---
title: "Waiting since 2012: shaping a CRM or an ERP | SalexHub"
description: "What businesses ask for when they shape a CRM or an ERP to their work, read from 33 sources: lines across documents, upgrades, limits and AI."
url: "https://salexhub.com/research/waiting-since-2012"
kind: "Review"
area: "Operations"
published: "2026-11-13"
author: "SalexHub"
---

# Waiting since 2012

One delivery holds lines of several orders, an invoice comes in parts, a change has to survive the next version. A reading of 33 sources on what people ask vendors for, and what they wait years for.

[Research](https://salexhub.com/research.md) · Review · [Operations](https://salexhub.com/research/operations.md) · 13 November 2026

Method: 33 sources read on 13 November 2026: 17 public request boards, forums, trackers and threads with their counts and dates, 8 vendors' own documents, 4 official sources, 3 surveys and 1 peer-reviewed study.

The question: What do people need when they shape a CRM or an ERP to their own company, and where do today's products fail them?

Almost nobody runs a business on software exactly as it ships. In a consultancy's poll of ERP projects, 12% of respondents had changed nothing in theirs [1]. The rest add fields and kinds of record, change how documents follow one another, and then live with what that costs at every new version.

We read 33 sources for what people ask for when they shape the system, and where they are refused. Seventeen are the places where they ask in public: vendors' idea boards and forums, the issue trackers and add-on store of open products, and practitioners' threads, each with its counts and dates as the page showed them on 13 November 2026. Eight are vendors' own documents on limits, prices and upgrades. Four are official sources, three are surveys and one is a peer-reviewed study. A vote is not a sample: it counts the people who found the board and cared enough to click. So we read the counts for order and for age, and say where one product's board is all the evidence there is.

## Key findings

- **What people ask for most is to change how records relate, and the largest asks are the slowest to arrive.** Of the ten most voted customization ideas on one CRM vendor's board, six were delivered only in part and two are marked not planned. The most voted of all, posted in 2006 with 125,570 points, is marked delivered in part, in a release of 2023 [2].
- **The work links lines; the software links documents.** The best-selling add-on that merges deliveries and receipts of several orders in one ERP's store shows 271 purchases. A down-payment add-on shows 202 and progress billing 136 [3].
- **Money in parts waits longest.** On an accounting vendor's board, deposits on invoices have been asked for since March 2012 and progress payments since October 2012, with 516 and 252 votes. Both are still in development [4].
- **Customization is paid for at every upgrade.** In one open-source ERP's community, 52.4% of 2,481 modules had been moved to the newest annual version one year after it came out [5]. The vendor's own terms say a database with custom modules cannot be upgraded until they are [6].
- **Limits are priced, and the price is often hidden.** One vendor lists extra database capacity at USD 40.00 per GB a month [7]. Another allows between one and fifteen lookup fields per module in its paid editions, depending on which [8].
- **People will let AI act when a person can still correct it.** In a 47-country survey of 48,340 people, 84% said they would trust an AI system more if a person can correct, override or challenge what it does [9].
- **On the phone, the first ask is to work without a connection.** The top request of a work-management vendor's mobile board, with 4,432 votes, asks for offline use. It was posted in December 2020, and offline creation shipped in 2026 [10].

## Who changes the system, and why?

**An owner, someone in operations, a partner and, less often, a developer. And the reasons are not only missing functions.** A study of two companies that changed their ERP package recorded reasons well beyond a missing function. Some functions were absent. But the companies also wanted documents to look right to outsiders, fewer staff hours on daily work, and to keep "existing ways of work that were perceived of value" [11].

The same split shows in practitioners' threads. In a long discussion among people who build and run ERP systems, a consultant called customization the most important thing about one, beyond adding fields: overriding how cost or price is worked out. The owner of a manufacturer said he wrote his own order system because nothing fit. Others said management prefers a bounded, predictable way to customize to open-ended changes to the code [12].

