Presentation on theme: "Exploring successful enterprise system implementation Jay Cooprider – Computer Information Systems Gary David - Sociology Linda Edelman – Strategic Management."— Presentation transcript:
Exploring successful enterprise system implementation Jay Cooprider – Computer Information Systems Gary David - Sociology Linda Edelman – Strategic Management Traci Logan – CIO Bentley College Sue Newell – Organizational Behavior
Over-arching Research Question: 1. What is the role of social capital and knowledge creation/integration on the outcomes of large scale Information Technology Projects. 1. Motivated by studies that indicate that despite widespread implementation of ERP – limited use of functionality of system and in some cases total rejection of the new system.
Methods: 1. Consultant perception study 1. Large consulting organization RQ: What role do information systems consultants play in knowledge creation and integration within ERP projects? Conducted 8 interviews over a four month period.
Methods: 1. Siebel implementation study 1. RQ1:What is the link between social networks and the generation of new knowledge during ERP implementation? RQ2:What are the advantages/ disadvantages of enacting organizational change at the beginning/end of an ERP implementation process? 2. Conducted 7 interviews over four months.
Data Analysis: 1. All interviews have been conducted and transcribed 2. Data is still undergoing analysis 1. Qualitative nature of data lends itself to tools such as NVIVO.
Systematic Literature Review: 1. Searched online databases for key words (e.g., "knowledge integration or systems consultants) 2. Gathered over 500 articles – grouped by research question 3. Ranked articles on applicability 4. Took consultant articles and rated them on theoretical quality, rigor and robustness 5. Findings: Paucity of quality empirical research on role of Information Technology consultants in ERP implementation processes.
Consulting articles: Review template AuthorTitleJournalTheoryMethodsFindingsContributionRateReview S. Bagchi S. Kanungo S. Dasgupta Modeling use of Enterprise resource planning systems: A path analytic study European Journal of Informatio n Systems 12;2003 Unit of analysis: Individual user Theory of Reasoned Action – (two Factors contribute to behavior: attitude and norm), uses existing theory Qualitative case Studies combined with questionnaire ERP too Expensive not to use Need for ERP experts, hence ERP knowledge is good for career Theory had to be modified to be relevant for ERP ERP dynamics are different than in the theoretical model. My comments: no surprise model had to be modified given the number of paths, despite appearance of rigor, not much in way of findings 2LFE Key: 1 = low relevance 2 = medium relevance 3 = high relevance
Analyzing different strategies to ERP adoption: Reengineering- led versus quick deployment International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, forthcoming
Reengineering-led vs. Quick- deployment Reengineering-led Concerted (Robey) Change processes before implement Define as is and to be processes Difficult implementation Pre-implementation transformation Quick-Deployment Piecemeal (Robey) Replace legacy systems Rely on embedded best practices Easy implementation Post-implementation gradual evolution
Alternative Adoption Strategies Transformation Evolution
Discussion Consultants recognized difference between reengineering-led vs. quick- deployment and could relate to different client experiences All but 1 felt reengineering-led best But recognized most firms want to limit reengineering (quote)
Case example Small office furniture distributor – main business supplier wanted them to adopt a very complex ERP system that would have meant drastic org. changes Refused – we have been 15 years in this business and have perfected our processes – why should someone else know our processes better than us Wanted a tool to support processes, not a system to impose new processes Went with a small software vendor Problems – a bug versus an enhancement (purchase order field – long and short but long not actually supported in rest of software so PO never printed on e.g., receipts!)
Conclusions Quick-deployment strategy popular with companies (Nah et al., 2003) Good reasons for this Previous extensive reengineering BUs operate independently – integration may not be that important May be beneficial Reengineering may identify best practices not supported by selected software Reduces visible progress and so limits commitment
Practical Implications Quick-deployment strategy PLUS User-led post-implementation strategy Provide resources to facilitate emergent exploitation of system May require a new team as implementation team may be burnt out
Understanding the problems of ES implementations: Beyond critical success factors Working paper
ERP critical success factors Nah et al. – 11 factors more or less important at different project stages Relate to different aspects of project management and structure Consider these CSFs in relation to Siebel implementation Explore why CSFs problematic in practice
The Siebel Project Reduction of legacy systems – but only sunsetted 1 system after 4 years Delays in module implementations – sales (1 year) and marketing (2 years) Burnout of project team (quote)
Project Methodology Standard IT implementation methodology Core team Module teams – PDT – leader, project manager, process leader, architecture leader, education leader, deployment leader etc. Fit-gap analysis – 1 week intensive workshop Vanilla, out the box implementation
Problems encountered Sustaining resources for social rather than technical work (quote) Getting things done at critical points – work around formal system (quote) Leadership and team involvement Overall project leader – x3 Core project team Periphery members – turnover Divergent common practices (quote) Resistance and stalemates (quote)
Analysis - Socio-political and cultural realities make it difficult to sustain CSFs Staffing issues – leadership and team composition 1. Top management support 2. Project champion 3. Good team mix But reality: senior management turnover; continuous change in periphery members i.e., Difficult to sustain commitment over long duration Need continuous INDUCTION AND REINDUCTION
Analysis - Socio-political and cultural realities make it difficult to sustain CSFs Formal project management methodology 1. Formal methods 2. Business plan 3. Communication to all stakeholders 4. Constant evaluation and monitoring 5. Troubleshooting and testing But reality: Work around formal processes crucial (quote) Understanding situated actions Need to stress INFORMAL NETWORKING
Analysis - Socio-political and cultural realities make it difficult to sustain CSFs Organizational structure and culture Manage the change process Reality: Maintaining resources for organizational change difficult Stable and successful context Reengineering already taken place – but reality: divergence of practice and process Organization change to suit software so minimize customization Reality: resistance Recognize IMPROVISATION skills of users
Conclusions – Meta-level processes Induction – to build and rebuild social capital – bonds and bridges (Adler and Kwon) Informality – to sustain CoP (Brown and Duguid) Improvisation – to support situated learning (Lave and Wenger)