Change Management of People and Technology in an ERP Implementation - Coursework Example

 Change Management of People & Technology in an ERP Implementation 1 Introduction 1 PowerIT and Implementation of ERP 2 Problems Encountered 4 Considerations for Required Changes 6 Suitable Option Available to PowerIT 8 Conclusion 9 Works Cited 9 Change Management of People & Technology in an ERP Implementation Introduction PowerIT is a well-established company that has identified the need of implementation of ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) software for the future progress of the company. The management of the company decided for an ERP solution because it was adopted by many other companies in the same field. The company was facing some lose in terms of finance by working on MRPII, which was its current employed system. The company has IT department, which is considered quite efficient. The IT department of the company was not preferred to develop and implement ERP software. In place of the IT department, the management thought it more appropriate to buy the needed software. According to the management, the IT department did not keep the necessary expertise required for development of software and application domain (Edwards and Humphries 2005). A third party off-the-shelf solution was opted by the company for the development and implementation of new software. PowerIT faced many problems from the start of the project to its aftereffects after implementation. The problems dealt with technical and organizational needs of the company. The business development manager of the company was a strong technical person but he was weak socially (Edwards and Humphries 2005). There was no impact analysis and risk evaluation related to the implementation of the ERP software. The business development manager was less communicative and did not manage change efficiently. There were three short listed vendors out of which one was selected without full satisfaction to its recommendations. The vendor was not aware of the full recommendations and all the managers of the company were not involved in the implementation procedure. There was also resistance from the users, which was ignored. After implementation, there was identification of many problems. Also an investigative team was appointed to identify the problematic areas of the newly implemented software. The investigators suggested organizational as well as technical changes for the usability of ERP system. PowerIT and Implementation of ERP PowerIT had a strong IT department but they lacked the expertise that was required for the software developed so the company did not allow to take any risk by allowing the IT department to develop a software (Edwards and Humphries 2005). In place of developing the software themselves, the company felt suitable that the software should be bought. The software that the company was willing to buy was Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software. Figure 2 represents the company opted solution in terms of attainment of the software that was to buy it from a third party vendor (Edwards and Humphries 2005). The third party modified off-the-shelf solution was opted for the obtainment of ERP software. The IT staff was well equipped with local company knowledge but in terms of specific software development (ERP) and in terms of application domain, they lacked the expertise that was required. The third party vendor that they selected was strong and expert in terms of the knowledge concerning software development and application domain but they lacked the local company knowledge (Edwards and Humphries 2005). The case writers categorized the solutions as “High”, “High” and “Low” because the experiences required for the development and acquisition were with the experts such as vendors and where they were low in experience and expertise, the company IT department was there in terms of expertise. The third party – the vendor was expert in software development and application domain, so the case writers used “High” and “High”. On the other hand, the third party was inexpert in local company knowledge, so the case writers used “Low”. The areas of relative strength for the third party were software development and application domain knowledge while the area of relative strength for the IT department of PowerIT was local company knowledge. Problems Encountered The company, PowerIT faced a number of problems in terms of selecting, implementing and aftereffects of the ERP software. All of these problems are concerned to the organizational procedures and personnel of the company. While the project was going to initiate or it was in its selection phase, there was no special interest towards the project by the personnel of the company, which was highlighted by the help of interviewing. The case also elaborates that the business development manager of PowerIT was a powerful person in terms of technical skills but he lacked social skills due to which, he faced problems in opting for ERP software (Edwards and Humphries 2005). Another problem that is described in the case is the disgruntlement between business development manager and other managers of PowerIT. Initially for implementing the ERP software, the business development manager conducted interviews which informed him that the user group of the company is not willing to bring in the change (Edwards and Humphries 2005). Afterwards, brown paper mapping was created which, gave no specification in terms of the current system being employed by the organization. Because of incomplete description through brown paper mapping, it was taken for granted that the new ERP software was going to work along with the current system of the company (Edwards and Humphries 2005). In addition, there was no analysis of the current system. Three vendors were short listed in terms of attainment of ERP software. The business development manager was not fully satisfied with their presented software but he allotted the tender to one of the vendors without full analysis and evaluation of the software specific for PowerIT. Out of these vendors, one was unresponsive, the other one came up with generic software while the third one was with some specifications and he was selected after a short consideration (Edwards and Humphries 2005). The business development manager did not feel a need to interact with other managers of PowerIT in order to discuss the specifications of the ERP