Most of that work is bought. A consultancy's poll of 342 people who ran ERP projects between March 2016 and February 2017 found that 74% went over budget [1]. In the catalogue where UK public bodies buy implementation services, the rate cards of twelve suppliers price a business architect at GBP 650 to GBP 1,337 a day in the United Kingdom and GBP 180 to GBP 855 offshore [13]. One ERP vendor sells its own consultants' hours in packs from 25 hours for USD 2,400 to 200 hours for USD 15,000 [14].

What decides whether it works is not always the money. Asked to price a construction company's rollout, a member of one open-source ERP's forum answered that "successful deployments need an evangelist inside the company"; failed rollouts, he wrote, had handed a specification to an outside developer with nobody inside who understood the system [15].

## What do people ask for most?

**To change how records relate to each other, and to have numbers that follow those relations.** The largest board we read belongs to a CRM vendor and holds ideas back to 2006. Among its 50 most voted ideas of all time, ten are about shaping the system itself. Six were delivered only in part, two are marked not planned, and two were delivered in full [2].

**Figure 1. Of the ten largest asks to shape the system, two were delivered in full**

The customization ideas among the 50 most voted on one CRM vendor's board, by points and by what was delivered

| Measure | Group | Value |
| --- | --- | --- |
| A list of options shared by many fields | Delivered in full | 44,790 |
| Where a field is used | Delivered in full | 36,840 |
| Rules that show, hide or require fields by their data | Delivered in part, or not planned | 125,570 |
| Roll-ups with formulas, not fixed criteria | Delivered in part, or not planned | 76,290 |
| Shared option lists for existing fields (not planned) | Delivered in part, or not planned | 61,190 |
| Roll-ups across any kind of link | Delivered in part, or not planned | 60,290 |
| A button shown by profile (not planned) | Delivered in part, or not planned | 45,700 |
| Formatting of a field by its value | Delivered in part, or not planned | 38,700 |
| Tabs shown by condition | Delivered in part, or not planned | 37,960 |
| Fields of related records on a page | Delivered in part, or not planned | 35,520 |

Points on the vendor's idea board, read on 13 November 2026, for the ten ideas in its category for customization and app building among the 50 most voted of all time. Status as the board shows it; ideas marked delivered in part count as not delivered in full [2]. Points are votes, not a sample of customers.

The same requests appear on every board, in that product's own words. A person linked to more than one company: 64,360 points on the first board, delivered in 2016, nine years after it was posted [2]; 1,249 votes on a second CRM's board [16]; 123 likes on a third [17]. More lookup fields than the edition allows: 87 likes, posted in March 2015 and raised in July 2024 [17]. A value copied from a parent record that goes stale when the parent changes: 80 likes on one board and 82 votes on another, both open [17, 18].

Formulas and roll-ups come next, and the complaint is that they are not current. A request that formulas recalculate without the record being edited drew 182 likes and 150 comments before it was delivered [17]. One vendor's documentation explains why such complaints arise: a roll-up column is first calculated 12 hours after it is created, then by a job that runs at most hourly, with 50 roll-ups to a table [19].

- **Seeing what another person sees** The most liked idea of all 2,756 on one CRM board, 386 likes, asks that an administrator can see the system as a given user does. It was posted in March 2015 and is still marked as being worked on [17]. A second vendor's board has the same request twice, with 92 and 85 votes [18].
- **Copying what was built** On the same CRM board, cloning a whole kind of record has 192 likes and has been parked since 2019 [17]. On one open-source database, copying a built base to another installation is the most reacted issue, with 81 reactions [20].

## Why do lines matter more than documents?

**Because goods, work and money move by the line, and most software links whole documents.** A box arrives with twenty positions: five belong to one order, five to a second, ten to a third. The receipt is one document, and each of its lines answers to a line of a different order. The same happens on the way out, when one delivery or one invoice gathers lines of several orders, and in reverse, when one order is split across suppliers, warehouses or dates.

Where a product creates one delivery per order, people buy the rest. In one open-source ERP's add-on store, a search for merging deliveries and receipts returns 32 add-ons, and the best-selling shows 271 purchases at USD 13.40. Invoicing from deliveries returns 33, merging invoices 50 and merging purchase orders 63 [3]. The community that maintains free modules for the same product keeps modules to group deliveries of several orders, to invoice by delivery, and to link each invoice line to the delivery it came from [5].

