Contact Info
How should a Dutch company write down its ERP requirements?
A Dutch company should record its ERP requirements as a programma van eisen: numbered, prioritized statements a supplier can answer and a tester can prove. I build that document by process area, phrase BTW codes, the ICP listing, the auditfile, Peppol invoicing and retention as checkable requirements your accountant confirms, add hosting, logging and ondernemingsraad-related rules, and trace every requirement into demos, the contract and tests, working remotely.
Last reviewed by Vikas Saroj
Dutch companies tend to be direct about what they want from software, yet the written programma van eisen behind an ERP tender can still be thin: a supplier's checklist with some local additions, no acceptance evidence and no rules on hosting or logging. When the offer arrives, every supplier has interpreted the gaps in its own favor.
My part, as an independent consultant who delivers online, is that document itself: how it is laid out, how Dutch tax, invoicing and logistics needs are worded so they can be checked, how priorities are fixed, and how each requirement is carried into offers, the agreement and acceptance testing.
Discovery workshops and goods-flow mapping are described on my ERP business analyst page for the Netherlands.
Everything below ends up in a single programma van eisen that suppliers answer, the agreement cites and your key users test against.
A document grouped by goods flow and finance process, where every requirement has a code, a one-sentence statement, a source, a priority tier and the proof a key user needs to see before approving it.
Requirements on BTW codes and return figures, the ICP listing, the auditfile export, Peppol sending and receiving, invoices to government customers and record retention, each reviewed by your accountant.
Hosting inside the EU or elsewhere, processing agreements, roles and approval limits, change history, logging the ondernemingsraad may need to see, scanner response times and documents in several languages.
Every message with a logistics provider, carrier, customs broker, marketplace, bank or payroll bureau written out with sender, trigger, content and error route, plus clear rules on what data moves at go-live.
A tracking sheet linking each requirement to the demo case that showed it, the supplier's design note, the acceptance test and the outcome, so coverage is visible to management at every stage.
Already holding a requirements list from a supplier or an earlier attempt? I mark untestable wording, missing tax, logistics and technical requirements, inflated tiers and product-specific phrasing, then return a cleaned version.
Decide what the document must cover
Write, check and tier the requirements
Release one version everyone uses
Many ERP buyers in the Netherlands are trading, distribution or logistics-heavy businesses, often acting as a European hub for a foreign parent. Their programma van eisen should follow the goods: purchase and inbound shipments, storage at an own or third-party warehouse, order intake from EDI, web shop or sales staff, picking and dispatch, returns, invoicing and collection, then the finance close. Service and project companies follow their own flows, but the principle is the same.
Within each flow, a requirement is a single statement a supplier can answer as fully met, partly met or not met. Alongside it sit a code, the person or party who asked for it, a priority tier and a description of the proof expected at acceptance, for example "a return with partial credit shows the restocked quantity and the credit note in the same customer history".
Around the flows the document adds four blocks that Dutch lists often leave out: tax and invoicing requirements, rules on platform behavior, a message and interface catalog, and data takeover rules. A short glossary pairs English terms with the Dutch words key users actually say, such as pakbon, inkooporder or creditnota, so nothing is lost when Dutch-speaking staff test. The approach mirrors my ERP requirements gathering method.
"Supports Dutch tax" is not a requirement anyone can test. I break the subject into statements with a visible outcome, each one confirmed by your accountant or tax advisor before release:
With European rules heading toward structured invoices and transaction reporting, the requirement asks how each product supports that today rather than relying on a roadmap slide. How these requirements are demonstrated by suppliers is covered on my ERP selection page for the Netherlands.
A programma van eisen that describes only processes leaves suppliers free to decide everything else. A dedicated block of platform rules prevents that.
Data protection requirements state where production data and backups may be held, whether processing outside the EU is acceptable and on what basis, which subprocessors are allowed and what the processing agreement must contain. Your privacy officer takes the position; the document records it so every supplier answers the same question.
