Professional Documents
Culture Documents
S T R AT E G I C E R P
EXTENSION AND USE
Contents
11
13
36
52
71
85
87
97
108
vi
Contents
130
140
T. E. Vollmann
PART III.
11
153
155
13
172
191
Contributors
Chief Editors
Dr. Elliot Bendoly is a faculty member in Decision and Information Analysis at Emory Universitys Goizueta Business School. Prior to academia, he
worked as a research engineer for the Intel Corporation. He holds a Ph.D.
in the elds of operations management and decision sciences from Indiana University. Along with these specializations, his academic background includes an information systems orientation including database,
ERP, and knowledge management focuses. During this time, he served as
an instructor and developer of SAP implementation and ABAP/4 programming curriculum. More recently, he has been involved with coursework on IT supported service operations and supply chain management.
He has published in a number of academic journals, including the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Operations Management, Journal
of Service Research, European Journal of Operational Research, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Decision Support Systems, Information and Management, and Business Horizons. His
current research focuses on operational issues in IT utilization and organizational behavioral dynamics.
Dr. F. Robert Jacobs is the E-II Faculty Fellow and Professor of Operations
Management at the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. He has
viii
Contributors
Contributors
POMS, AIS, and DSI. She regularly makes presentations at national and
international conferences and to various other professional groups.
Dr. Stuart J. Allen is professor emeritus at Penn StateErie, the Behrend
College. He works on design of decision aids for application in manufacturing environments. His educational background includes a bachelor of
science degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Wisconsin, a masters degree in mechanical engineering from Seattle University,
and a Ph.D. in engineering mechanics from the University of Minnesota.
Dr. Allen began his research career in the eld of non-Newtonian uid
mechanics and has published over 50 journal articles in engineering and
management science. He has also owned and operated three businesses in
Wisconsin and New York State.
Dr. David L. Brock is Principal Research Scientist at the MIT Auto-ID Labs
and the founding director of Brock Rogers Surgical, a manufacturer of
microrobotic devices. He has worked with a number of organizations, including MITs articial intelligence lab, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Inrmary, DARPA, Celadon, Loral, BBN, and Draper Labs. Dr. Brocks interests include distributed systems control, Internet control, large system
simulation, robotics, and AI. He has several publications and four patents. He has received several awards, including the Wunsch Foundation
Award for outstanding mechanical design, Tau Beta Pi, and Pi Tau Sigma.
Dr. Brock holds bachelors degrees in theoretical mathematics and mechanical engineering, as well as masters and Ph.D. degrees from MIT.
Dr. Carol V. Brown is Associate Professor of Information Systems, Kelley
School of Business, IUPUI Indianapolis. Her general areas of specialization are management and design of information systems in large organizations and the management of end-user computing strategies and tactics.
Her recent work has surrounded enterprise system implementation issues,
ITs role in mergers and acquisitions, and design and governance of the
IT organization. Publications of her research can be found in highly respected outlets such as Information Systems Management, MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, and Organization Science.
ix
Contributors
Susan Cantrell is a research fellow at the Accenture Institute for High Performance Business. Her work is focused on business innovation, human
performance, and the intersection of organizational behavior and information systems. Ms. Cantrell has a masters degree in management information systems and has prior experience in the investment and education
elds. Her work has been published in publications such as Industry Standard, Across the Board, Strategy and Leadership, and Outlook.
Dr. Daniel Chen is an Assistant Professor of Information Systems at Texas
Christian University. He received his Ph.D. in MIS from the University of
Georgia in December 2004. He also holds an MBA from Washington University in St. Louis. Dr. Chens research interests lie at the interface between
information technology and strategic management. His primary areas of
research are the organizational impact of IT application infrastructure,
the role and value of IS leadership, and electronic commerce. His work
has been accepted for publication in Business Intelligence Journal and the
proceedings of several leading national and international conferences.
Dr. Thomas H. Davenport is a fellow with the Accenture Institute for High
Performance Business and holds the Presidents Chair in Information Technology and Management at Babson College. He is a widely published author and acclaimed speaker on the topics of information and knowledge
management, reengineering, enterprise systems, and electronic business
and markets. He has a Ph.D. from Harvard University in organizational
behavior and has taught at the Harvard Business School, the University
of Chicago, Dartmouths Tuck School of Business, and the University of
Texas at Austin. He has also directed research centers at Ernst & Young,
McKinsey & Company, and CSC Index. Dr. Davenports latest book
coauthored with Larry Prusakis Whats the Big Idea? (Harvard Business School Press), which describes how organizations modify and implement new management ideas to improve their performance. Prior to
this, Dr. Davenport wrote, coauthored, or edited nine other books, including the rst books on business process reengineering, knowledge
management, attention in business, and enterprise systems management.
He has written more than 100 articles for publications such as Harvard
Business Review, Sloan Management Review, California Management
Contributors
Review, Financial Times, and many others. Dr. Davenport has also been
a columnist for CIO, InformationWeek, and Darwin magazines.
Loretta David, MBA, CPIM, CIRM, CDP, holds an MBA in business management with a BS in mathematics and is certied in data processing
(CDP). Ms. David is currently a business consultant with SSA Global, responsible for proposing and demonstrating solution sales to installed base
clients for BPCS and various partner products. She has been a member of
APICS (American Production and Inventory Control Society) for over
20 years and has held many board positions, including president of the
APICS Atlanta Chapter from 2002 to 2004 (with almost 1,000 members)
and president of APICS Shreveport, Louisiana.
Mark Dinning is the RFID Project Leader in the Supply Chain Engineering Group at Dell Inc. He coauthored Fighting Friction, an article about
the applied use of RFID technology, which appeared as the February
2003 cover story in APICS Magazine. Mr. Dinning has a masters of engineering in supply chain management from MIT and an undergraduate
degree in business economics from UCLA. Mr. Dinning wrote his thesis
in conjunction with the MIT Auto-ID Center, the group responsible for
the development and standardization of RFID technology. Prior to Dell
Inc. and MIT, he was one of the original employees at Tickets.com.
Mr. Dinning began his career at Deloitte & Touche and is a Certied Public Accountant.
Dr. John E. Ettlie is the Malelon L. and Richard N. Rosett Professor of Business Administration and Director of the Technology Management Center
at the Rochester Institute of Technology. He earned his Ph.D. at Northwestern University in 1975 and has held appointments since then at the
University of Illinois Chicago, De Paul University, the Industrial Technology Institute, the University of Michigan Business School, the U.S.
Business School in Prague, and Catolica University in Lisbon, Portugal.
Professor Ettlie has been the consultant to numerous corporations and
government projects, including the Saturn Corporation, Allied-Signal
Corporation, Caterpillar Tractor, Inc., PACAR Reynolds Metals, Kodak,
Delphi Corporation, and many others. He is the associate editor of sev-
xi
xii
Contributors
eral professional journals, including the Journal of Operations Management and Production and Operations Management. He has authored six
books, including the second edition of his textbook titled Managing Innovation to be published by Elsevier (expected summer 2005).
Dr. Thomas F. Gattiker, CFPIM, is Assistant Professor of Operations Management at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and is an afliate of the interdisciplinary Engineering Management Program. He has published in
Information and Management, Production and Inventory Management
Journal, International Journal of Production Research, Quality Management Journal, and The Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education. His current research is the application of information technology to
the operations and supply chain areas. He was the 1999 APICS George
and Marion Plossl Fellow. Before obtaining his Ph.D. from the University
of Georgia, he worked in operations and inventory management, most recently at Rockwell Automation and Reliance Electric.
Dr. Dale L. Goodhue is the C. Herman and Mary Virginia Terry Chair of
Business Administration and Head of the Department of MIS at the University of Georgias Terry College of Business. He has published in Management Science, MIS Quarterly, Decision Sciences, Sloan Management
Review, and other journals. His research interests include measuring the
impact of information systems, the impact of task-technology t on individual performance, and the management of data and other IS infrastructures and resources. In particular, he is currently focusing on identifying the impacts and implementation success factors of enterprise
resource planning (ERP) systems and data warehousing.
Jeanne G. Harris is associate partner, Senior Research Fellow, and Director of Research (Chicago) at the Accenture Institute for High Performance
Business. She has a masters degree in information science from the University of Illinois and is currently conducting research on the next generation of enterprise solutions and the economics of IT innovation. Her past
research topics include improving managerial performance, knowledge
management, business intelligence, building analytic capabilities, customer relationship management, customer-centric strategies, mobile personalization, and realizing value from enterprise solutions; she also speaks
Contributors
xiii
xiv
Contributors
Contributors
xv
xvi
Contributors
terests include supply chain management, electronic procurement and reverse auctions, e-commerce, industrial marketing, and ERP systems.
Ed Schuster has held the appointment of Director of the Afliates Program
in Logistics at the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics and is
currently helping to organize a new research effort involving the largescale analysis of data. His interests are in the application of models to logistical and planning problems experienced in industry. He has a bachelors of science in food technology from Ohio State University and a
masters in public administration with an emphasis in management science from Gannon University. Mr. Schuster also attended the executive
development program for physical distribution managers at the University of Tennessee and holds several professional certications.
Dr. Ashok Soni is Chairperson and Professor of Operations and Decision
Technologies and the SAP Faculty Fellow at the Kelley School of Business
at Indiana University. He received a B.S. in aeronautical engineering from
Manchester University, an M.S. in operations research from Strathclyde
University, and an MBA and DBA from Indiana University. Professor
Sonis teaching and research interests are in the areas of enterprise applications, technology, e-business, and decision support systems. His research interests are in enterprise technologies and decision support systems. His research has appeared in Management Science, Naval Logistics
Research, Omega, IIE Transactions, and European Journal of Operational Research.
Dr. R. P. Sundarraj is currently an Associate Professor of Information Systems at the University of Waterloo. He obtained his bachelors in electrical engineering from the University of Madras, India, and his M.S. and
Ph.D. in management and computer sciences from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Professor Sundarrajs teaching and research encompass
the development of methodologies for the efcient design and management
of emerging information systems, as well as the use of massive parallel
computing for solving large-scale problems. He has published in various
national and international journals such as Mathematical Programming,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, and European Journal of Operational Research. In addi-
Contributors
tion, he has provided e-commerce solutions for marketing and inventorymanagement problems arising in Fortune-100 companies.
Dr. Mohan V. Tatikonda is an Associate Professor of Operations Management at Indiana Universitys Kelley School of Business. Dr. Tatikonda
holds a doctorate in operations management from Boston University and
an M.S. in manufacturing systems engineering, an MBA in operations
management, and a B.S. in electrical engineering, all from the University
of Wisconsin at Madison. He is an APICS certied fellow (CFPIM) and a
PDMA certied professional in new product development (NPDP). He
has received several awards for teaching excellence, including the Otteson
award and the MBA teaching excellence award. His research has received
the best doctoral dissertation award from the Production and Operations Management Society. Professor Tatikondas research on new product development and the supply chain has been published in journals such
as Management Science and Journal of Operations Management. He contributed three chapters to the recent book New Directions in Supply Chain
Management. He has taught elective courses on the practice and theory
of product innovation to MBA, Executive MBA, and Ph.D. students and
has consulted for SAP, the World Bank, and other major organizations.
Dr. M.A. Venkataramanan is a professor of Operations and Decision Technologies at the Indiana University, Bloomington. He received his Ph.D. in
business analysis and research from Texas A&M University. His research
interests include network modeling, optimization techniques, combinatorial models, articial intelligence, high-speed computing, and supply chain
models. His teaching interests are in the area of decision support systems,
computer programming, enterprise resource planning (ERP), optimization
techniques, and project management. He is one of the principle investigators in the ERP research and teaching initiative at Indiana University.
He has more than 20 research articles published in a variety of journals,
including Operations Research, Decision Sciences, Annals of Operations
Research, Naval Research Logistics, Computers and OR, EJOR, and
Mathematical Modeling.
Dr. Iris Vessey is a Professor of Information Systems at Indiana Universitys
Kelley School of Business, Bloomington. Dr. Vessey received her M.S.,
xvii
xviii
Contributors
Contributors
xix
Transactional applicationsS
(B2B/B2C e-commerce)
Data mining
Data warehousing
SRM andS
collaborative R&D
CRM andS
collaborative R&D
ERP=
SCM andS
collaborative logistics
FIGURE
1.1
Ta b l e 1 . 1
ERP product versus process benets
Variability
reduction
Bottleneck
reduction
Waste
reduction
Rationalization of number
of business procedures.
Less uncertainty as to how a
transaction will be executed
Standardized interfaces.
