# Oracle Fusion SCM Implementation Readiness Assessment > Source: https://netray.co/tools/oracle-fusion-scm-implementation-readiness-assessment > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer Ten questions that show whether data, process, integration and people are ready for a Fusion SCM implementation. ## Category oracle ## Erp Oracle Fusion Cloud SCM ## Audience - IT director - Program manager - Oracle Cloud consultant ## Tool **Kind:** assessment **Questions:** #### How clean is your item master data? **Help:** Duplicates, missing UOM and inconsistent descriptions slow every conversion cycle. **Options:** ##### Known duplicates and gaps, no cleansing plan **Score:** 0 ##### Cleansing planned but not started **Score:** 1 ##### Cleansing in progress with an owner **Score:** 2 ##### Cleansed and governed with ongoing rules **Score:** 3 #### Are future state processes documented? **Options:** ##### Only current state in people's heads **Score:** 0 ##### Current state documented **Score:** 1 ##### Future state drafted for key flows **Score:** 2 ##### Future state agreed with process owners **Score:** 3 #### Do you have an inventory of customizations and reports? **Options:** ##### No inventory **Score:** 0 ##### Partial list from IT **Score:** 1 ##### Full list without disposition **Score:** 2 ##### Full list with keep, replace or retire decision **Score:** 3 #### How well are integrations understood? **Options:** ##### Unknown number of interfaces **Score:** 0 ##### Listed but not described **Score:** 1 ##### Described with owners and volumes **Score:** 2 ##### Redesign approach agreed for each **Score:** 3 #### Is there a business owner for each module? **Options:** ##### No named owners **Score:** 0 ##### IT acts as owner **Score:** 1 ##### Owners named but part time **Score:** 2 ##### Owners named with allocated time **Score:** 3 #### How is data conversion planned? **Options:** ##### Not yet planned **Score:** 0 ##### Object list only **Score:** 1 ##### Plan with mock loads scheduled **Score:** 2 ##### Plan, tools, owners and reconciliation defined **Score:** 3 #### Is a security and role design approach set? **Options:** ##### Not considered **Score:** 0 ##### Copy existing responsibilities **Score:** 1 ##### Role mapping drafted **Score:** 2 ##### Role design reviewed with audit and SoD checks **Score:** 3 #### What is the test strategy? **Options:** ##### Test at the end **Score:** 0 ##### Some scripts, no owners **Score:** 1 ##### Cycles planned with scripts **Score:** 2 ##### Cycles, scripts, defect process and sign off defined **Score:** 3 #### How ready are users for change? **Options:** ##### Not informed yet **Score:** 0 ##### Announced only **Score:** 1 ##### Training plan drafted **Score:** 2 ##### Change network and training scheduled **Score:** 3 #### Is there a plan for quarterly updates after go live? **Options:** ##### No plan **Score:** 0 ##### Aware but unplanned **Score:** 1 ##### Regression scripts being collected **Score:** 2 ##### Update calendar, owners and regression pack in place **Score:** 3 **Bands:** #### Not ready **Min:** 0 **Max:** 30 **Verdict:** Foundational work is missing. Starting build now would be expensive. **Recommendations:** - Name business owners for each module - Start item master cleansing - Inventory customizations and interfaces first #### Partly ready **Min:** 31 **Max:** 60 **Verdict:** Some foundations exist but gaps in data and ownership will cause delays. **Recommendations:** - Agree future state for the top process flows - Plan mock conversion cycles early - Set a security design approach #### Mostly ready **Min:** 61 **Max:** 85 **Verdict:** You can start with managed risk. Focus on the weakest areas before design freeze. **Recommendations:** - Close gaps in test strategy and reconciliation - Confirm integration redesign for each interface - Schedule training early #### Ready **Min:** 86 **Max:** 100 **Verdict:** Strong foundations. Keep governance steady and protect owner time. **Recommendations:** - Hold regular data quality gates - Build the regression pack for quarterly updates - Rehearse cutover early ## Content **Intro:** Most Oracle Fusion SCM delays come from data, ownership and integration surprises, not from configuration. This quick assessment shows where you stand across the factors that decide timelines. **Sections:** #### How to use the assessment **Body:** Answer honestly for the module scope you are implementing. Have the program manager, a business owner and an IT lead answer separately and compare, since differences between their answers are themselves a finding. The result gives a band and a list of actions. Export it to PDF for your steering committee. #### What is scored **Body:** Ten factors are equally weighted: item data quality, future state process, customization inventory, integrations, business ownership, conversion planning, security design, test strategy, change readiness and update planning. Each is scored zero to three. The percentage places you in one of four bands. **Bullets:** - Data and integration questions predict schedule risk - Ownership questions predict decision speed - Update planning predicts life after go live #### Reading and acting on the result **Body:** A low score is a reason to fix foundations, not to cancel. Pick the two lowest scoring areas and assign an owner and date. Retake the assessment after four to six weeks. Remember it is a self assessment, so treat bands as directional, and compare against your implementation partner's own readiness review. **Cta:** If your result shows data or integration gaps, we can help scope cleansing and show how private AI assists with reconciliation and report rebuilds. **Faq:** #### Is this specific to manufacturing? **Answer:** It is written for SCM and manufacturing programs, but most factors apply to any Fusion Cloud implementation. Manufacturers should weight item data, work definitions and shop floor integrations heavily. #### How accurate is the score? **Answer:** It is a directional self assessment, not an audit. Its value comes from conversation across roles and from a ranked list of weaknesses, not from the exact percentage. #### Who should answer? **Answer:** Ideally three people: a business process owner, an IT lead and the program manager. Disagreement among them highlights hidden risk, which is often more informative than the total score. #### Can I use it for a phased rollout? **Answer:** Yes. Run it per wave. Early waves often score well on ownership but poorly on integration, and later waves reverse this as the team gains experience. ## Search terms oracle fusion implementation readiness, oracle cloud scm readiness assessment, erp readiness assessment oracle, oracle fusion project risk, oracle cloud implementation checklist, oracle fusion scm go live readiness, oracle fusion manufacturing readiness, oracle erp cloud assessment --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json