Anybody using MCE experiencing tons of misery? This tool seems to be trying to fix things that weren’t broken and not fixing the things that were. It just seems to be inflexible, poorly implemented and just breaks new things and makes even more things so many roles in GSCs these days, and it becomes almost impossible to correct anything. What are others experiencing?
11 replies (most recent on top)
Le processus est inapplicable pour les marketing locaux. Oubliez toute extension locale =objectif du global de reduction des création atteint. BRAVO
Didn't 3M bring in McKinsey or Kearney to help design this system?
It's the gift that keeps on giving (for the consultants) who get paid to come in and fix their own broken system.
It is in 3M's DNA to engineer high complex, unstable systems that require massive amounts of upkeep and are highly prone to errors. I never fully trust any data stream I need to do my daily job because there is always a link that's broken or a flag that's set incorrectly that causes data fouling. Glad 3M doesn't design airplanes or rockets or anything like that.
Way too complex and difficult to use. It feels all encompassing but useful if it could be modified to be more situational or flexible. If not, it makes cycle times and user experience poor - keep working on it and maybe roll out AFTER it is ready for production. Roll out feels similar to SAP, eh
Just another tool designed by a tool. Nearly 40 steps to release one sku. Wtf. 8-10 weeks to release a sku if you're lucky. Just another disappointment and delay to drive customers to competition.
@Post IDwta+1rSRo9FC - when you say "customer" input, are you referring to external customers, because if not, I can attest that it was built based on the requirements from the businesses. The resources within the businesses that were assigned to the project were assigned by their business leaders to be the best resources to represent their business needs. Was not a small group w/ tribal knowledge. Had it been, it would have been a lot less complex and much, much cheaper to build.
It does a lot more than MICAW but also takes a long time to complete
Seems a little concerning that that a small group with tribal knowledge built or implemented with a reluctance for its customers to provide input? I hear maybe that is happening now, but feels too late. I hope it is fixable because we need to get materials created faster. Our customers experience greater speed and accuracy elsewhere, and it is logical to ask why 3M can’t compete
As part of the design team, I can tell you that MCE is over-engineered and this is primarily due to the "uniqueness" of the businesses. So called business requirements were never-ending and ever-changing. Areas that were not paying for it were also allowed to determine requirements - which should have never been allowed. However, the build was also single-threaded through a few "experts" that did not want anyone with ideas or expertise to be in their sandbox. It will be very difficult, if not impossible at some point, to sustain the application.
It is a joke so far, but trying to reserve judgement on if it can work well a little longer……….not really sure when to declare it an inferior MICAW, but getting closer by the day
It is definitely confusing compared to MICAW. Many fields display, but only limited fields editable. I think it show too much noise (irrelevant information for the task being reviewed). It also seems to be all or nothing, so when there are mistakes it is always a start over solution which slows everything down. Poor training, slow process, little support or resources— MICAW was better simply because of speed, accuracy and flexibility. MCE seems like classic 3M, fix something to make it worse, then executives have the ego to keep doubling down and expanding first with a fix it later attitude. Yet another way to speed up the decline