Reduction in variance in
human-computer and
computer-computer
processing time
Training/education of users.
Reduced variation in
interpretations of corporate
goals, operational priorities,
and transactional procedures
Rationalization of number of
business procedures. Fewer
processes make the
identication of bottleneck
sources easier, and allow
for smoother reactive
capacity adjustments
Standardized interfaces.
Signicant reduction of time
required for transactions, in
some cases eliminating
bottlenecks
Training/education of users.
More workers have the
ability to recognize
bottlenecks
Rationalization of number
of business procedures.
Elimination of unnecessary,
redundant or waste-generating
business subprocesses
Standardized interfaces.
Allowing easier comparability
of interdepartmental sources of
waste and hastening treatment
Training/education of users.
More workers have the
ability to recognize waste
and future waste-generating
processes
issues regarding the existing functional capabilities of ERP systems and the
underutilization of these existing capabilities by rms. We also hope to illuminate the potential for extensions of the capabilities of these systems to
support both intra-organizational and inter-organizational resource management decisions and strategies. If accomplished, these objectives begin
to ll the knowledge gap that has served as a barrier to many managers
in cost-justifying both their prior technology investments and future
strategically focused management decisions (a gap that is currently not
lled by the existing literature).
Its How You Use It, Stupid!
design and planning activities that support competitive gains in innovativeness across supply chains. The rst of these chapters (Joseph and
Ettlie) discusses the value potential of both R&D collaborative technologies and the architectural standards (e.g., ERP) that support their use.
Although optimistic of the ability to ultimately link market results to this
use, the authors warn against myopic views of IT that still limit the realization of potential. In a subsequent chapter by Vollmann, this potential
is given greater emphasis and detail in execution. Case studies are drawn
on to illustrate how ERP architecture facilitates the evolution of dyadic
relationships within supply chains as well as the creation of idiosyncratic
inimitable gains that these relationships may embody.
In our nal section (Future Visibility and Accountability), we present the thoughts of researchers regarding the safeguards required to ensure the maintenance of strategic capabilities and subsequently the competitive strengths drawn from an evolving techno-organizational operating
architecture such as ERP. We begin this section with a chapter that touches
on what may ultimately be one of the most pivotal business technologies
of the early part of this century and one that is currently considered to
be a terra-former of future competitive landscapesAuto-ID (Schuster
et al.). The authors discuss the developing implications for ERP systems
resulting from increased data obtained through Auto-ID technology. It is
anticipated that nearly all components of existing ERP packages will be
affected by Auto-ID, allowing many more applications in practice given
the increased ow of data through the application of Auto-ID.
This discussion is followed by a chapter (Sarkis and Sundarraj)
outlining the critical nature of ongoing ERP architecture evaluation
in-line with the support of sustained competitive advantage. The authors
provide some detail on the process of evaluating these strategy-enabling
systems within the context of a broad systems development or technology
management framework. A number of methodological approaches and
tools for evaluation are outlined. Insights related to the implementation
of these approaches for ERP evaluation are also provided.
Given the wide range of expert viewpoints and ndings depicted in
these chapters, we conclude this compilation with a set of summary thoughts
and prescriptions regarding strategic ERP extension and use (Davids and
Bendoly). Based on the vast array of positive case experiences describing
already substantial gains and notable suggestions for advancement (along
with common pitfalls that have ensnared misguided rms and misaligned
implementations), we stress that an image of the strategic relevance of
ERP as an enabler of novelty and agility is critical in valuing this technology not only from a business case perspective but also from the perspective of business landscape development. With emphasis on the fact that
the strategic opportunities posed by ERP implementations are far from
past and in fact continue to be revealed as technology and management
practice evolve, we describe options and considerations essential to garnering strategic value from ERP in the future.
14
15
16
17
18
rm argues that strategy should be derived from the internal assets and
value-creating capabilities of an organization.
One extension of the resource-based view that is particularly
relevant to ERP adoption decisions is knowledge-based theories of the
rm (Grant, 1991, 1996; Kogut and Zander, 1993; Liebeskind, 1996;
Nonaka, 1994; Spender, 1996). The knowledge-based view suggests that
the main source of differences in rm performance lies in the heterogeneous knowledge bases and diverse capabilities for putting knowledge
into action that vary from rm to rm. Thus, knowledge and the social,
human, and intellectual capital needed to transform knowledge into competitive action are the most signicant resources and capabilities driving
a rms competitive performance. Unfortunately, this realization is often
neglected during the ERP adoption process.
ERP advocates argue that enterprise systems are substantial,
competitive assets on their own because of the benets of seamless
functional integration, coupled with the ability to enable rms to more
effectively leverage their other key resources (Davenport, 1998). However, from a resource-based perspective, the competitive utility of ERP
systems contains an inherent paradox (Lengnick-Hall, Lengnick-Hall,
and Abdinnour-Helm, 2004). On the positive side, ERP systems are valuable because they enable rms to accurately assess and tightly coordinate
production capabilities and to develop responsive relationships with customers based on reliable and precise information (Dillon, 1999). Moreover, through links between ERP systems, rms can coordinate with
suppliers to manage the entire supply chain more efciently and smoothly
(Fisher, 1997; Bendoly, Soni, and Venkataramanan, 2004). In addition,
ERP systems as implementations are largely nonsubstitutable.
Of course, ERP systems in themselves and in concept are not rare.
Industry-wide ERP adoption promotes competitive parity among major
players, and it moves an industry away from opportunities for sustained
competitive advantage (Grant, 1991). In addition, ERP systems are not
entirely inimitable, although idiosyncratic implementations and instances
of these architectures can be as inimitable as the unique operational
processes they support. Third-party vendors create ERP technologies,
making basic standardized components easy to copy or acquire. Vendors
create modules designed to capture the most signicant aspects of
common industry activities and relationships. Both by denition and
19
20
can be translated into opportunities for learning and continuous improvement in performance among individuals, groups, and the organization as
a whole. Each of these elements offers a signicant route to enhancing
intellectual capital and organizational learning. The managerial challenge
is to translate this potential into organizational reality. If employees do
not trust the information an ERP system provides, if they do not recognize the value of using the data to guide their behavior, or if they do not
input information into the system in an accurate and timely way, ERP can
undermine rather than enhance the rms knowledge. It is important to
recognize that none of the potential social capital development, intellectual
capital formation, or knowledge enhancement can be realized unless the
people within an organization make it happen. Attitudes toward ERP,
toward change, and toward the organization all inuence the likelihood
that the potentially important strategic consequences of ERP adoption
will be achieved.
A Case Study on Perceptions of ERP Use
21
22
PreGo Live
Frequency
200
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
More trouble than worth
7
Essential
7
Essential
PostGo Live
Frequency
200
150
100
50
0
FIGURE
2.1
1
2
3
4
More trouble than worth
23
24
25
26
PreGo Live
250
Frequency
200
150
100
50
0
7
High
7
High
Low
PostGo Live
250
Frequency
200
150
100
50
0
1
Low
FIGURE
2.2
27
28
44% felt that there was a low likelihood that the benets
would exceed the costs.
Of the respondents who had been employed by the company for
16 or more years, 22% felt that there was a high likelihood that
the benets would exceed the costs, whereas 46% felt that there
was a low likelihood that the benets would exceed the costs.
An examination of the data by organizational afliation revealed the
following:
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in manufacturing operations and support functions, 33% felt that
there was a high likelihood that the benets would exceed the
costs, whereas 39% felt that there was a low likelihood that
the benets would exceed the costs.
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in nal
assembly operations and support functions, 22% felt that
there was a high likelihood that the benets would exceed the
costs, whereas 38% felt that there was a low likelihood that
the benets would exceed the costs.
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in other
areas, 40% felt that there was a high likelihood that the
benets would exceed the costs, whereas 34% felt that there
was a low likelihood that the benets would exceed the costs.
Post-Go-Live-Results
Of the professionals and engineers who responded to the survey, 27% felt that the benets exceeded the costs, whereas
53% felt that the benets had not exceeded the costs.
An examination of the data by tenure at the company revealed the
following:
Of the respondents who have been employed by the company
for 5 years or less, 34% felt that the benets exceeded the
costs, whereas 46% felt that the benets had not exceeded
the costs.
Of the respondents who have been employed by the company
for a period of 6 to 10 years, 23% felt that the benets exceeded the costs, whereas 61% felt that the benets had not
exceeded the costs.
Of the respondents who have been employed by the company
for a period of 11 to 15 years 17% felt that the benets exceeded the costs, whereas 66% felt that the benets had not
exceeded the costs.
Of the respondents who have been employed by the company
for 16 or more years, 17% felt that the benets exceeded the
costs, whereas 70% felt that the benets had not exceeded the
costs.
An examination of the data by organizational afliation revealed the
following:
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in manufacturing operations and support functions, 24% felt that the
benets exceeded the costs, whereas 62% felt that the benets
had not exceeded the costs.
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in nal
assembly operations and support functions, 19% felt that the
benets exceeded the costs, whereas 59% felt that the benets
had not exceeded the costs.
Of the respondents who indicated that they worked in other
areas, 25% felt that the benets exceeded the costs, whereas
51% felt that the benets had not exceeded the costs.
29
30
Employees were asked to indicate the extent to which they believed the ERP system would be used for a variety of specic activities and
operations (Figures 2.3 and 2.4).
Pre-Go-Live Results
HR administrationS 12
10
S
Manufacturing/S
10 11
industrial engineeringS
S
ProcurementS 7 9
S
39
46
16
28
57
26
11
Capacity managementS
S
11
Operations schedulingS
S
MRP management and controlS
S
Sales and operations planningS
S
MeasuringS
(organization) performanceS
S
Financial and cost control
58
24
58
23
29
35
35
57
22
51
30
63
22
60
14
27
56
28
51
5 8
28
55
10
20
Low
2.3
22
46
5 8
FIGURE
57
14
33
56
Warehouse managementS 8 9
S
Tool planning manufacture/S
10 11
maintenanceS
S
Production managementS
9
10
for assemblyS
S
Production managementS
9
10
for making partsS
S
Quality assuranceS 13
12
S
Workaround adjustmentsS
S
38
30
40
32
50 60
Percent
Medium
High
70
80
90 100
Dont know
HR administrationS
S
Manufacturing/S
industrial engineeringS
S
ProcurementS
S
11
16
17
13
16
10
18
31
33
36
22
14
36
29
23
14
36
26
15
Workaround adjustmentsS
S
24
15
24
13
19
10
Operations schedulingS
S
MRP management and controlS
S
Sales and operations planningS
S
MeasuringS
(organization) performanceS
S
Financial and cost control
19
11
16
13
10
20
41
36
28
42
41
29
43
30
29
48
15
31
13
20
32
29
10
19
13
33
12
Low
2.4
35
39
13
20
46
39
Capacity managementS
S
FIGURE
23
10
21
Warehouse managementS
S
Tool planning manufacture/S
maintenanceS
S
Production managementS
for assemblyS
S
Production managementS
for making partsS
S
Quality assuranceS
S
64
36
30
30
40
44
50 60
Percent
Medium
High
70
80
90
Dont know
100
33
34
support and thus engender strategic benet indirectly. Second, the longterm competitive value from ERP comes from its ability to generate
knowledge that a rm can act on to change its business practices, introduce innovation, and build social and intellectual capital. Unless these
uses of ERP are highlighted and integrated into the selection of a system
and its implementation process at the adoption stage, they will most likely
be lost during subsequent stages of implementation. Third, without an
accompanying investment in behavioral and culture change, ERP tends to
augment the more rigid aspects of organizational activity (planning and
control) and inhibit the more exible aspects of organizational activity
(learning and innovation). These trends are likely to create barriers to
competitive advantage in the uid knowledge economy.
35
37
38
BPICS) also started to transform their packages to ERP systems by providing more integrated functionalities such as accounting, order entry,
and warehouse management. These new offerings, aimed at the SME market, motivated many SMEs to become willing players in the ERP arena.
A recent study suggests that the experiences of large companies
implementing enterprise systems (Mabert, Soni, and Venkataramanan,
2003) may be very different from those of small and medium enterprises.
That study, for example, shows that companies, depending on size, tend
to do different things with their ERP implementations across a variety of
issues. These differences range from the motivation for implementing
such systems to the types of systems adopted to the implementation
process itself. In addition, there are key differences by company size in
the outcomes and benets attained. For example, larger companies report improvements in nancial measures, whereas smaller companies
report better performance in manufacturing and logistics metrics. This
preliminary evidence suggests that the activities and experiences of large
companies may not be applicable to SMEs. Thus, it is important and
useful to study more fully the deployment of ERP systems and related
applications as they apply to small and medium enterprises (Bendoly and
Kaefer, 2004).