**Figure 2. Joining and splitting lines is bought as an add-on**

Purchases of the best-selling add-on for each ability, in one open-source ERP's add-on store

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Merge deliveries and receipts of several orders | 271 |
| Down payments on purchase orders | 202 |
| Invoice from a delivery | 149 |
| Progress billing | 136 |
| Returns against an order | 122 |
| Merge invoices | 97 |
| Merge purchase orders | 90 |
| Split a sales order | 48 |
| Revise a quotation | 34 |
| Invoice from timesheets | 30 |

The store's own purchase counter of the best-selling add-on among the first results of each search, read on 13 November 2026; prices of these add-ons ran from USD 10.72 to USD 55.83 [3]. A purchase counts a sale, not a need, and the core product may do part of some of these.

Where a product can combine documents, the complaint moves to the line. On the same ERP's forum, a thread asking how to invoice lines of several orders has 17,288 views [21]. In another thread there, a customer refused a single invoice for ten deliveries until each line showed the number of its delivery note [21]. And an accounting vendor's board asks for the customer's purchase order number on invoices (220 votes) and on bills (176) [4].

Splitting fails at the same place. Asked how to drop-ship part of one order line, a forum answer was blunt: "The shipping address is PO level and not PO line" [21]. On another open-source ERP, three threads posted from 2018 to 2023 say the same, and the advice is to split the line in two [15]. On a third vendor's board, a request about the order in which drop-shipped documents are posted has 184 votes and has been under review since January 2019 [18].

- **Closing what is left of one line** A request to bill the quantity received instead of the quantity ordered, and close the order, has 43 comments and has been under review since August 2017; the vendor's reply that year was that it had no immediate plans to change the flow [22]. Another vendor answered a 54-vote request to close a partly shipped order that it is not on the roadmap [18].
- **Returns and credit against chosen lines** Returning goods and crediting money are often two acts, and people want each tied to the line it undoes. An add-on for returns shows 122 purchases at USD 55.83 [3], and the free modules include one to credit only chosen lines of an invoice [5].
- **A quote that changes, and a quote taken in part** How to revise a quotation has 30,421 views on one forum since 2013, and 27 paid add-ons answer it [21, 3]. Copying part of a quote to an invoice has waited since September 2015, with 124 votes [4].
- **Hours and expenses that become invoice lines** Assigning purchase order lines to a project has 622 votes and was accepted in 2017, with no date given [4]. Turning timesheets into invoice lines has been an open request on one open-source tracker since 2021 [23].

Substitution, delivering another item in place of the one ordered, is the one case with little demand on record: no request we found had more than eight reactions or votes [23, 18].

## What happens when the money comes in parts?

**It waits the longest of anything we read, and it is where industry differs most.** On an accounting vendor's board, deposits on invoices have been asked for since March 2012 (516 votes) and progress payments since October 2012 (252 votes); the vendor reports deposits live in six countries and fuller progress billing not yet covered [4]. On an ERP vendor's board, invoicing a job in stages of 30%, 30% and 40% has 136 votes and no reply since 2019, and a request for more than one prepayment invoice per order was answered that it is not on the roadmap [18]. A third vendor parks progressive invoicing as maybe later [22].

**Figure 3. Requests about lines and money in parts wait for years**

Years each request had been open on 13 November 2026, on three vendors' idea boards

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Deposits on invoices (in development) | 14.6 years |
| Progress payments on invoices (in development) | 14.1 years |
| Copy part of a quote to an invoice (submitted) | 11.2 years |
| Bill what was received, not what was ordered (under review) | 9.3 years |
| Purchase order lines to a project (accepted, no date) | 8.9 years |
| Order of posting for drop shipments (under review) | 7.9 years |
| Invoice a job in stages (needs votes) | 7 years |

From the date each request was posted to 13 November 2026, our arithmetic, with the status the board showed that day [4, 22, 18]. On one board the date is the earliest on the idea's page, which may be the date it was first posted on an older forum.

