New to the forum - just learned about it from the Minnesota Epicor Users group.
We are currently working on implementing Epicor Kinetic. One item that I am tasked with is simplifying our engineering process - we make an Engineered to Order product that could be largely configuration based and CPQ looks like it might be a good fit. We are waiting for a demo with the Epicor team to further explore.
I am looking for feedback on how robust the CPQ solution is and how well it integrates with CAD (specifically Inventor). Our product can be quite large (consisting of assemblies of different modules to create the length needed) and I would really like to hear from others who have done something similar.
Wow I am so sorry for not responding sooner to this post. We use Epicor CPQ (formerly KBMax) pretty extensively to simplify the process for our sales team. We produce Environmental Graphics and Wayfinding (signage). While our construction methods and size/shapes are similar there are so many material choices that impact the materials and operations that we rely on our CPQ to dynamically build the Method of Manufacture.
We use it entirely internal as it sounds you may as well. The visualizer and tools could allow us to embed this into a website complete with shopping cart, but not just yet. Also being in a graphical business our Marketing team is demanding on what is put in front of a customer.
It takes a while to get up and running with CPQ as you learn the platform and integration. It is a very capable platform. Plan 2 months to generate a CPQ and go live. We are struggling currently as we try to get it to match legacy pricing that was unfortunately based on “perceived value” and not rooted in things that are easily to write a formula around.
We also are not using the CAD output, but I do hold hope once we get further down the road that is something I want to get back into.
While our products are much smaller, our manufacturing team does require several sub-assemblies to make sure that product flows smoothly through production so we do have some experience with layered or indented Bills. We use JSON variables to build out our Method of Manufacture and parse that JSON into the pricing and Method of Manufacture. It can be difficult to keep it straight and when dealing with sub-assemblies the integration to build the MoM gets a little manual so you have to keep your head on straight. I can’t count the number of times I would ask every in the room to be quiet as I try to wrap my head around which layer of JSON indent I was, LOL.
My apologies for the delay in getting back to this - we have been working with Epicor to get a demo setup.
I would like the CPQ software to be the interface for our sales team such that they enter the information into the configurator, it models the product in accordance with the engineering rules and defined parts, then spits out a configuration that is fully structured and with a complete MOM such that there is no engineering intervention. It seems this is possible, but over a much longer time frame.
My bigger concern right now is about what the CPQ product actually is and how robust a product it is. Additionally, what support is Epicor supplying and is it evolving at a rate that you would expect?
Our CPQ and Kinetic implementation took longer than we care to admit, however since we went live in January 2025 we have been very successful. The biggest hurdle during implementation was the complexity of our product and getting that into CPQ. The next biggest hurdle was the CPQ & Kinetic integration. We found it tough because CPQ professional services knew minimal about Kinetic and Kinetic professional services generally knew even less about CPQ. We did ultimately meet in the middle and had help from CPQ to set up all of our BOM information from the CPQ configurator, which flows into CPQ. We then worked Kinetic operations consultants to help us get MRP settings correct so that Unfirm Jobs would be created in Kinetic. Kinetic operations consultants also helped us with later Job Processing activities - ie. Job Adjustment, Job Completion/Backflush, shipments, etc.
Since we are still dealing with CPQ professional services, we have not dealt very much with CPQ support. However, the interactions we have had with them have all been positive. It’s definitely a great product once it’s finally working. You can see the public-facing version of our CPQ on our website if you’re interested.
This is how we are planning to implement CPQ into our Kinetic. Our go live has been delayed far too long, but we have done most of the CPQ work to create the MoM’s we like. It has become my go to tool when I want to do something cute with line items, but has its limitations.
We are now struggling with a product line that we essentially buy out. Part on the Fly line items like the ones output by CPQ are inherently Manufactured line items so this is posing some interesting challenges.
They say up to two months to implement a CPQ. I’d say your first one for sure will take a while as you learn how it works. We have set up roughly 20 at this point. I could probably get one together in a week if I had all the right information (for our environment, because I know our environment). However I understand if you don’t know what a customer wants it is real difficult to get these together. We used flow charts to define material/operation choices based on CPQ options and went through several iterations with Production and Engineering, then eventually pricing review.