German SMEs The Mittelstand
39
40
These characteristics of the German Mittelstand companies illustrate their uniqueness. Clearly, they have been able to compete very effectively, both nationally and globally, over a long period of time using a
variety of strategies. Many of them cite information technology as a key
component of their competitive strategy. For example, Voigt (2001)
found that 22% of the German SMEs, a majority of them in manufacturing, see IT as a way to secure and improve their competitive position and
ability to remain more responsive. This makes an investigation into the
enterprise system experiences of Mittelstand SMEs not only interesting
but also necessary. The next section outlines the methodology used in
this study.
Out in the Field
Ta b l e 3 . 1
Characteristics of the case study companies
Company
Industry type
Company A
Company B
Company C
Company D
Company E
Company F
Company G
Company H
Company I
Company J
Company K
Company L
Company M
Company N
Company O
Company P
Company Q
Company R
Size
(# employees)
Revenue
(million )
1,000
600
900
770
593
1,200
1,100
378
120
64
90
100
140
320
700
2,000
220
208
100
235
600
3,000
480
500
350
80 85
100
Not available
25
24
60
200
380
70
275
100
41
42
Ta b l e 3 . 2
Shop and product characteristics
Flow of materials
Job shop
Flow shop
Mixture shop
Products
Number
10/18
5/18
3/18
Number
Standard products
Custom products
Standard and custom
8/18
4/18
6/18
Order makeup
Number
Made-to-order
Made-to-stock
Mixed
10/18
2/18
6/18
tape-recorded and transcribed in English. While the format was semistructured with open-ended, predetermined questions, all discussions
covered the following areas at a minimum:
What is the state of enterprise systems?
Why did the company decide on an enterprise system solution?
How was the system implemented, and what was the
implementation experience?
What were the resources utilized and the benets accumulated?
What areas of the organization experienced improvements
after the implementation? Disappointments?
What lessons were learned?
What do these companies plan to do in the future?
The primary objective of the case studies was to obtain reliable and detailed
information on the current status of ERP practice and implementations in
the manufacturing SMEs.
Comparing SME Experiences
medium enterprises. The two exceptions and the ones most relevant to the
current study are by Van Everdigen, Van Hillegersberg, and Warts (2000)
and Mabert, Soni, and Venkataramanan (2003). Van Everdigen et al.
surveyed 2,647 European companies to determine the adoption and
penetration of ERP by functionality. This study provides a reference point
on the status of enterprise systems in European SMEs in 1999, the year of
their survey. Mabert et al. looked at the ERP implementation practices
of manufacturing companies across a range of different-sized companies.
Thus, their results not only provide key insights into the implementation
and use of ERP systems in the manufacturing sector but also analyze
the impact of company size on ERP implementations. They found that
smaller companies differ signicantly from large companies on a number
of dimensions. The Mabert et al. survey was undertaken in 2000 and provided the following observations:
1. Adoption of ERP systems by large companies is motivated
more by strategic needs, whereas tactical considerations carry
greater importance for smaller companies. Companies implement ERP systems for many different reasons. These reasons
include gaining a strategic advantage, acquiring a simplied
information systems infrastructure, standardizing processes,
improving customer and supplier interactions, linking global
operations, and solving the Y2K problem. For larger companies, the top three reasons for adopting ERP systems were gaining a strategic advantage, simplifying and standardizing processes, and replacing legacy systems. Over 90% of the large
rms cited these three reasons for choosing ERP systems. For
smaller rms, the top three reasons were replacing legacy systems, simplifying and standardizing processes, and improving
interactions with suppliers and customers. There were clear
and distinct differences between the priorities of the large and
small rms.
2. Large companies use an incremental implementation
approach by phasing in the systems, while smaller companies
adopt more radical implementation approaches, such as
implementing the entire system or several major modules at
the same time. The strategies used for implementation are one
43
44
Ta b l e 3 . 3
Motivational factors
Motivational factor
Gain competitive advantage
Improve interactions with suppliers and customers
Vendor support and ease of upgrades
Link to global activities
Product /process complexity
Solve the Y2K problem
Number
18/18
17/18
16/18
7/18
2/18
2/18
45
46
Ta b l e 3 . 4
Enterprise systems characteristics by company
Company
Single or
multiple
systems
Major ERP
package or
niche provider
Standard system
versus customized
system
Implementation
approach
Company A
Company B
Company C
Company D
Company E
Company F
Company G
Company H
Company I
Company J
Company K
Multiple
Multiple
Multiple
Multiple
Single
Single
Multiple
Multiple
Single
Multiple
Multiple
Standard
Standard
Customized
Customized
Customized
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Customized
Standard
Phased in
Big bang
Phased in
Phased in
Phased in
Big bang
Phased in
Big bang
Phased in
Big bang
Phased in
Company L
Company M
Company N
Company O
Company P
Company Q
Company R
Multiple
Multiple
Single
Single
Single
Multiple
Legacy
Big (SAP)
Niche (Oxion)
Internal
Big (SAP)
Big (SAP)
Big (SAP)
Big (SAP)
Big (Baan)
Big (SAP)
Niche (Rohna)
Niche (Moves
Intentia)
Niche (Brain)
Niche (Ratioplan)
Big (SAP)
Big (SAP)
Big (PeopleSoft)
Big (SAP)
Legacy
Standard
Customized
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Legacy
Big bang
Phased in
Phased n
Phased in
Big bang
Phased in
Still TBD
Ta b l e 3 . 5
Conguration and implementation of systems
Conguration of ERP systems
Major package ERP system
Niche ERP system
Internally developed ERP system
No ERP system
Conguration of ERP systems
Number
11/18
5/18
1/18
1/18
Number
6/18
10/18
1/18
Number
12/18
5/18
1/18
Implementation approach
Big-bang approach
Phased-in approach
Number
6/18
11/18
47
48
SMEs, Van Everdigen et al. found that 30% of the ERP systems implemented came from smaller or niche vendors, and over half of the
companies preferred their in-house developed, tailor-made information
systems to the package ERP systems. The case studies conducted for this
project seem to show that companies looking for a good t with their
business practices in 2004 are more likely to adopt a large-scale ERP
system.
Another area that appears to have changed over the last few years
involves the strategies used for the implementation of enterprise systems.
These strategies are one of the most important factors in assessing the
impact of an ERP system on an organization. Strategies can range from a
single go-live date for all modules (big bang) or for a subset of modules
(mini big bang) to phasing in by module or site. While the big-bang
approach usually results in the shortest implementation time, it is also the
riskiest approach because it can threaten the entire stability of a company
in case of any problems. The decision of which strategy to deploy depends
on a range of issues, including complexities of geographical reach and
the complexity of processes and operations. Our work shows that 61% of
the Mittelstand SMEs implemented their ERP system using one of the
phased-in approaches, while 28% used a big-bang approach. This is
almost the reverse of the SMEs in the United States in 2000, whereas
Mabert et al. reported that over 72% of the SMEs used one of the two
big-bang approaches. Here again, the implementation strategies appear
to have changed over the period from 2000 to 2004.
SMEs also seem to have changed when it comes to customization
of the systems. Because of the integrative architecture of ERP systems,
customization can be prohibitively expensive. Mabert et al. determined
that the degree of customization varies signicantly depending on the size
of the company. Larger companies customize more, with over 50% of
them making either signicant or major modications. On the other
hand, most small companies in the United States made only minor
modications, but the case studies show that 28% of the Mittelstand
companies made major modications to their system.
Another key difference among companies is the conguration of
the ERP systems implemented. In 2000, approximately 56% of small
companies in the United States used a single ERP package, while only
28% of the large companies used this approach. One clear distinction
driving this difference is the complexity of the organization. Large companies are more likely to have more global operations, more sites, and
generally more complex operations that frequently reect mergers and
acquisitions of diverse operations. Even the ERP systems may not be able
to provide the functionality required to manage these complex enterprises
and disjointed operations. To remedy such shortcomings, companies are
increasingly using either self-contained add-on ERP modules or extension
systems, called bolt-ons, for functions such as demand planning, order
tracking, warehouse management, supply chain management, customer
relationship management, online collaboration, e-procurement, and online business-to-business transactions. Not every ERP system can support these specialized add-ons. Thus, their use becomes a key decision factor not only for which system is adopted but also for how the package
is implemented, as well as future enhancements and upgrades. This is
demonstrated with the Mittelstand companies, in which 56% of the
SMEs use multiple systems, a reverse of what the U.S. companies reported
in 2000.
Summary and Conclusions
49
50
51
53
54
55
56
OLeary is not the only one to sing the praises of ERP. When one
talks to ERP software providers, reads various promotional brochures, or
visits either vendor or other commercial ERP Websites, one gains the
impression that ERP systems are the Holy Grail of information systems
for enterprises. Some of the claims include the abilities to link the entire
organization together seamlessly, improve productivity, provide instantaneous information, etc. However, there is another side to this story.
Improving Functionality
SRM andS
collaborative R&D
ENTERPRISE.
DOMAIN
DM
CRM andS
collaborative R&D
ERP
Customers
APS
SEM
SCM andS
collaborative logistics
Third parties
FIGURE
4.1
57
58
slow; in fact, salespeople in the eld found themselves unable to download customer information from the companys databases onto their
laptop. Every time they tried, their machine froze. Eventually, Monster.com
was forced to rebuild the entire system. It lost millions of dollars along
the way, not to mention the goodwill of both customers and employees
(Rigby, Reicheld, and Schefter, 2002).
While billions of dollars have been expended on IT systems such
as ERP and bolt-ons, the question remains as to their value to the enterprise. From limited reports in editorials and the popular press (Cliffe,
1999; Deutsch, 1998), the success of ERP systems in achieving the stated
objectives is mixed at best. For example, FoxMeyer (Diederich, 1998)
claimed that an ERP implementation was the reason for its ultimate
failure, while it was reported that Hershey Foods Corporation (Nelson
and Ramstad, 1999) had a major distribution problem when it went live
with a new ERP system. Others (Piturro, 1999; Kirkpatrick, 1998)
emphasize that ERP is a key ingredient for gaining competitive advantage,
streamlining the supply chain, contributing to lean manufacturing, and
managing customer relationships. Thus, there are differing opinions on
whether basic ERP systems are an asset that can deliver on the stated
promises or a liability with signicant cost consequences.
The limited research that has occurred addresses the implementation process itself, focusing on project management issues such as onbudget and on-time performance for system implementation (Mabert,
Soni, and Venkataramanan, 2003). The next section presents an objective
view of ERP systems and bolt-ons as management tools for coordinating
and guiding the activities of an organization based on a survey conducted
in January 2004.
Recent Experience
59
60
61
62
the 187 useful responses, a 9.3% return rate, are the basis for the
observations discussed below. Respondents were not asked to provide
company-identifying information, and postage-paid return envelopes
were provided to maintain condentiality.
Basic Company Information
Table 4.1 presents some basic information concerning the respondents and their rms. As can be seen, there is a wide variety of rms and
respondents. The table indicates that 74% of the respondents are at the
manager level or above in their respective organizations. The other category includes staff planners and project leaders. The sample rms span
a wide range in size as measured by revenue and employment. Close to a
quarter of the rms have annual revenues exceeding $1 billion per year,
while about 40% are under $100 million. In terms of workforce level,
about 50% employed fewer than 500 people. The demographic data
indicate that the respondents represent a wide cross-section of rms and
industries, suggesting a representative group for assessing current and
future effort to build and utilize best-of-breed systems.
For the purposes of this chapter, we focus on the data from rms
in the survey that had already implemented ERP systems. In Table 4.2,
you can see that 76% of our sample had already implemented ERP systems. These rms have average revenues that are about six times higher
Ta b l e 4 . 1
Respondent information
Current position
Percentage
Other
Manager
Executive/owner
25.9
53.5
20.6
Revenues ($)
5 billion X
1 billion X 5 billion
500 million X 1 billion
100 million X 500 million
50 million X 100 million
25 million X 50 million
X 25 million
Percentage
6.8
18.7
9.6
23.8
16.4
11.9
12.5
Employment
1,000 X
500 X 1,000
100 X 500
X 100
Industry
Chemical /pharmaceutical
Automotive
Aerospace
Electronics
General manufacturing
Percentage
45.7
6.3
43.1
4.7
Percentage
16.1
7.0
5.3
9.1
62.6
Ta b l e 4 . 2
ERP users versus nonusers
Percentage enterprises
Average enterprise revenues
Percentage employees above 1,000
76.4%
$3.0 billion
82.1%
22.6%
$.45 billion
17.9%
than those who had not implemented ERP. Also, 82% of the rms that
already used ERP have more than 1,000 employees. These rms are on
leading edge in building and employing best-of-breed systems because
they have the nancial and technical resources necessary to attempt this
complex task.