Construction shows why. A standard pay application, as a US architects' institute publishes it, carries the contract sum, the work completed and the materials stored to date, the retainage, the previous payments and the change orders, line by line against a schedule of values, and an architect certifies the amount before the owner pays [24]. It is a cumulative document, not an ordinary invoice.

Retention, the part of each payment held back until the work is done, follows rules that differ by country and change. US federal fixed-price construction contracts allow at most 10% to be retained while progress is unsatisfactory [25]. In a 2016 survey for the UK government, contractors reported an average retention of 4.8% of contract value, and 71% of those with retentions held had been paid them late [26]. In July 2026 the UK government proposed to ban deducting and withholding retention payments in construction contracts [27].

This is also where the add-ons cost most. In one open-source ERP's store, progress billing returns 70 add-ons; a job-costing invoice add-on sells at USD 308.15 with 94 purchases, and a contracting bundle at USD 2,778.97 with 66 [3].

## Where does a shaped system break?

**At the next version.** In the one ecosystem where it can be counted, every annual version of an open-source ERP opens between 178 and 231 migration issues, one per repository, and between 2,955 and 4,270 pull requests that each move one module [5]. Two years after one version, 82.7% of the modules listed for it had been moved; one year after the next, 52.4% [5].

**Figure 4. A year after a new version, half the community's modules had been moved to it**

Share of the modules listed for an annual version that had been moved to it, in one open-source ERP's community

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Version 19, about one year after | 52.4% |
| Version 18, about two years after | 82.7% |

Ticked boxes in the community's migration tracking issues, one issue per repository, read on 13 November 2026: 1,299 of 2,481 modules for version 19 and 2,141 of 2,590 for version 18, our arithmetic. A ticked box means a move was merged or claimed under that repository's practice [5].

The vendor's own documents put the rule plainly: a database with custom modules cannot be upgraded until a version of those modules exists, and the maintenance of customer-specific code is charged per 100 lines a month [6, 28]. A paid industry add-on in its store states its own maintenance estimate, USD 492.00 a month [3]. Outside that ecosystem the evidence is threads. On another open-source ERP's forum, one upgrade stopped because a field already held data of another type, and another because existing data broke a new rule that values be unique [15].

**At the limits, and at their price.** One vendor lists extra database capacity at USD 40.00 per GB a month, and the most voted idea on its platform board, 204 votes, asked not to pay for the storage of system tables the customer cannot control [7, 18]. Another vendor's editions allow no lookup fields on the free edition and up to fifteen per module on the top one, roll-ups only in the upper editions and a test copy of the system only in the top two [8]. In an open-source ERP, a form refused new fields after about fifty custom ones, and deleting fields did not free the space [15].

- **Testing before it goes live** Where a test environment exists, people ask for more of them, for copies with masked data and for a clean way to move a model between them: 53 votes for a copy with randomized data, under review since 2019 [18].
- **Undoing a change** Rolling back a deployed extension has 88 votes on an ERP board [18]. Undoing a lead conversion was refused on a CRM board [17]. No board we read offers a general way to undo a change to the configuration.
- **Knowing where a field is used** On the largest CRM board, "where is this field used" drew 36,840 points before it was delivered [2]. Elsewhere it shows only as a symptom: people who cannot delete an object because they cannot find what depends on it [18].
- **Keeping history when data moves** Original dates lost when notes were reassigned drew 110 votes and was declined [18]. Importing into multi-value fields has been asked for since 2014 and is still marked as being worked on [17]; filling the links between records on import was asked for on an open-source tracker [20].

## What do people want before AI changes their system?

**A person who can stop it, a record of what it did, and a way back.** In a survey of 48,340 people in 47 countries, 46% said they were willing to trust AI systems. Asked what would make them trust one more, 84% named a person's ability to correct, override or challenge its output, and 82% knowing who is accountable when something goes wrong [9].