software. The users of the ERP software were resistant towards the change. There was no impact analysis in terms of implementation of the new ERP software. All the managers were not engaged in the implementation process due to which, full specification remained incomplete. There were no guess work in place of factual information related to the working of PowerIT. The users of the ERP software were uncomfortable with the ERP software (Edwards and Humphries 2005). MRPII, which was the previous working system of the company, was replaced with ERP software but the software packages that were used with MRPII were not removed (Edwards and Humphries 2005). They were still used due to which, there were problems with the usage of ERP software. Managers had no knowledge about these software packages. There was a lot of inaccurate data, which was there because of unskilled importing of data from the previous system, MRPII (Edwards and Humphries 2005). After implementation of ERP software, the users recognized further modifications, which were trivial but there was no analysis for these modifications (Edwards and Humphries 2005). There were problems concerning the updating of records. An investigation team was appointed to evaluate the whole problematic procedures related to the software development. The investigators reported that there are two major problems with the software implementation, they are: unfriendly user interface and inadequate training for the users. After implementation, the management of the company identified that the IT department of the company is not that much strong as they considered it earlier because it was having problems in terms of using the new system (Edwards and Humphries 2005). Considerations for Required Changes After analyzing figure 1 of the case study, it is clear that the Class of PowerIT’s project is Class C. Class C of classification of enterprise resource planning success reports that the ERP system is used partially and the data that is associated with the system is inaccurate and incomplete (Edwards and Humphries 2005). The company, PowerIT is unable to gain benefits from the ERP system, it has acquired because it is having a lot of problems with the new system. Class C is a classification that appears appropriate related to the working of the software. The company is going through difficulties concerning the usability of ERP system and is unable to get any benefits until now. It is also reported in the case study that the data associated to ERP software is inaccurate because of inaccurate importability of data from the old system that is MRPII. The investigators that were appointed to identify the problematic areas of the new ERP system reported that the company is in need of technical as well as organizational changes (Edwards and Humphries 2005). Class C is there because there was no impact analysis concerning change. For any change that is going to be brought up in any work environment, it is wholly significant to management change and to analyze and evaluate the affects that will be there after implementation of the change. According to my perception, the required organizational changes are more difficult to achieve as the business development manager is reported to a good technically skilled person but weak in terms of social skills. The case study shows that he has not collaborated with others managers and the vendors sufficiently due to which, there are many problems with the ERP system that is implemented. There was lack of communication between the management of the company and the vendors. The vendors that were allotted the tender were taken over by a larger company and the project was in hands of the new company that was not found communicative by the management of PowerIT. There was also a need for training of the users so that the new ERP system can be employed efficiently and effectively. Suitable Option Available to PowerIT The three options available to PowerIT at this point are to re-implement and modify; upgrade; or scarp and replace the ERP software (Edwards and Humphries 2005). As far as the scrap and replacement options are concerned, at this stage, they do not appear too suitable for the company, PowerIT, as the company has invested much on the project and cannot start from the beginning. The option that is best considerable is to upgrade. The vendor can be consulted in terms of upgrading the ERP system and there will be appropriate solutions for the company. The company has covered a long path concerning selection and implementation and is not in a position to discard the whole project and to look for an entire new option. The vendor can be contacted in order to upgrade the current system. There can be requirements and specifications by the users of the systems and there can be adequate training. Because of these measures, there can be betterment for the company. The implementation of ERP system is erroneous because of improper and incomplete stages of the project development and implementation. All the needs and requirements specific to the current system of PowerIT were not analyzed and evaluated. There was no impact analysis and there was not efficient change management due to which, there were problems with the integration of ERP system. There was improper communication, inadequate training, incomplete understandability of user requirements and insufficient management role in the implementation process, which resulted in the failure of ERP software in PowerIT. Conclusion The company, PowerIT suffered many problems from the initiation of the project. There were many reasons behind its problems. There was lack of communication, inaccurate information, insufficient training, no impact analysis, random selection of vendor, lack of social skills, misidentification of requirements, noninvolvement of all managers and incomplete planning. All these problems lead to the failure of the ERP system. The company is in need of organizational as well as technical changes if it wants its newly implemented software to work according to its needs and requirements. The most suitable option for the company at this stage is to upgrade the ERP according to the needs and requirements of the system. Upgrading will be fruitful along with adequate training. Works Cited Edwards, Helen M. and Humphries, Lynne P. Change Management of People and Technology in an ERP Implementation. Journal of Cases in Information Technology 7(4) (2005): 143-159. Read More