Current Best-of-Breed Systems
63
Cost of quality
Independent
departments
Standard operating
procedures
Predictable cost
and rates
Automated
Spreadsheets
Business pain
Driving goal
Organizational
focus
Process change
Metric
IT focus
Key planning
tools
Key execution
tools
The fundamentals
Stage I
MRP II
Point tools
Packaged
On-time, complete
delivery
Cross-functional
communications
Consolidated operations
Customer service
Unreliable order
fulllment
Stage II
Cross-functional
teams
ERP
Enterprise supply
chain planning
Integrated
Cross-functional
processes
Integrated supply
chains (internal)
Protable customer
responsiveness
Cost of customer
service
Integrated enterprise
Stage III
Ta b l e 4 . 3
The supply chain compass
Customer management
systems
Point-of-sale supply
chain planning
Inter-operable
Share of customer
Customer-specic
processes
Integrated supply
chains (external)
Protable growth
Stage IV
Extended supply
chain
Network-centric
commerce
Synchronized supply
chain planning
Networked
New worth
Reinvented processes
Rapidly
recongurable
Market leadership
Nonpreferred supplier
Stage V
Supply chain
communities
Ta b l e 4 . 4
Current bolt-on system usage ranked by percent of users
Current bolt-on software
Inventory management system
Demand forecasting and planning system
Factory planning and scheduling system (MES)
Quality management system
Data warehouse system
Warehouse management system
Product data management (PDM) system
Project management system
Call center management system
Customer relationship management
(CRM) system
E-procurement system
Supply network planner system
Trafc management system
E-auction system
Percent of
users
Product
improvement
Sales
increase
73.0
66.7
65.1
46.0
44.4
41.3
40.5
29.4
21.4
21.4
3.75
3.79
3.70
3.60
3.82
4.06
3.90
3.83
4.00
3.37
3.33
3.40
3.40
3.29
3.02
3.33
3.20
3.22
3.81
3.59
19.8
19.0
19.0
11.1
3.68
3.63
3.87
3.71
2.96
3.81
3.08
3.29
65
66
emphasizing systems that optimize the use of their current resources. The
bottom six bolt-ons (in terms of the percentage of adopters) could all be
characterized as systems that tend to be more external than the ones
higher on the list. This suggests that rms want to have their internal
systems in order before expending extensive effort on external facing
systems.
To estimate the impact of bolt-on systems on performance, data
were collected on productivity improvements as a result of bolt-ons and
on change in revenue over the last two years. In terms of productivity
increases, the following ve-point scale: 1 (decreased), 2 (no change),
3 (increased 1% to 5%), 4 (increased 6% to 10%), and 5 (increase more
than 10%). Using the provided responses, the average productivity for
the adopters of each bolt-on is shown in Table 4.3. This average gives an
indication of the amount of productivity improvement as a result of a
particular bolt-on. However, the results are also inuenced by the fact
that these rms may be using other bolt-ons as well. If one ranks the boltons based on the average productivity improvement, only two have an
average of 4 or above: warehouse management systems and call center
management systems. These bolt-ons gave an average improvement of
6% or greater. The top three adopted bolt-ons in Table 4.4 are, at best,
ranked seventh in terms of productivity improvement. This indicates that
these bolt-ons are probably the most mature and have much wider use in
manufacturing rms. Given that there is a high percentage of adopters of
these applications, there are likely to be some rms in the group that are
not leading-edge users. These rms may have adopted the most popular
applications, but they have not gained the same amount of benet as
leading competitors.
When looking at the change in revenue over that last two years,
again a ve-point scale was used with the following descriptors: 1 (large
decrease), 2 (moderate decrease), 3 (little change), 4 (moderate increase),
and 5 (large increase). These results are shown in the fourth column of
Table 4.4. The top two bolt-ons for companies with the highest average
sales increases were call center management systems and supply network
planner systems. Both of these systems are clearly externally focused,
which explains their impact on increasing revenue. Customer relationship
management systems are third, based on the average sales increases.
These applications are also designed to improve customer information
and should have a positive impact on sales. Therefore, these results indicate that many of the bolt-ons with external focus are in fact providing
the impact they are intended to provide.
Looking at bolt-ons in the top half on each performance measure,
there are only three that appear in both lists: Call center management
systems, warehouse management systems, and demand forecasting and
planning systems. All of these bolt-ons involve some component of a
customer interface. Call centers take customer calls, answer questions, or
place orders. Promptly and accurately handling these issues ensures that
resource use is driven by customer desires, which helps improve productivity. These types of systems also mean the difference between a satised customer who generates repeat sales and a disgruntled customer who
takes his or her business elsewhere. The warehouse management system
performs a similar function in making sure that the right products are at
the right warehouse at the right time to satisfy customer requirements.
Knowing a products location in the distribution system improves productivity by reducing wasted effort and the inventory required to maintain the same level of customer service. The last bolt-on that is in the top
half of both lists is demand forecasting and planning. These systems make
sure that the right items are in the demand plan for production and distribution. Accurate demand planning improves both customer service and
productivity. These systems also have an external component because
they frequently use direct input from the customer in terms of demand
information. Firms who are using these types of bolt-ons may already be
transitioning from an integrated enterprise in Stage III of the supply chain
compass to a Stage IV rm that has an extended supply chain. This transition raises the question of where rms will focus their future efforts in
building their best-of-breed systems.
When looking at these performance measures, one can surmise
that rms with the highest productivity or the highest sales growth be
rms that have created a best-of-breed system. Table 4.5 shows bolt-ons
that are being used by 50% or more of the rms with productivity
increases of 10% or above. The six bolt-ons that would comprise these
best-of-breed systems are all internally focused with the possible exceptions of two, demand forecasting and planning systems (discussed earlier)
and warehouse management systems that are tied to customers through the
distribution system. These rms appear to be clearly focused on Stage III of
67
68
Ta b l e 4 . 5
Best of breed based on productivity
Current bolt-on software
Inventory management system
Factory planning and scheduling system (MES)
Demand forecasting and planning system
Warehouse management system
Data warehouse system
Product data management (PDM) system
Percent of most
productive
77.4
71.0
67.7
64.5
51.6
51.6
Ta b l e 4 . 6
Best of breed based on sales
Current bolt-on software
Demand forecasting and planning system
Inventory management system
Factory planning and scheduling system (MES)
Quality management system
Call center management system
Warehouse management system
Customer relationship management (CRM) system
the supply chain compass, using all of these bolt-ons to create a tightly
integrated and successful enterprise. Thirty-one rms fell into the highest
category for productivity improvement, and all of these rms were using at
least one bolt-on, with 23 of those 31 rms using ve or more bolt-ons to
their ERP system. We can conclude that those rms are selecting and applying multiple bolt-ons to build their best-of-breed system.
The set of bolt-ons being used by about 50% of the rms that
were in the top sales growth category are given in Table 4.6. The top
three are the same as those in the list based on productivity with one
important difference: demand forecasting and planning was the highest
on the list. This particular bolt-on is the most externally oriented of
the top three, heavily oriented to using customer input in determining
the demand plan. A fourth bolt-on that appears on both lists was the
warehouse management system. The other three in the top seven are
customer oriented: call center management systems and customer relationship management systems are clearly focused on the customer, and
quality systems that are designed correctly use information from custom-
ers as part of the improvement process. It appears that rms may want
to use a different set of bolt-ons depending on whether they want to improve productivity or improve sales. Firms with the highest sales increases
all use at least one bolt-on, and 8 out of the 11 use ve or more bolt-ons.
This result shows that whether you are interested in increased sales or
increased productivity, selecting several bolt-ons to enhance your information system is one path to success. The only bolt-on not used by one of
the rms with the highest sales increases was the e-procurement system.
Obviously, using the four bolt-ons that appear on both lists would be a
good starting point for building a best-of-breed system to enhance enterprise performance.
Future Best-of-Breed Systems
Where are enterprises heading? Table 4.7 shows the bolt-ons that
respondents say they are going to install in the future. When looking at
future best-of-breed system plans, one sees a general change from an
internal to an external focus. The top future bolt-on (factory planning
and scheduling systems) is one of the top three currently being used. It is
a critical foundation bolt-on that is still internally focused and that is
helping to ne-tune the production process by improving execution on
the shop oor. This package can be customer driven because it involves
Ta b l e 4 . 7
Future plans for bolt-on systems ranked by percent
Future bolt-on software
Factory planning and scheduling system (MES)
Customer relationship management (CRM) system
E-procurement system
Quality management system
Demand forecasting and planning system
Warehouse management system
Supply network planner system
Inventory management system
Product data management (PDM) system
Data warehouse system
Call center management system
Trafc management system
Project management system
E-auction system
Percent of users
21.4
19.8
19.0
15.9
15.1
15.1
15.1
14.3
8.7
5.6
5.6
4.8
4.0
3.2
69
70
making sure that individual orders are completed as promised. The confounding factor about whether this system has an external focus depends
on where the decoupling point for customer orders is located for rms
using these systems. If the decoupling point is at the nished goods stage,
then the rm is in a make-to-stock situation and the linkage to specic
customer orders is not as strong. However, a company that decouples the
orders further upstream in their process has a much tighter linkage with
customers and is focusing on a more responsive approach to customer
requirements.
The more intriguing result is the ranking of the next two bolt-ons
that are in these rms future plans: customer relationship management
(CRM) and e-procurement systems. The purpose of these two bolt-ons is
to provide better linkages to the extended supply chain. CRM improves
the linkages to customers and enhances communication on the downstream side of a rms supply chain. E-procurement systems provide
linkages to suppliers and strengthen communication on the upstream side
of the supply chain. It appears that these rms are attempting to create an
extended supply chain by obtaining better information on both the upstream and downstream supply chains. Based on the supply chain compass, this is the next evolutionary step in moving from an integrated enterprise to an extended supply chain.
This chapter illustrates that rms that have already adopted ERP
systems are trying to get more functionality by adding bolt-ons to create
a best-of-breed system. The rms that are the top performers are the ones
that have selected the appropriate ve or more bolt-ons to enhance their
productivity and sales. The data suggest that rms in the future will
implement best-of-breed systems that are more externally oriented. These
enterprise application systems will allow rms to have an extended supply
chain and eventually lead to value chain resource planning, as discussed
by Bendoly et al. (2004).
72
Research Approach
Accentures Institute for Strategic Change conducted a quantitative analysis in
2002 of information obtained from surveys of 163 large businesses around the
world with enterprise solutions already in place. In addition, researchers studied
the experience of 28 organizations considered to be leading adopters of enterprise
solutions in the communications and high-technology, nancial services, government, products, and resources industries. Geographies represented were Australia,
Europe, and the United States. In 2003, 180 additional interviews were conducted
in the Asia-Pacic region, including mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, India,
Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. Complete results from those studies
were published in Davenport, Harris, and Cantrell (2002) and Broeking (2004).
Most of the results reported in this chapter are from the original study, with
discussions relating to the Asia-Pacic study specically identied.
FIGURE
5.1
50
42
Improved customerS
service and retentionS
32
Ease of expansion /S
growth and increased exibilityS
32
29
Headcount reductionS
26
25
Improved inventoryS
and asset managementS
22
21
Increased revenue
12
FIGURE
5.2
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percent of organizations naming the benetS
as a rst, second, or third priority to be achieved
73
74
70
69
63
60
Ease of expansion /S
growth and increased exibilityS
55
54
53
Improved customerS
service and retentionS
47
Headcount reductionS
40
Increased revenue
36
FIGURE
5.3
20
40
Percent
60
80
rst there. These are certainly useful benets, but they are also undeniably
difcult to translate into nancial returns. The most difcult (and nancially
rewarding) change objectivessuch as headcount reduction and increased
revenueswere at the bottom of the list. Firms might have achieved more
value if they had worked harder on more measurable and nancially
quantiable targets. Again, however, a comparison of Figures 5.2 and 5.3
indicates that rms often received benet in areas where they did not
target it.
All of these benets took time to be achieved (Figure 5.3). As we
have noted, faster transactions and nancial management benets were
among the rst to be delivered, with a majority of companies reporting
benet in only one year. Only about 20% of the companies we surveyed,
however, were able to achieve increased revenues or lower headcounts
within a year. Over 60% of surveyed rms had achieved some benet in
these categories four years after implementation.