**Figure 5. Most people would trust AI more if a person can override it**

Share who would be more willing to trust an AI system if it met each condition

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| A person can correct, override or challenge it | 84% |
| Its accuracy and reliability are monitored | 84% |
| It is clear who is accountable if something goes wrong | 82% |
| An independent third party assures it | 74% |

48,340 people in 47 countries, surveyed online from November 2024 to mid January 2025, by a university with a consulting firm; four of the conditions the study asked about [9]. The question is about AI systems in general, not about business software.

Executives say the same about agents. In a survey of 1,500 executives at organizations with more than USD 1 billion in annual revenue, 74% said the benefits of human oversight outweigh its costs [29].

Practitioners read the failures as failures of access, not of the model. In a thread of 1,032 comments on an AI agent that deleted a company's production database, the replies dwell on a credential that could do anything, backups kept beside the data, and no separate test environment; one reads "The real issue is no actual backups." [30] In a forum of people who build automations, the line drawn was simple: "the agent can draft it or prep it, but a human fires it" [31].

What we did not find is demand for AI that builds the model itself. On the issue trackers of the open products we read, no user request for AI that creates fields, objects or workflows had more than a handful of reactions; the items about AI with the most were the makers' own changes [23, 20].

## What do teams, phones and templates need?

**A record that shows each kind of work its own fields, a phone that works without a connection, and templates that stay in step.** On a work-management vendor's board, fields that belong to one kind of work, not to every record in a list, drew 2,093 votes before they shipped in 2026. Permissions on single fields drew 2,163 and shipped only on the two top plans, which the comments that followed objected to [10].

On the phone, offline use leads every board with a mobile section. The work-management board's top mobile request has 4,432 votes [10]; an older request for offline mode on a database product has 121 likes and 219 replies [32]; a thread asking an open-source ERP to work offline has 19,148 views and replies across eleven years [15]. Next come photos, scanning and signatures captured in the field: a camera barcode scanner drew 334 votes on one ERP vendor's board, photos on warehouse work 230. Editing document lines on a phone has few requests, the largest with 111 votes [18].

A template is usually a one-time copy, and that is the complaint. Applying changes of a master template to everything made from it has 1,990 votes; it was posted in December 2019 and is marked for the future; a commenter in 2026 asked "What is the point of a template if changes are not propagated???" [10] On the boards we read, no high-count request asks for more industry templates.

**Figure 6. One in five industry add-ons stops at an older version**

Industry add-ons in one ERP's store, by the newest version each is listed for

| Measure | Value |
| --- | --- |
| The newest version | 55.66% |
| The version before it | 24.9% |
| An older version | 19.44% |

All 751 listings of the store's industries category, read on 13 November 2026: 418, 187 and 146 listings, our arithmetic [3]. A listing may also run on versions it does not name.

Industry add-ons show the same gap from the other side. Of the 751 listings in the industries category of one ERP's add-on store, 747 have no rating, and where a purchase count is shown the median is three [3]. A commenter who ran that ERP wrote that the upgrade path for third-party and custom add-ons "was not defined" [33].

## What this does not show

- **A vote is not a sample.** Every board counts the people who found it and chose to click, and each counts differently: points, votes, likes, reactions. We compare counts within one board, never across boards, and read them for order and age, not for share.
- **Several places could not be read.** Every request to the largest discussion forum was sent to a login page, so no thread from it is here. The idea boards of three ERP vendors refused us or needed a browser we did not use for them, and a practitioner publication's admin surveys refused us.
- **A purchase is a sale, not a need.** Add-on counts show what people paid someone else to build. The core product may do part of it, and a module that sells little may sell little because the core already does it.
- **The evidence on who customizes is old or thin.** The share of projects with no customization comes from a consultancy's web poll of 2016 and 2017. The reasons come from two case companies.
- **The AI evidence is about AI in general.** The surveys ask the public and executives about AI systems and agents, not about a system that changes a data model. The incidents practitioners discuss are about coding agents and infrastructure.
- **Only construction has official evidence of an industry difference.** For distribution, manufacturing, services and field work, the evidence is the forum and tracker of one open product and the counts of one add-on store.
- **We sell business software.** Every product whose board we read is one we could be compared with. Read the selection of requests, and our reading of them, with that in mind.

