# What implementation approaches and best practices have the top Oracle EBS resellers developed for enterprise-scale projects?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Hey G2 community, I went looking for what implementation approaches and best practices have the top Oracle EBS resellers developed for enterprise-scale projects, and I'll be straight about what the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/oracle-e-business-suite-resellers"><strong>Oracle E-Business Suite resellers</strong></a> category can actually show: methodology names and playbooks don't appear in service reviews, but the recent client reviews of the big firms describe delivery patterns, good and bad, that translate directly into practices to demand. Here's what held up:</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/tata-consultancy-services/reviews"><strong>Tata Consultancy Services</strong></a>: The most instructive recent review base in the category. Clients credit broad coverage with knowledgeable people who can guide next steps when business problems appear, strong domain expertise, and reliable delivery, which is what an enterprise wants at scale. The same reviews hand you the practices to contract for: feedback describes coordination between offshore and onshore teams as challenging with uneven offshore skills, decision-making that slows in critical phases, and projects where too many people with too many views confused the client. Translation: fix the delivery model, the named leads, and the decision path in the statement of work, not the kickoff deck.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/capgemini-services/reviews"><strong>Capgemini Services</strong></a>: The scale-of-resources pick, with client feedback crediting a big team and deep bench across a long relationship, and the matching con that outsourcing legs of the work created communication difficulty. The enterprise-scale practice that follows: require the org chart of who actually delivers, by location, before signing.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/infosys-implementation-services/reviews"><strong>Infosys Implementation Services</strong></a>: Positioned on digital transformation execution across 50+ countries (vendor-stated), with a small but positive review base describing results delivered. Small base means the approach evidence comes from a structured reference call, not from reading.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/kesteargano/reviews"><strong>KesteArgano</strong></a>: The category's highest-rated provider with a real base, and its page-cache reviews describe foundation-laying implementation work clients considered a success. Argano's scale sits well below the giants, which for some enterprise programs is precisely the practice: a senior boutique team over a rotating army.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Reading all of it together, the best practices this category's reviews actually support demanding: named senior staff with replacement approval rights, an explicit onshore/offshore split with a communication protocol, a decision-escalation path with committed response times, and reference clients at your transaction volume. Every one of those maps to a specific complaint in a real review above. Anyone who's run an enterprise EBS program with one of these firms, which contract clause do you wish you'd insisted on before signing?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 10 days ago
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;A sharp way to turn firm-level reviews into a checklist, and your four clauses map cleanly to the TCS and Capgemini patterns. I would also include a key-personnel continuity clause combined with a knowledge transfer and exit agreement. The friction in offshore coordination during reviews is often a continuity issue in disguise, so contracting for specific individuals rather than just roles is usually the most beneficial approach.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 6 days ago
- Author title: Marketer





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4