As a result of this time lag, we have concluded that time itself is a
critical prerequisite for extracting value from enterprise systems. We and
other prognosticators argued that rms should attempt to change their
businesses and extract value as during implementation, but this apparently proved too difcult. Instead, most organizations installed ES with
little change to their businesses and gradually found value as they became
familiar with their systems.
What exactly takes so long? Our interviews suggested that three
factors were implicated:
Critical mass. Before an organization can use an ES to better
integrate across processes and units, it has to have a critical
mass of functionality installed. That takes a while for many
companies, who put in the systems one module or business unit
at a time. As one consumer goods CIO put it, The biggest
factor that contributed to benet realization was getting critical
mass, which leads to tight integration of business processes and
real-time access to information globally.
Infrastructure projects come rst, and add less value. The
earliest aspects of an ES implementation are back-ofce and
transaction-oriented components, but they are necessary to
provide a foundation for later front-ofce functions such as
CRM and supply chain optimization. A chemical company
CIO (in the eighth year of ES implementation) noted, The
emphasis this year will be on leveraging value from our applications. Benets are greater in the follow-up projects than in
getting the core infrastructure in place. Were just now starting
to gure out what they are.
Getting to know the data. A big part of value derives from using
ES data, and it apparently takes time to learn how to use it. As
another consumer products executive described, One challenge
has been going from a lot of transactional data to good business
information. Slowly but surely, people are doing their jobs in
different ways. About six months after implementation, people
start to understand what they can do with the data.
75
76
77
78
as Dow Chemical and Eastman Chemical are also experimenting with the
use of emerging integration technologies like Web services.
Optimize
79
80
help knowledge workers access and interpret enterprise solutions information relevant to specic tasks.
Once robust reporting and data access are widely available, the
next major challenge is providing the analytical capabilities that managers
need to analyze, correctly interpret, and apply their ES data to management decision making. Executives say that this is a separate issue, one that
goes beyond data access or performance management reporting. At Briggs
and Stratton, for example, executives originally assumed that their new ES
would address all their reporting needs. However, once they completed
their installation, executives found that their operational data was overwhelming in quantity and yet insufcient for making many business decisions. Management concluded that ES-based operational data was merely
a starting point to addressing their information and analytic needs.
Another way companies informate is by implementing new enterprise solutions functionality, such as performance measurement applications, to obtain managerial information not otherwise captured by their
systems. For example, executives at the Texas Education Agency attribute
much of their success to the extension of their ES to include performance
measurement. Using PeopleSofts balanced scorecard, they are able to
track performance on a monthly basis. Their ES capabilities enable them
to handle information requests quickly and analyze management information in new ways to generate insights into their operations.
Managing for Value
Enterprise systems have delivered tremendous value to organizations. Most organizations, however, can still wring a signicant amount
of additional value from their systems. We have suggested that organizations integrate, optimize, and informate in order to achieve more value,
but successful organizations also:
Invest the effort required to get a critical mass of implementation. Only organizations that have invested the time and
resources necessary to extensively implement ES throughout
their organizations will be able to capitalize on their promise
of better integration and seamless information ows between
functions, business units, and geographies (Figure 5.4).
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Within 1
12
2 4
Time to achieve benet (years)
5.4
More than 4
Ease of expansion /S
growth and increased exibilityS
Improved customer serviceS
and retentionS
Head count reductionS
Increased revenue
81
80
70
60
50
Percent
82
40
30
20
10
0
Within 1
12
2 4
More than 4
Time to benet since implementation (years)
Actively track metrics for the majority or all of expected benets, and S
processes and incentives have changed to supportS
Actively track metrics for a few key benets post-implementationS
Do not actively seek to measure and capture benets
FIGURE
5.5
70
60
Percent
50
40
30
20
10
0
Within 1
12
2 4
5.6
83
84
II
88
and processes should make it far easier to integrate knowledge across the
rm, which should allow organizations to better sense opportunities and
problems. Examples include discovering changes in customer demand
patterns, ascertaining worldwide purchase volumes, and so on.
On the other hand, it is less clear that enterprise computing
systems will facilitate response agility. The following quote from a case
study participant typies the view of a signicant number of managers:
In a way, we are slaves to the system, and we have accepted the technological imperative that that implies. We cannot improvise on process
because such innovations will ripple through the company and cause
problems for someone else (Ross and Vitale, 2000). Existing ERP
research suggests some means by which enterprise computing has this
type of effect. Response agility may entail changing the ERP conguration
(i.e., a change to a conguration table). Although built-in conguration
capabilities allow some changes to an organizations processes, the variety of process congurations supported by any single enterprise package
is limited. Thus, rms sometimes nd desired functionality lacking (Soh,
Kien, and Tay-Yap, 2000; Sommers and Nelson, 2003).
Second, because ERP processes and modules are tightly interlinked
with one another, any reconguration may be prohibitively resource
intensive (Akkermans et al., 2003), in part because each conguration
change runs the risk of unintended consequences that must be evaluated
in advance to the extent possible (Bingi, Sharma, and Godla, 1999;
Brown, 1998). Of course, any change that requires customization is still
riskier and probably costlier. More generally, the increasing complexity
of large-scale technologies, such as enterprise computing, creates knowledge barriers to organizations trying to leverage potential technologydriven benets (Boudreau and Robey, 2001; Robey, Ross, and Boudreau,
2002). Finally, because ERP typically increases the standardization and
centralization of processes and data, it may diminish the options available
to local personnel for responding to local challenges and opportunities
(Gattiker and Goodhue, 2004; Jacobs and Whybark, 2000).
Based on these notions, we suggest the following ingoing proposition:
Enterprise systems should be excellent in support of sensing
agility but more problematic in support of responding agility.
89
90
91
92
93
94
Ta b l e 6 . 1
Mechanisms by which ERP supports agility
Built-in exibility
Process integration
Data integration
Availability of add-on
software applications
Availability of consultant
knowledge
agility (along with sensing agility) quite extensively. Lead passing among
sales channels and using data from the opportunity management system
in production scheduling are two excellent examples. Beyond this particular case, the ndings from six additional companies we have studied
conrm this notion. To date we have observed a total of 28 instances of
ERP facilitated agility; of these, 19 were examples of responding agility.
In the beginning of this chapter, we also suggested that if enterprise
computing does affect agility, we would want to know the mechanisms by
which it has this impact. Based on interviews with the company described
in this case and on our other case studies, we see evidence of at least ve
different mechanisms through which enterprise systems provided agility.
These are summarized in Table 6.1.
The rst of these mechanisms, not too surprisingly, is the exibility
built into the ERP system. Actions such as moving or reassigning employees
or restructuring organizations seem to have been well anticipated by the
designers of ERP systems, and there are simple processes designed to accomplish these changes by reconguring the system. Such changes have been theoretically suggested in recent ERP research (Bendoly and Kaefer, 2004).
95
96
existing system, its architecture, and its processes quite well. This means
they can rapidly move to implementation, rather than spending months
coming to understand the existing nonstandard legacy systems.
Recognition of these ve mechanisms has a number of implications
for managers and researchers. ERP systems are often seen as a homogenizing force diminishing a companys ability to differentiate itself (via
its business processes) from its competitors. There are a number of wellpublicized examples of organizations eschewing broadly deployed packages, such as SAP, because these companies want to avoid using so-called
generic ERP-driven processes. Somewhat paradoxically, the fourth and
fth mechanisms in Table 6.1 suggest that there are strategic benets to
adopting the more widely deployed packages. The breadth of the consultant knowledge base and variety of bolt-on software available both
increase with the market share of core ERP package. Thus the logic of network externalities would apply: the more companies that have chosen a
particular solution, the more benets accrue to each of them.
Summary
98
Whang (1997) label this phenomenon as the bullwhip effect and suggest
remedies such as sharing point-of-sales data with suppliers and the operational alignment of channel member activities. In the 1990s, the coemergence
of advanced information technologies and supply chain management
philosophies led to numerous industry successes based on the benets of information sharing and collaboration among channel members. Well-known
examples include Wal-Marts retail link program, efcient consumer response in the grocery industry, quick response systems in the apparel industry, Dells direct sell and value chain models, and vendor-managed inventory
programs.
Sahin and Robinson (2002) surveyed the vast and growing literature on supply chain integration and proposed information sharing and
decision-making coordination (problem scope) as the two primary drivers
of supply chain cost performance. Their review of over 100 research studies found that operational improvements associated with enhanced information sharing and coordination ranged from 0% to 35% of total relevant costs, depending on the supply chain environment. While these
research efforts are encouraging, they only address make-to-stock supply
chains in which each channel member applies statistical inventory control
procedures to plan inventory that is held in anticipation of demand. In
spite of their importance in industry, not a single study investigates the application of extended ERP systems to improve channel integration in
make-to-order systems, in which all supply chain activities are performed
in direct response to a customers order, utilizing requirements planningbased procedures.
While the basic functionality for managing procurement and fulllment processes exists in current ERP software, our research ndings indicate that the prospective capabilities of ERP systems to integrate intra- and
inter-organizational replenishment activities, and thereby lower operating
costs, are underutilized in industry. We feel that this is in large part due to
an incomplete understanding of the alternative strategies for replenishment integration, the potential economic benet, and a clear implementation path. We draw conclusions about enhanced ERP replenishment systems from the authors research, addressing the value of information
sharing and coordination in make-to-order supply chains. The research,
based on the authors observations and experiences with several Fortune
500 companies in the construction equipment, building materials, and
99
100
Vendors LTS
Slack timeS
S
18 days
2 days
Tower fabricationS
10 days
Main frame
Power pack
Final assemblyS
23 days
7.1
the order time-fence, its conguration, quantity, and due date are locked
into the production schedule and subject to change only in emergencies.
This provides a stable FAS schedule for planning. A master production
schedule (MPS) coordinates module fabrication with assembly operations
and drives material requirements planning (MRP).
Figure 7.1 shows the lead-time relationships among the order
time-fence, the longest cumulative lead time in the BOM, nal assembly,
module production, and procurement operations for an illustrative drilling
rig from a construction equipment supply chain. The 53-day order timefence corresponds to the longest cumulative procurement and nal assembly lead-time path of a noninventoried component. The total lead time for
drilling tower fabrication and nal assembly is 33 days, providing a 20-day
planning horizon from the time when the end item crosses the order timefence until the manufacturer must order and receive the components for
the tower fabrication.
Table 7.1 illustrates the manufacturers MRP record for one of the
many metal components that are used in the tower fabrication. Due to the
schedule stability provided by the order time-fence, all gross requirements
for the component are deterministic over the 20-day planning horizon.
However, the timing and quantity of the planned orders, particularly in the
later time periods, may oscillate during successive MRP record processing
cycles as new orders are entered into the FAS and the MRP schedule is reoptimized. Standard practice for controlling this MRP nervousness and
Planned order
release
Planned order
receipt
16
30
Ending
inventory
Gross
requirements
Scheduled
receipt
Time
16
16
30
22
20
26
20
12
Frozen orders
26
10
16
24
10
11
24
16
12
22
13
14
24
22
12
10
15
Ta b l e 7 . 1
MRP tableau for a component with a 12-period frozen time-fence
24
16
17
Slushy orders
12
16
16
10
18
19
16
16
20
102
103
104
Ta b l e 7 . 2
ERP enhanced replenishment strategies
decision makers planning problem
Replenishment strategy
Manufacturer
Transportation
Vendor
No information sharing
and functional
coordination
(NI /FUNC)
Wagner-Whitin
single-item
lot-size problem
Ship as required
Replenish on a
lot-for-lot
basis
Advance order
commitments and
functional
coordination
(AOC /FUNC)
Wagner-Whitin
single-item
lot-size problem
Ship as required
Wagner-Whitin
single-item
lot-size
problem
No information sharing
and intraorganizational
coordination
(NI /INTRA)
Replenish on a
lot-for-lot
basis
Advance order
commitments and
intra-organizational
coordination
(AOC /INTRA)
Wagner-Whitin
single-item
lot-size
problem
105
50
45
40
35
Percent
106
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Problem scope
Functional
FIGURE
7.2
None
AOC
Information sharing
Intra-organizational
Full
Inter-organizational
coordination strategies. Finally, moving to an inter-organizational coordination strategy with full information sharing (FULL /INTER) yields a marginal 8.22% improvement over the best intra-organizational coordination
strategy. Overall, these results are promising and indicate that a signicant
potential economic benet is associated with enhanced ERP replenishment
systems.