## What we build from this

Each need below is one the evidence names. Beside it is what SalexHub does about it today, with the page that shows it. Where we have nothing to show, the row says so.

| The need | What SalexHub does today | Where to see it |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Records of your own, with their links and rules | Add the kinds of record only your business keeps, with their properties and the links between them. Formulas and roll-ups work out totals across linked records, and a rule set once holds however a record is written. | [Data model](https://salexhub.com/platform/data-model.md) |
| A field's type changed without losing what it holds | Ask the Agent to turn a text field into a number, and it shows what each value becomes before it does. | [Data model](https://salexhub.com/platform/data-model.md) |
| An invoice in parts, from what was agreed | The Agent drafts the invoice from the quote your customer accepted, with the same lines. Invoicing in parts, the quote counts what is left. You issue it. | [Invoice an accepted quote](https://salexhub.com/use-cases/invoice-an-accepted-quote.md) |
| A receipt that leaves the rest of a line open | Receive on the purchase order: it drafts every open line, you enter what was counted, and the rest stays open until it arrives. | [Receive a delivery against the order](https://salexhub.com/use-cases/receive-a-delivery.md) |
| Credit against chosen lines | A credit note takes the lines you choose and a reason, at the invoice's own rates. The invoice is never edited. | [Correct an issued invoice with a credit note](https://salexhub.com/use-cases/credit-note.md) |
| A bill checked against what arrived | A supplier's bill is posted against the goods received. Billing past what was received is refused. | [Pay suppliers only for what arrived](https://salexhub.com/use-cases/pay-for-what-arrived.md) |
| History brought in, and a way back | Import from a spreadsheet or another CRM, see how many rows are ready before anything is written, and undo the whole import in one action. | [Bring your customers in](https://salexhub.com/use-cases/bring-customers-in.md) |
| Proof in numbers | We have not measured what any of this saves in hours or in add-ons not bought. Until we do, we make no claim about it. | Nothing to show yet |

