotive Industry With the Right Bill of Material Configuration. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 51(1), 214.
  4. Navneet, S. K., & Chandra, J. (2025). Rethinking Autonomy: Preventing Failures in AI-Driven Software Engineering. arXiv.