Conclusions and Implications
Advances in ERP systems are rapidly evolving to include data sharing and collaborative decision making among channel partners. In the past,
interoperability among trading partners proved to be a signicant hurdle,
but today the availability of the Internet and the falling costs of B2B serverto-server integration have brought the cost of connectivity into the reach of
most channel partners (Brown, 2001). However, a better understanding of
the alternative integration strategies and their potential benets is necessary
107
VMI programs differ considerably in practice, and those differences can be categorized into three dimensions: collaborative intensity,
technology intensity, and program complexity (see Figure 8.1).
First, the level of collaborative intensity of VMI programs varies
based on the extent of joint planning and management and on what information is shared. By denition, VMI requires information sharing.
However, the amount of information sharing can vary (e.g., length of the
time-horizon of the historical product usage data shared with the supplier,
amount of the customers downstream demand or forecast data shared
with the supplier, and granularity of the shared data). VMI programs vary
109
co Pro
m gr
pl am
ex S
ity
Technology intensity
110
L
L
H
Collaborative intensity
FIGURE
8.1
VMI commonly uses EDI, but is not synonymous with EDI. EDI
stands for electronic data interchange and involves the use of standardized electronic formats for B2B transactions such as order placement, order
conrmation, and invoicing. By the early 1990s, many Fortune 500 rms
had implemented custom software applications to transmit high volumes of
orders and other documents electronically using EDI standards developed
by industry groups or powerful buyers such as automobile manufacturers or
large retailers like Kmart and Wal-Mart. VMI programs, due to their high
level of transactions, also commonly use EDI standards for information
exchange. However, VMI transactions can be communicated via document
attachments to e-mail systems, Web-based forms (with or without XML),
111
112
all the players in that supply chain. Multiparty collaboration based on this
data can lead to effective global decision making and optimization of the
extended supply chain rather than simple optimization of a given suppliercustomer partnership in the supply chain. CFPR clearly involves a more
complex set of players, but the individual supplier-customer partnership
dyads in VMI are often deeper and stronger than links between two partners in a CFPR (multiparty) program.
Case Study: NIBCOs VMI Program
The following case study illustrates the strategic motivation, implementation process, and performance outcomes for a new VMI program
leveraging an ERP platform (Brown, Tatikonda, and Vessey, 2003).
The Company
113
114
115
STARTS
PARTNER IDENTIFICATIONS
(via business model)
No
VIABLE PARTNER?
EXITS
Yes
MARKETING PRESENTATION S
TO POTENTIAL CUSTOMER
No
EXITS
Yes
DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS S
AND DETAILED PROPOSAL
No
PARTNER APPROVES PROPOSAL?
EXITS
Yes
PILOT PROJECT
8.2
No
EXITS
determine specic potential benets for the customer. The customers last
24-month consumption history and sales activity data are analyzed in conjunction with customer inventory data, growth forecasts, and seasonality
effects so that NIBCO can develop a VMI proposal. Based on the customers own critical business metrics (e.g., inventory turns and gross margin return on inventory investment), improvement projections are made
and presented to the customer.
If there is customer buy-in, NIBCO and the customer then discuss
and nalize execution details, including which SKUs will be affected; inventory maximums, minimums, and reorder point levels; the frequency of
the replenishment cycle (weekly, biweekly, or monthly); the number of
customer locations; and the improvement metrics to be tracked. These inventory policy decisions can differ for each SKU. Although NIBCO may
sell thousands of SKUs to a given customer, its preference is to manage
only the high-volume items via VMI and to replenish low-volume items
through traditional means instead. Essentially, a Pareto analysis is conducted to trade off transactional volume complexity with bang for the
buck in terms of which SKUs are best served by a VMI plan (often 300
to 600 SKUs).
The partners agree to a long-term, stable-rate pricing plan and a
single-source relationship for the SKUs of interest. Single sourcing is essential to NIBCO to ensure data completeness and validity in terms of
product usage rates, on-hand levels, and inventory level projections. Customers do typically identify a second source, but only as a contingency for
emergency situations.
Partner Implementation Process
117
118
8.3
EDI EFT
Customer
NIBCO and its customers rigorously collect and assess VMI partnership performance data. For NIBCO and its customers, the actual benets in terms of the overall VMI program and individual partnerships have
been quite compelling. The proposed improvement levels for all VMI customers have been realized or exceeded. Relative to pre-VMI benchmarks,
the customers have approximately doubled their inventory turns and reduced their inventory dollar value by one-third to one-half. These results
are in line with customer benets reported for VMI programs by other
companies (IOMA Group, 2003). All in all, NIBCOs VMI customers have
seen notable benets.
NIBCOs VMI team has honed its organizational processes and
information systems so that a new VMI partnership can be established
within a period as soon as two to three weeks after customer buy-in is
achieved. This relatively short time frame for fully implementing a VMI
partnership is due to NIBCOs competency in VMI program management
and partnership execution.
NIBCOs Next Steps
NIBCO was the rst company in its industry to leverage its ERP infrastructure to offer VMI. Four years later, some of NIBCOs competitors
tried to implement a comprehensive VMI program but did not succeed. Although VMI customers represent a small percentage of NIBCOs total customer base, they provide a large percentage of its sales. Overall, NIBCO is
a stronger company with closer relationships to key customers as a result
of its VMI program.
119
120
121
122
There are also benets at the program level (that is, the supplier
rms overall portfolio of VMI partnerships). For example, the supplier
gains deeper insight into its customers actual needs, particularly through
visibility into actual customer consumption levels. This makes it possible
for the supplier to consider and prioritize the needs of all VMI partners.
The supplier can make priority allocation decisions rather than treating
all customer orders as equally important. This approach optimizes the
suppliers asset utilization and increases customer service.
Admittedly, it is difcult to parse out benets that accrue solely due
to the VMI aspects of the partnership (that is, vendor decision making regarding the timing and quantity of replenishment) because there are commingled factors in many VMI programs. These factors would themselves
alone logically lead to some benets. Such factors include electronic communication methods (e.g., increased speed and decreased transaction costs
due to EDI and EFT), the demand-pull philosophy of inventory replenishment (versus the traditional forecast push approach, which tends to
lead to higher inventory levels), and strategic partnership aspects (including long-term, stable-price contracts and sole-sourcing relationships).
Other measures could be listed as well because different industry
contexts call for different objectives. For example, noncommodity and retail VMI situations have some benets that are distinct from those in commodity situations. In the case of noncommodity products, part innovation by the supplier and joint product innovation between supplier and
customer are benets that could arise from VMI partnerships. Both partners benet from less costly and simpler transitions (changeovers) when
established parts are replaced with new ones (due to upgrades, engineering changes, etc.). Other measures appropriate for some situations include part quality, return on (information) technology investment, and
the customers performance measures (that is, the second-tier customers
ll rates, inventory turns, and overall satisfaction).
Strategic Implications for Organizational Capabilities
and Competitive Competencies
123
124
the supplier rm is the focal rm of interest, then the VMI experience can
serve to establish interfaces with the suppliers suppliers. VMI involves nontrivial interaction, but that interaction is only on the outer edges of the
boundaries of the two rms. VMI experience can serve as a basis for richer
and deeper interactions in established partnerships, ranging from twocompany integrated inventory-planning systems to collaborative development of new products. And it may help the rm contribute to, and operate
in, a multi-tier CFPR-like environment more successfully.
Outlooks for VMI Growth
Overcoming the Barriers
In general, the factors in Table 8.1 appear to be those most commonly associated with implementation of VMI partnerships and with VMI
partnership effectiveness. The inverse of these factors can be seen as barriers
to VMI implementation and success. Finding ways to reduce or overcome
these barriers would allow growth in the number and depth of VMI partnerships. As one example, consider the high bang for the buck SKU items.
Currently, VMI programs are applied primarily to higher volume SKUs.
These are the A parts in the ABC inventory analysis logic. Should VMI be
extended to B and C parts? And if so, then what is required for VMI to be
made viable for those items? As a start, the traditional inventory control prioritization of A, B, and C items could be extended into the VMI context. As
such, B and C items would be monitored less often by the supplier, perhaps
once a month rather than once a day as might be done with A items.
Systems Integration
125
126
Ta b l e 8 . 1
Factors associated with VMI partnership implementation and effectiveness
Characteristics
Customer has established electronic capabilities (EDI in place)
Customer employs centralized inventory planning (even if customer has many
branches)
VMI partner represents a signicant percentage of suppliers sales
Product characteristics
High-volume, fast-moving items
High bang for the buck items (these SKUs represent a large percentage of the
suppliers sales)
High product unit accountability (discrete, unitized, countable pieces)
Highly dened part reference and communication standards for the industry
Partnership characteristics
Customer willing to collect and share proprietary information with supplier
Customer has sufcient personnel and management resources for implementation
Customer and supplier trust each other
Potential employee resistance is managed (especially among customers purchasing/
procurement personnel and suppliers sales representatives/agents)
EnterpriseS
functionality
VMIS
functionality
EDI /EFT
VMIS
functionality
EnterpriseS
functionality
Inter-rm communication
FIGURE
8.4
barriers. Conversely, partners with the same ERP platform or VMI system
will have the potential advantage of deeper inter-rm integration of planning
and execution systems (the suppliers and customers MRP systems, for
example). Today, extranets commonly provide visibility into a partners
data, but truly integrated, multiparty systems have the potential to provide
simultaneous visibility to multiple tiers in the supply chain.
127
128
129
IT-Supported Productivity:
Paradoxes and Resolution in R&D
DANIEL A. JOSEPH AND JOHN ET TLIE
set of hammers, nails, and planks doesnt mean that he can erect a quality
house at reasonable cost (Feld and Stoddard, 2004, p. 74). In other words,
it does not matter how powerful the hardware or how elegant the software
if strategy and structures for execution are inappropriate.
Feld and Stoddard suggest that management teams who wish to capitalize on IT investments should observe three principles in their approach
to IT management: (1) develop a long-term IT renewal plan aligned to corporate strategy; (2) replace vertically oriented data silos with clean, horizontally oriented architectures designed to serve the company as a whole;
and (3) strive to develop a highly functional, performance-oriented IT organization. Unfortunately, the authors place the blame in much too general
terms (poor IT management) to be really useful. This is the equivalent to saying that all the worlds problems would be solved by better communication.
The Paradox Revisited
131
132
not of the US, but of the vast, underdeveloped Asian region. [sic] Information technology is making it possible to move jobs from the US to China
and India; to where those jobs are beyond the reach of the productivity
statistics.
Perhaps the best place to look for the answer to this question is to
look at how the Japanese view the relationship between quality and technology and apply this lesson generally. For example, Ettlie (1997) studied
600 durable goods rms in 20 countries and found that technology
signicantly moderated the association of R&D intensity and total quality
management (TQM) with market share, controlling for industry category.
In high-technology rms, R&D intensity was signicantly associated with
market share; in low-technology rms, TQM was signicantly associated
with market share. R&D intensity and TQM were signicantly and inversely related, while R&D intensity and computer-aided manufacturing
(CAM) were signicantly and directly related. Given such spurious results,
it is, therefore, not surprising that many scholars have raised the questions
of how much and, more important, what type and application of IT
is enough to support real strategic gains for a company. Clearly, the
uniqueness of innovations developed through the support of IT should represent a necessary objective qualifying the purchase of such systems by innovative rms, yet standards-based architectures required as a medium for
such creative development cannot be discounted.
Collaborating Engineering: Standardization Versus Innovation
One of the vexing challenges of any technology manager of support systems, such as the CIO, plant engineering, or the manager of customer service, is nding that delicate balance between standardization of
practices and dealing with the inevitable exception that always seems to
arrive at the wrong time. The technical unit responsible for core technology of any organization is still the last holdout in ES deployments. Economic theory can help explain why this happens and why it is likely to
continue for quite some time. The appropriation of rents from investments in new technology is best under strong conditions: when the fruits
of these investments in new technology can be protected with solid intellectual property protection. Therefore, why struggle to protect purchased
technology such as hardware and software systems, which are owned by
133
134
and (4) have recently introduced a major new product characterized as new
to the world, new to the industry, or new to the company.
Overall, these preliminary results suggest that in order to fully understand the adoption of collaborative engineering hardware and software
systems, one can take cues from the innovation and new product development processes in these rms. Based on such data, not only were our models able to replicate the new product success rate (60% after launch) in both
samples, we also found that the impact of the adoption of collaborative engineering systems on performance outcomes (i.e., new product protability) was signicantly moderated by the adoption of tailored hardware and
software systems. Given the collaborative bolt-on options available to rms
with integrative IS architectures such as ERP, the focus should, therefore,
remain not on distinguishing the specic designs of ERP architectures per se
but rather on the tailored selection and use of such bolt-ons.