## References

1. Panorama Consulting Solutions. [2017 ERP Report](https://www.panorama-consulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2017-ERP-Report.pdf). panorama-consulting.com, 2017. Vendor survey. 342 respondents to a poll on the publisher's website, March 2016 to February 2017. The publisher sells ERP consulting.
2. Salesforce. [IdeaExchange: all ideas, sorted by points; searches for line items, field history and sandboxes](https://ideas.salesforce.com/s/search#t=All&sort=%40sfvotes__c%20descending). ideas.salesforce.com, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. The 50 most voted ideas of all time, posted 2006 to 2022, with points, dates and status as the board showed them.
3. Odoo S.A.. [Odoo Apps store: searches by ability, the Industries category, and add-on pages](https://apps.odoo.com/apps/modules/browse?search=merge+picking). apps.odoo.com, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation. Number of add-ons per search, price as shown in US dollars and the store's purchase counter for the first results; all 751 listings of the Industries category.
4. Xero. [Xero Product Ideas: invoices and quotes; purchase orders, bills and inventory; projects](https://productideas.xero.com/forums/967115-invoices-quotes/suggestions/44960395-sales-invoices-issue-progress-payments-on-invoic). productideas.xero.com, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Top-voted ideas of three forums and 16 idea pages, with votes, earliest date and status.
5. Odoo Community Association. [Migration to version 18.0 and 19.0: tracking issues and pull requests; module lists of the workflow and invoicing repositories](https://github.com/OCA/sale-workflow/issues/3914). github.com/OCA, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. 218 and 226 migration tracking issues listing 2,590 and 2,481 modules; issue and pull request totals for versions 14.0 to 19.0.
6. Odoo S.A.. [Upgrade](https://www.odoo.com/documentation/18.0/administration/upgrade.html). Odoo 18.0 documentation, administration, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation
7. Microsoft. [Power Apps pricing](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/products/power-apps/pricing). microsoft.com, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation. Database capacity add-on, USD 40.00 per GB a month, paid annually; the page notes that prices may differ at checkout.
8. Zoho. [Zoho CRM: compare editions](https://www.zoho.com/crm/comparison.html). zoho.com, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation. Limits per edition: custom modules, fields, lookup and roll-up fields, sandbox, storage.
9. Gillespie, Lockey, Ward, Macdade and Hassed. [Trust, attitudes and use of artificial intelligence: A global study 2025](https://kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/xx/pdf/2025/05/trust-attitudes-and-use-of-ai-global-report.pdf). The University of Melbourne and KPMG, 2025. Independent survey. 48,340 people in 47 countries, surveyed online from November 2024 to mid January 2025. Led by a university, with a consulting firm.
10. ClickUp. [Feature requests and the mobile app board](https://feedback.clickup.com/feature-requests/p/offline-functionality-on-mobile). feedback.clickup.com, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. 18 searches sorted by votes and 10 request pages, with votes, dates, status and staff comments.
11. Light. [Going beyond 'misfit' as a reason for ERP package customisation](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2005.02.008). Computers in Industry 56(6), 606 to 619, 2005. Peer-reviewed study. Two companies that customized an ERP package; interviews and documents. Read in the author's version.
12. Hacker News. [Show HN: I've been building an ERP for manufacturing for the last 3 years](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44792005). news.ycombinator.com, item 44792005, 4 August 2025. Public requests. 322 points, 158 comments.
13. UK Crown Commercial Service and Government Digital Service. [G-Cloud 15, Cloud support: supplier service pages and rate cards](https://www.applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/g-cloud/search?q=salesforce+implementation&lot=cloud-support). Digital Marketplace, applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk, Read 13 November 2026. Official source. Rate cards of 12 suppliers of CRM and ERP implementation services that list a business architect, from the first results of three searches. Rates in GBP per day.
14. Odoo S.A.. [Odoo Success Packs](https://www.odoo.com/pricing-packs). odoo.com, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation. Prices as shown in US dollars to the reading location, for returning customers.
15. Frappe. [Frappe Forum: threads on implementation, drop shipping, upgrades, field limits and offline use](https://discuss.frappe.io/t/erpnext-in-off-line-mode/3204). discuss.frappe.io, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Threads with their views, likes, posts and dates, 2013 to 2026; among them topics 165374, 95044, 33878, 76868 and 3204.
16. HubSpot. [HubSpot Ideas, sorted by votes](https://community.hubspot.com/t/3206). community.hubspot.com, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. The 60 most voted ideas, with votes, replies, dates and status.
17. Zoho. [Zoho CRM ideas](https://help.zoho.com/portal/en/community/topic/super-admin-logging-in-as-another-user). help.zoho.com community, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. All 2,756 ideas of the CRM category, ranked by likes, with comments, dates and status.
18. Microsoft. [Dynamics 365 and Power Platform ideas: Sales, Dataverse, Admin center, Business Central](https://experience.dynamics.com/ideas/idea/?ideaid=487e9e37-670f-e911-9461-0003ff68bc11). experience.dynamics.com/ideas, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Top lists of four forums and searches of about ten ideas each, with votes, dates, status and vendor replies.
