Exploring successful enterprise system implementationJay Cooprider – Computer Information SystemsGary David - SociologyLinda Edelman – Strategic ManagementTraci Logan – CIO Bentley CollegeSue 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 study1. 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 study1. 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 applicability4. Took consultant articles and rated them on

theoretical quality, rigor and robustness5. Findings: Paucity of quality empirical research on

role of Information Technology consultants in ERP implementation processes.

Consulting articles:Review templateAuthor Title Journal Theory Methods Findings Contribution Rate Review

S. BagchiS. KanungoS. Dasgupta

Modeling use of Enterprise resource planning systems: A path analytic study

European Journal ofInformatio

n Systems12;2003

Unit of analysis: Individual userTheory of Reasoned Action –

(two Factors contribute to behavior: attitude and norm), uses existing theory

Qualitative case Studiescombined with questionnaire

ERP too Expensive not to useNeed for ERP experts, hence ERPknowledge

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

2 LFE

Key:1 = low relevance2 = medium relevance3 = 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 methodologyCore teamModule 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 support2. Project champion3. 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 methodology1. Formal methods2. Business plan3. Communication to all stakeholders4. Constant evaluation and monitoring5. 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)