Research & Development Organizations
and allowed to pursue their own processes and procedures in carrying out
their work. In addition, it suggests that members of project teams prefer to
be involved in the development of the operational controls for the projects
on which they work and that they perceive management intervention in
project activities as onerous (Bonner, Ruekert, and Walker, 2002).
Creativity is not a 9 5 job. Nor is it something that can be turned
on and off. It comes and goes somewhat serendipitously, and it requires a
strong discipline and, most often, intense synergistic interaction with others. More to the point, it requires the kind of seamless access to information across business units, functions, and corporate boundaries that only
integrated systems such as ERP can provide. At one time, it may have been
possible for one individual to design a motor vehicle, but not today.
Today there are so many aspects to designing a motor vehicle that such a
proposition is unreasonable as an effective and timely mechanism for innovation. Some require embedded programs on electronics boards, some
require the design of aerodynamic exteriors, and other R&D activities
may require anything from packaging science to color science.
New developments in software that take ERP beyond the monolithic suites it was in the 1990s and into an entirely new realm where process architectures dominate will allow for the necessary control to be
maintained while providing exibility in processes. Presently this is accomplished through bolt-ons and middleware: software designed to support a set of process architecture standard interfaces so that any vendors
application can interact with the middleware, provided that it abides by
the interface standard. Process architectures are normally depicted as activity maps in which each activity connects with other steps in a process.
Someday soon, a plug-and-play process architecture could be developed for the automobile manufacturing industry. Such a product would
be shared throughout the industry and would permit an entirely new level
of exibility. New processes could be developed and then redesigned
quickly as needs change by using plug-and-play product components.
As an example, a process architecture map for designing a car
would dene all basic activities that could be involved in the car design
process, along with common variations on the activities and key interfaces between the activities. It would also include many levels of detail so
that different audiences involved in the process (e.g., top managers,
middle managers, operations managers, operations staff, and operators)
135
136
could view their activity and see how it ts into the entire process. This
will make it possible for the person in one step to see who gets the output
from his or her activity so that, in the event that this persons step
changes, he or she will be able to discuss the change with the recipient of
the output before the change is made. This will provide greater freedom
to the people doing work activity over how they accomplish their work,
and it will allow them to tailor their activities to the situation at hand. As
an added benet, when appropriate, these maps include tools for nding
appropriate people or services to perform each of the various activities or
to whom the activities might be outsourced (Malone, 2004).
Views from the Frontline: Heads in the Sand?
Interestingly, our respondents focused on short-term issues. Compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is perhaps the best example of this; implementation of measures to ensure conformance to the law are undoubtedly
a top priority, especially in view of the fact that the CEO and CFO face a real
prospect of jail terms and substantial nes if their corporations are found out
of compliance with the law. However, Sarbanes-Oxley compliance is not a
strategic issue, nor is the coordination of outsource agreements or anything
else that our respondents mentioned. These are operational issues and, as
such, represent the focus of our survey respondents. However, the responses
Ta b l e 9 . 1
Potential information systems integration barriers
Respondents perception of major
issues for ERP over next five years
6 Finance
4 Production (including SCM)
4 Marketing/sales
to this question suggest that the people who use ERP systems today may not
be aware of future directions in the business environments of their rms; if
this is true, it does not bode well for American business. There was no mention of process architecture maps, Web services architectures, systems or application architectures, the integration of R&D with ERP systems, improved
information requirements gathering models, and, perhaps most important,
the evaluation of new technologies for competitive advantage.
Six of the seven rms represented in the survey were at some stage in
the installation of the business intelligence component of the SAP software
137
138
suite. This module is focused on the evaluation of a rms data for strategic
and tactical use. Its importance is evident in the number of implementation projects under way in our sample. In every case, the nance department was involved in the business intelligence project. Marketing and
production were the only other areas where interest was found. For us,
the interesting nding in this area was that despite the fact that six of the
seven rms were pursuing installation of the business intelligence application, respondents from half of the rms surveyed indicated that their
users were unable to adequately dene their information requirements.
Moreover, there appeared to be no knowledge among the respondents regarding what, if any, metrics were being used to measure the projects success. All of these issues, including the comments regarding the problem
with scoping and with understanding the information in the SAP database, we think might suggest that the users of ERP systems do not necessarily understand the systems well enough to use them to full advantage.
If this is so, this situation can be resolved quickly with additional training. Unfortunately, training is often ignored in these sorts of projects. The
Gartner group estimates that 17% of a typical ERP project budget should
be spent on training (Kelly and ODonnell, 2001), but the data clearly
indicates that this level of expenditure was missing from these projects.
In areas such as R&D, it is more likely that much autonomy will
be permitted in the design of work processes. Our work on collaborative
engineering suggests that economic models which include intermediate
appropriation conditions are very much a part of the future of most rms.
However, in other areas, such as production, it would probably be better
to allow less autonomy and more standardization.
Legacies Versus Emerging Futures
What does all of this mean? Our world is more complex than even
a decade ago. First, it is not a matter of make or buy but make and buy with
partnership assistance. Second, the new economy requires a constant tending of the new dual-core model of the rm: the rearranging, upgrading, and
continuous and simultaneous improvement of both information technology and core technology in any enterprise. Third and nally, the future
workplace will resemble in part what we see today but in great measure will
be more mobile, more challenging, more global, and, of course, more virtual.
Firms will need to face these challenges head-on, not by myopically opting
for fads directed solely by the whims of potentially agenda-biased IT managers but by shoring up extensions to existing architectures that align with
operational and strategic goals. For rms that distinguish themselves
through innovation, this means developing idiosyncratic patterns of use for
collaborative technologies that draw on existing ERP architectures and
augmenting such strategic idiosyncrasies by ensuring that such use is bolstered on both sides of the corporate boundary (i.e., among its collaborators).
In turn, this may necessitate greater levels of commitment among partners,
yet it opens the door for repeated shifts in project and partner focus (i.e.,
technology-facilitated exibility) as such bolt-ons gain greater diffusion in the
marketplace.
139
10
The lean supply chain embraces one major shift in thinking from
that seen in the progression from MRP to ERP and related systems.
Rather than a monolithic approach to systems design one that focuses
on integration of all activitiesthe approach becomes one of implementing the processes and systems that uniquely address the needs of particular customers. It is critical that we not see this as a technical problem
or one in which more integrated information systems will lead the way.
The lean supply chain requires critical strategic decision making directed
by pairs of key supplier-customer decision makers and followed up by a
very different implementation approach. The approach, as well as the
processes and IT support, are fundamentally different.
The Nestl Globe Project
In 2000, Nestl launched their Globe (Global Business Excellence) project to transform the company from a set of individual operating units into an integrated global company. The project is expected to
cost SFr 3 billion ($2.4 billion) and return major benets only after ve
years, when the majority of the operations have been converted to a
common, integrated approach. The three major objectives of the program
are to create a set of best-practice processes that will be used throughout
the company, create a standard set of Nestl data, and implement a
141
142
143
144
FIGURE
10.1
ReconcileS
inventory
Issue toS
manufacturing
ReceiveS
goods
Stock outowS
forecastS
(X)
Customer
Raw materials
Pay invoice
Finance
Create (X)S
purchase order
EvaluateS
(conrm)S
replenishmentS
(X)
Purchasing
PlanS
manufacturing
PlanS
manufacturing
Manufacturing
Create (X)S
sales orderS
update VMI
CreateS
consignmentS
stock orderS
(VMI)
ProposeS
replenishmentS
(X)
EvaluateS
forecastS
(X)
Sales
PlanS
manufacturing
Manufacturing
ReconcileS
inventory
Pick ship
ProjectedS
balance
Supplier
Finished goods
CreateS
invoice (X)
Finance
146
As is often the case, the customer in Figure 10.1 wants the supplier
to provide materials on consignment (vendor managed inventory, or
VMI). Starting with the upper-hand portion of Figure 10.1, we see the
customer planning manufacturing (with ERP-based systems), which leads
to an expected outow of stock from their inventory. This information is
passed to the sales organization of the supplier, who evaluates the forecasted outow and proposes a replenishment shipment to the purchasing
function of the customer. That group evaluates the replenishment and
conrms or modies the result. The authorized replenishment quantity is
then passed back to the suppliers sales function and subsequently to its
manufacturing unit, which plans manufacturing based on the suppliers
nished goods inventory (and other criteria and constraints). When the
order is ready, the sales organization creates the consignment order,
which is then picked and shipped.
When the order arrives at the customer, it is put into inventory.
Then, when the customer needs these materials for its planned manufacturing, they are issued to the manufacturing function. At that time, the
purchasing group creates a purchase order for the amount issued to manufacturing and sends this to the sales function of the supplier. This is the
point where title for the goods passes from the supplier to the customer.
The supplier now creates a sales order for the amount used by the customer and passes the sales order to its nance group to create an invoice.
The invoice is sent to the customer for payment. Finally, as shown in
the gure, there is a periodic reconciliation of inventory between the
rms. All of these activities take place in typical supply relationships.
Figure 10.1 improves them by replacing classic transactions with e-based
systems and processes.
Breaking Out of ERP-Based Systems
147
148
lean enterprise is that one still has to design and implement new business
processes, and best practices can also be fostered or copied.
What is perhaps more important is that lean supply chain does not
need to wait until lean enterprise is completed. This is not an either/or
decision. One can work on achieving the benets of lean enterprise
through rationalization, standardization, and best practices, while simultaneously working with selected supplier and customer partners to achieve
the payoffs from excellence in supply chain management.
Best Practices and Future Directions
The following is a set of stages of dyad transaction complexity that can be approached
through e-based B2B systems. Implementing the successive stages will require a series of
transformations, supported by cross-rm education programs and new IT systems support:
Stage 1: Replacing.
existing processes.
S
(a) OrderingS
InvoicingS
PaymentsS
(b) OrderS
acknowledgementS
Delivery informationS
Logistics documentsS
(c) PricingS
RFQS
Quality certicationS
Payments linked toS
contractual terms
FIGURE
10.2
149
150
believe that they have more leverage with suppliers. However, it is often
one of their customers who initiates the process, as was the case for
Heineken. It also is true that although each dyad tends to be unique, there
are always lessons to be learned; moreover, most leading-edge rms try to
develop modular approaches to the systems and processes. Those who
move rst, proactively, can often dene the ways of working, rather
than being put into the position of adopting multiple, incompatible
approaches.
Stage 2 requires new interactions and systems operating between
dyad partners. More important, it assumes that partnership does in fact
exist. Stage 2 implies a much greater degree of trust and mutual working
relationships than stage 1. Thus, planning visibility requires transfer of
knowledge from customer to supplier. VMI uphill skier involves
even greater transfer of knowledge and responsibility. In this case, the exact needs of the customer are passed to the supplier, who can satisfy them
as it wisheswith payments made as the customer uses the supplied
goods; this is similar to skiing, in which it is the uphill skier who is responsible for not colliding with the downhill skier. These changes in practice can be achieved only when the dyads have been working together
for extended time periods. A good current example is Hewlett-Packard
working jointly with Flextronics in the manufacture of tape drives. In
the end, the key to success was the development of shared values from
top to bottom in both organizations. With this overall level of trust, it
has been possible to develop quick response times to market dynamics, visibility across the supply chain, fast time-to-market and time-tovolume, and high-quality products. All of the features of stage 2 have been
achieved.
Stage 3 may look like nirvana, but all of the activities depicted
there are in fact possible. It is important to compare step (a) with step (b).
The specic activities depicted in step (b) are more related to extensions
of classic lean manufacturing concepts, but step (a) is where the really big
payoffs are achieved. Concentrating on the systems and transactions
associated with coordinating the ows of material is necessarybut not
sufcient! The improvements depicted in step (a) of stage 3 involve some
key strategic choices, such as when the customer should direct dyad
orchestration and when the supplier should do it. It is critical that these
decisions not be based exclusively on power or politics.
ManageS
behavioralS
change
Effort
SoftwareS
development
Replacing existingS
processes
Joint execution
Time
FIGURE
10.3
151
152
III
11
In many respects, MRP, the subsequent development of manufacturing resource planning (MRP II), and ERP represent increasingly sophisticated databases that over time have improved tactical and strategic
business planning. Essentially, ERP serves an uncertainty absorption
function (Miles, 1980). It is impossible to know with certainty all future
outcomes that might occur for a business. However, with enough data
and proper methods of analysis, reasonable projections of future outcomes
become feasible. Having data allows for the possibility of calculating
risk, in which several different outcomes are possible, and a probability
calculated from the data can be assigned to each outcome (for example,
see Allen and Schuster, 2004).