Logging deserves explicit wording. Where a company has an ondernemingsraad, systems that can track the presence, behavior or performance of staff generally fall within its say, and an ERP with scanner logs, pick rates and user histories can do exactly that. I write requirements that such logging and reporting be adjustable per role and fully documented, which lets any agreement reached with the council be configured and later verified. Interpreting employment law stays with HR and counsel.
Further rules cover roles and approval limits, change history on master data and prices, scanner and screen response times during peak picking, behavior when a warehouse connection drops, and backup and restore. Output requirements list each customer-facing document with its language: Dutch for domestic customers, English for the group, and German or French where you sell across borders. Native speakers on your team or a partner check every translated layout.
For a Dutch distributor, messages with outside parties often carry more risk than the ERP itself. Each one in the catalog states the sending and receiving party, what triggers it, which fields it carries, timing, ownership, and how a rejected or late message is reported. Common entries include stock and shipment messages with a logistics provider, carrier labels and track-and-trace, customs declarations through a broker, EDI orders from retail customers, marketplace and web shop orders, bank statement files and direct debit batches, and the payroll journal. The technical side is described under ERP integration.
Data takeover rules specify which customers, suppliers and articles are carried over, whether stock is counted or loaded from the warehouse provider, which open items and balances start the new books, and how the old package remains readable for the retention period after its subscription ends.
Priorities use tiers in the MoSCoW spirit, described in words: needed on day one, needed soon after, worth having if cheap, and explicitly excluded for now. Tax, invoicing and agreed council requirements sit in the first tier. Exclusion criteria for the supplier round come only from that tier and are written so a supplier who fails one can be told why. Management approves the tiers per flow before suppliers see the document.
Suppliers answer the released programma van eisen requirement by requirement, with a fixed answer code and a short explanation. That makes Dutch offers, which can differ widely in format, comparable on substance. The tender mechanics are explained under ERP RFP consulting.
Suppliers may attach their own general ICT terms to the offer. How those relate to your requirements is a question for your lawyer; my concern is practical. The agreement should name the released version, every requirement should map to a design note from the supplier, and nothing answered as standard should return later as extra work. During testing, each requirement is followed to its acceptance test and the result recorded.
Each version carries a label, a release date, an owner and an entry in the change log. Flow owners approve their sections, the finance lead approves the tax requirements after the accountant's review, and management approves the release.
Weak spots in Dutch requirement lists are fairly predictable: the auditfile assumed rather than tested, Peppol receiving forgotten while sending is covered, no messages defined with the logistics provider, nothing on logging the ondernemingsraad may ask about, and no plan for reading old records. Each is checked before release. I am independent of every supplier, accept no commission, and visit only by arrangement. More on my work in the Netherlands.
Tell me about your business and current systems. I’ll suggest the most sensible first step.
Book a Consultation
Not sure which ERP you need?
Share your business requirements with me and I will help you understand the right process, architecture and platform before implementation.
Long enough to cover every flow, tax obligation, interface and platform rule, and no longer. Padding with generic features makes offers harder to compare and hides what matters. A smaller distributor may need a compact document; a European hub with several warehouses and entities needs more. Completeness of the critical blocks matters far more than page count.
It is wise to treat it that way. An auditfile that looks fine in a demo can still fail once real data, closed periods or several administrations are involved. A requirement with a defined sample, opened and checked by your accountant during testing, removes the guesswork. Whether and when the Belastingdienst asks for it is a matter for your advisor.
Yes. Because the programma van eisen describes needs rather than product features, it stays valid when suppliers are added or dropped. New suppliers receive the current released version and answer it in the same format, so their responses fit straight into the existing comparison and tracking sheet.
The change goes into the log with a reason, the requester, the expected effect on cost and planning, and an approval. The supplier then receives a new version of the document rather than an email instruction. That way the agreement, design and acceptance tests can always be traced back to the text that was actually approved.
Every business is different. Share where you are today and what you want to fix, and I’ll tell you honestly whether and how I can help.
Book a Consultation
Book a consultation to talk through your processes, systems and goals. I’ll reply with practical next steps - no obligation.