19. Microsoft. [Define rollup columns that aggregate values](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-apps/maker/data-platform/define-rollup-fields). Microsoft Learn, Power Apps, 30 April 2024. Vendor documentation
20. NocoDB. [nocodb/nocodb issues, sorted by reactions](https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb/issues/9596). GitHub, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Issues with their reactions, comments, dates and state.
21. Odoo S.A.. [Help forum: threads on invoicing several orders, delivery notes on invoices, drop shipping and quotation revisions](https://www.odoo.com/forum/help-1/invoicing-lines-from-multiple-sale-orders-93524). odoo.com/forum, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Threads with their views, votes, answers and dates, 2013 to 2026.
22. Zoho. [Zoho Books and Zoho Inventory ideas](https://help.zoho.com/portal/en/community/topic/bill-quantity-received-po-quantity). help.zoho.com community, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. 1,050 ideas of the two categories, with likes, comments, views, dates and status.
23. Frappe. [frappe/erpnext and frappe/frappe issues and pull requests](https://github.com/frappe/erpnext/issues/26794). GitHub, Read 13 November 2026. Public requests. Issues found by search, with their reactions, comments, dates and state.
24. AIA Contract Documents. [Summary: G702-1992, Application and Certificate for Payment](https://help.aiacontracts.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500009387461-Summary-G702-1992-Application-and-Certificate-for-Payment). help.aiacontracts.com, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation. The publisher's own summary of its standard form.
25. US General Services Administration, Department of Defense and NASA. [FAR 52.232-5, Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (May 2014)](https://www.acquisition.gov/far/52.232-5). Federal Acquisition Regulation, acquisition.gov, May 2014. Official source
26. Pye Tait Consulting for the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. [Retention payments in the construction industry](https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/retention-payments-in-the-construction-industry). gov.uk, with the consultation of October 2017, October 2017. Official source. 506 contractors in England, February to April 2016, and 419 construction clients, March to April 2016.
27. UK Department for Business and Trade. [Late payments: tackling poor payment practices, government response](https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/late-payments-tackling-poor-payment-practices). gov.uk, 24 July 2026. Official source. 867 responses to a consultation held from 31 July to 23 October 2025.
28. Odoo S.A.. [Odoo Enterprise Subscription Agreement](https://www.odoo.com/documentation/18.0/legal/terms/enterprise.html). Odoo 18.0 documentation, legal, Read 13 November 2026. Vendor documentation
29. Capgemini Research Institute. [Rise of agentic AI: How trust is the key to human-AI collaboration](https://www.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/AI-Agents_web_160226-1.pdf). capgemini.com, 2025. Vendor survey. 1,500 executives at director level and above, at organizations with more than USD 1 billion in annual revenue in 14 countries, surveyed in April 2025. The publisher sells AI services.
30. Hacker News. [An AI agent deleted our production database. The agent's confession is below](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47911524). news.ycombinator.com, item 47911524, 26 April 2026. Public requests. 860 points, 1,032 comments.
31. n8n community. [N8n users running AI agents: where do you still keep a human approval step?](https://community.n8n.io/t/n8n-users-running-ai-agents-where-do-you-still-keep-a-human-approval-step/303282). community.n8n.io, topic 303282, 14 July 2026. Public requests. 8 posts, 313 views.
32. Airtable. [Legacy product ideas: FR: Offline mode](https://community.airtable.com/legacy-product-ideas-75/fr-offline-mode-43531). community.airtable.com, 12 April 2016. Public requests. 121 likes, 219 replies.
33. Hacker News. [Odoo: Open-Source ERP](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46439993). news.ycombinator.com, item 46439993, 31 December 2025. Public requests. 76 points, 69 comments.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0: the retention research and the late payments consultation of the UK government, © Crown copyright 2017 and 2026, and the G-Cloud 15 pages of the Digital Marketplace. The licence: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

The University of Melbourne and KPMG study is licensed CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 by its authors; the four values drawn from it are restated as facts in a figure of our own.

### Kinds of evidence in this piece

- Peer-reviewed study (1): Published in a journal after review by other researchers.
- Official source (4): Statistics or rules published by a public authority.
- Independent survey (1): A survey by an organization that sells nothing to the people it asked.
- Public requests (17): What users ask for in public, on a vendor's idea board or forum, an issue tracker or a practitioners' thread, counted as the page shows it.
- Vendor documentation (8): What a vendor publishes about its own product: its limits, prices and documented behavior.
- Vendor survey (2): A survey run or paid for by a company that sells to the people it asked.

## Changes

- 13 November 2026: First published.

## Cite this piece

SalexHub (2026). Waiting since 2012. https://salexhub.com/research/waiting-since-2012

---

The same page for people: https://salexhub.com/research/waiting-since-2012. Index of this site for agents: https://salexhub.com/llms.txt