Manufacturing and industrial
The defining feature is an ERP or production system that is a decade or more old, is deeply embedded, and cannot realistically be replaced. Almost all the useful work is in what surrounds it.
The typical estate
- 01
ERP
Long-lived, heavily customised, and the thing every other system needs to agree with.
- 02
Production and shop-floor systems
Operating on a different lifecycle, a different network, and a different risk model to the office estate.
- 03
Site networks and connectivity
Multiple plants, often with connectivity that predates any current architecture.
- 04
Supplier and customer integration
EDI, portals and file drops accumulated one trading relationship at a time.
- 05
Quality, compliance and traceability
Records that must be producible years later, frequently held in the least modern system present.
Where it strains.
- The boundary between operational and office technology is where the real risk sits, and it is usually undocumented.
- ERP cannot be replaced, so integration debt accumulates around it instead.
- Individual sites solve their own problems, and the estate diverges plant by plant.
- Machine and process data exists but rarely reaches anyone who could act on it.
The line cannot stop
Every architectural decision in this sector is constrained by the fact that production continues. That rules out approaches that assume a maintenance window, and it makes reversibility a functional requirement rather than an engineering preference.
What Ferrafox would take on.
- An integration layer around the ERP rather than a project to replace it
- Network architecture and a deliberate operational/office boundary
- Supplier and customer connection points, built once instead of per relationship
- Site connectivity, monitoring and the identity estate across plants and contractors
Tell us what your organization runs on.
The first conversation is about the environment as it stands today: what exists, what it costs to keep running, and where responsibility currently sits.