The crowning achievement of ERP systems in practice is that business decision making has moved from an uncertainty basis, in which no
comprehension of risk exists, to a risk basis, in which ERP serves the important function of mitigating uncertainty. The result: Much more effective business decision making based on rational analysis of data available
rather than on pure conjecture. With the established success of ERP in
practice, it is realistic to begin thinking about what changes in information technology will further enhance ERP, thus reducing even more
uncertainty within business planning. Since ERP is at its essence a data
management tool, it is reasonable that any advancement in the way that
156
tagging of cases and pallets. At some time in the future, the price might
be low enough to tag individual consumer goods on a large scale.
With these new manufacturing methods, production of the silicon
chips needed for Auto-ID becomes a continuous manufacturing operation, in contrast to the current batch method for producing the integrated
circuits that make up silicone chips. This development opens the possibility of tag application to a large number of objects, such as individual
units, cases, and pallets of merchandise within the consumer goods supply chain. Given that the scale of retail supply chains includes billions of
items, industry consortiums recognized very early the need for a comprehensive information technology infrastructure to manage the large
amount of data potentially available from linking objects to the Internet.
With such an infrastructure, the practical possibility exists of ERP systems that have continuous, two-way communication with objects located
anywhere within a supply chain. This Internet of things will create unprecedented interconnectivity and have an important impact on the ERP
systems of the future.
The infrastructure needed to manage the Internet of things is
Auto-ID technology, an intricate yet robust system that utilizes RFID. An
important feature of Auto-ID technology includes open standards and
protocols for both tags and readers. This means that a tag produced by
one manufacturer can be read using equipment produced by a different
manufacturer. This type of interoperability between tags and readers is
essential for wide-scale application within supply chains.
Beyond the sophisticated information technology, Auto-ID lays
the groundwork for the intelligent value chain of the future (Brock,
2000). Creating smart products that sense and respond with the physical world requires unique identication, which is an element of Auto-ID
technology. With this capability, distributed control systems can interact
and give instructions to a specic object. For example, some time in
the future smart objects within the consumer goods supply chain might
dynamically change price based on sensing demand and communicate
this information to ERP systems without human intervention. Because it
offers much more than merely identifying objects using radio communication, Auto-ID technology holds the potential to drive rapid advances in
commerce by providing the infrastructure for true automation across
supply chains.
157
158
In addition to the advances in manufacturing technology for producing the integrated circuits, there are several other important advances
worth noting that deal with the way tags are powered. Currently, two
basic types of tags are used most often.
An active tag requires a small battery that provides electric power
to continuously generate and transmit the radio frequency signal. Active
tags can be read from a relatively long rangeup to 30 meters. In general, these tags have signicant amounts of memory to store information
such as bill of lading details. In some cases, specialized readers called
interrogators can not only read data from an active tag, but can also send
signals to reprogram the tag with new information or instructions.
However, active tags have several drawbacks. Because these tags
transmit signals signicant distances, there is greater chance of a frequency collision with other radio waves such as those emitted by radios,
transformers, or cellular phones. This type of interference could cause
the reader not to pick up the tag signal. In addition, with longer read
distances, the opportunity of providing exact location information
diminishes. The tiny batteries are also somewhat expensive, thus limiting
widespread use. Common prices for active tags are $2 or more per unit,
depending on capability, memory, and order size. Beyond the expense, the
other disadvantage of active tags is that the batteries sometimes wear out,
resulting in total loss of signal. This is disastrous if the tag fullls a critical function such as providing data for a moving rail car. Battery life
varies a great deal depending on many different factors, so it is difcult to
predict in advance when a failure might occur.
Beginning in 1999, industry and academics undertook research to
develop low-cost passive tags. With this technology, each tag does not contain a battery. Rather, the energy needed to power the tag is drawn from
electromagnetic elds created by readers that also serve to gather the signals
emanating from the passive tags. The read distance of a passive tag is usually no more than 3 meters. Since no xed power source is required, passive
tags hold a great advantage over active tags in terms of lower cost per unit.
This opens the possibility for the use of passive tags in a far greater number
of applications. Gradually, as costs decrease, passive tags will challenge bar
codes as a means of gathering information within supply chains.
Ta b l e 1 1 . 1
Comparison of different tags
Tag
Active
Passive
Semipassive
Power source
Battery
Induction from
electromagnetic
waves emitted
by reader
Battery and
induction
Read distance
Up to 30 meters
3 meters
Up to 30 meters
Proximity information
Poor
Good
Poor
Frequency collision
High
Medium
High
Information storage
32 k or more
(read/write)
2 kb (read only)
32 k or more
(read/write)
Cost /tag
$2 $100
25
Under development,
some applications
159
160
PML
ONS
Savant
Reader
Antenna
Antenna
Serial number
EPC
EPC
EPC
EPC
11.1
Technology Overview
the tag, and in turn, a signal is generated and transmitted to the reader.
Through this process, readers capture the EPC and interact with Savant
to look up the information on the product using the ONS.
The position of the reader receiving the EPC signal provides
important information on location and environmental conditions such as
temperature, vibration, and humidity, which is then linked through databases to the EPC. All this information is housed and written to corporate
databases using the PML format (see Figure 11.1).
Advantages of Auto-ID Technology Relative to Bar Codes
Few other inventions developed during the 20th century have had as
wide an impact on everyday life as the bar code (Haberman, 2001). First
implemented in 1974, the bar code has drastically reduced the amount of
labor needed to operate retail stores, improved pricing accuracy, and shortened countless checkout lines, saving great amounts of time.
161
162
Beyond retail stores, bar codes have been applied in many other
situations to provide important information, such as the coordination of
production within manufacturing plants or tracking data for overnight
packages in transit. Bar codes transmit a small amount of information
that identies the manufacturer and links to a description of the object.
Nonprot standards groups such as GS1 administer the numbering
system used for the bar codes, ensuring unique identication without
duplication by other rms. New research efforts have led to the development of a two-dimensional bar code that is able to carry more data about
an object. This opens the possibility of attaching important information
such as billing details directly to the object as it passes through the
supply chain.
A basic characteristic of bar codes is that all information travels
with the object. In the case of a two-dimensional bar code, more information travels with the object as compared to a regular bar code. This is
a common attribute shared with active RFID tags, although in most cases,
active tags contain much more information than two-dimensional bar
codes. Furthermore, although two-dimensional bar codes do provide
much more information beyond product identication, all bar codes have
limitations, including:
The need for a direct line of sight from the scanner to the bar
code
The ability to read only one code at time
The need for human intervention to capture data or to orient
packages in the case of overhead bar code readers
In addition, bar codes provide only one-way communication and
seldom provide real-time information or Internet connectivity to the data.
There is always a chance that the bar code will be missed or, in other
cases, read twice. Bar codes can also be damaged or compromised in a
way that makes them impossible to read. Auto-ID technology is designed
to overcome all of these limitations and make it possible to automate the
scanning process, providing real-time data.
With all the advantages of Auto-ID, it is natural to begin thinking
about how this new identication technology will affect the overall design
and operation of ERP systems. At its core, ERP is essentially a large database. As increasing amounts of data become available through Auto-ID
technology, the nature of ERP and the infrastructure needed to support the
system will change dramatically, opening new possibilities to do things
that were previously thought to be impossible to achieve in practice.
Data and ERP Systems
55%
13%
10%
9%
9%
4%
658 respondents
163
164
constant ux, data accuracy is not just a function of having the correct
value, but of having the correct value at the correct time to reect the
proper state of the system. Accurate data that is old is useless in a dynamic
system.
Thinking beyond the utilization of real-time data, Auto-ID offers
other opportunities to capture detailed data about objects within a supply
chain on a scale never before experienced in commerce. However, organizing EPCs represents a challenge that requires signicant changes to
ERP systems.
Organizing Data from the EPC
One of the most basic processes of ERP is planning and scheduling. Figure 11.2 provides a conceptual overview of the various planning
and scheduling functions common to all ERP systems.
Two aspects of Auto-ID technology have the potential to change
the way that practitioners use ERP for planning and scheduling.
First, the ability to have manufacturing plant and supply chain
wide visibility of objects identied with the EPC allows for large amounts
of information and executable instructions to be assigned to an object. An
example that has been in application for several years involves attaching
an electronic tag to a component that is a work in process (WIP). As the
component moves through different manufacturing stages, the tagged
165
166
Aggregate plan
FIGURE
11.2
167
168
facility adds to this complexity. MRP has been singled out by managers
and academics alike for the lack of consideration of capacity constraints
when planning lots sizes. As Billington, McClain, and Thomas (1983,
p. 1130) write, MRP systems in their basic form assume that there are
no capacity constraints. That is, they perform innite loading in that any
amount of production is presumed possible. . . .
For some types of industries, such as heavy manufacturing, this
limitation is an annoying inconvenience. With nished items requiring
high labor inputs, the primary capacity constraint is often the availability
of skilled workers to do the job. If high production levels press the
capacity of available trained labor, more workers can be hired or existing
workers can be retrained. In other situations, such as process industries,
lack of capacitated planning and scheduling is a much more serious
matter.
The process industries are asset intensive, with huge investments
in long lead-time equipment. In this case, adding additional capacity is
not a short-term managerial prerogative, so it becomes imperative to get
the greatest amount of capacity utilization possible through scheduling
methods that nd the optimal solution and consider dynamic capacity
constraints. The lack of capacitated MRP is such a serious issue that some
leading companies have declined to use MRP for planning and scheduling (Taylor and Bolander, 1994). While the algorithms to do aspects of
capacitated MRP (CMRP) are available, the drawback to implementation
is partially dependent on lack of real-time data needed for a meaningful
solution. To deal with dynamic demand for end items, manufacturers
must account for capacity constraints at all levels of the supply chain.
This ambitious goal remains elusive for most rms.
Auto-ID technology overcomes one barrier to the implementation
of advanced algorithms for capacitated MRP by providing a continuous
stream of data for mathematical programming models to achieve CMRP
in practice. Although there are a number of complicating factors that
limit the widespread use of advanced models, a major drawback appears
to be schedule stability (Unahabhokha et al., 2003). Because of a lack of
continuous data, replanning often occurs less frequently than needed. In
addition, small changes in inventory and production values caused by
inaccurate counts or poor execution to plan (for production and the sales
forecast) also contribute to the schedule stability problem. The combination
of these two factors can create large changes in out-front schedules and a
great amount of instability within CMRP. Having a continuous stream of
data allows quick adjustment to variances and frequent updates. If the
proper buffers exist, a stable schedule results, with only minor changes
occurring over the time horizon with each new planning run.
There are several documented examples of the application of
CMRP in industry (Schuster and Allen, 1998; Schuster, Allen, and DItri,
2000). Most notable is the work of Leachman et al. (1996). This article
provides a comprehensive report on the successful application of CMRP
for a semiconductor company. The approach uses large-scale linear programming (LP) to accomplish CMRP with the goal of improving on-time
delivery. The authors note that before implementing the LP approach,
sector-wide planning took place only once per month because of the poor
quality and availability of data on demand, work in process, and inventory. Essentially, planners always had incomplete information. A large
part of the project included the design of databases to feed the LP planning model and the development of standard ways to represent data. In
the end, the authors state that data accuracy, availability, and timeliness
were signicant factors in the overall success of their efforts to implement
CMRP as a management tool.
These are just a few examples of how Auto-ID technology will
change the nature of ERP systems in practice. However, the concepts of
Auto-ID do not apply just to supply chains. The nal section of this chapter explores the application of Auto-ID concepts beyond the Internet of
things. In many ways, this is Auto-ID part II. This effort will have a longterm impact on ERP system design.
Semantic Modeling
The underlying aspects of Auto-ID technology will form the bedrock of international commerce in the years to come. Unique identication, interoperability, standards, and the use of automated Internet-based
systems to track, trace, and control physical objects all are important elements of Auto-ID technology that are moving out of the laboratory and
into practical application. There will be new applications that can only be
dreamed about today, and other applications that are beyond what currently can be conceptualized.
169
170
171
12
name a couple of reasons. Yet, PIA and evaluation is one of the least
attractive areas for practice and investigation.
As part of determining the value of an ERP system and strategy to
an organization, it is necessary to consider a more holistic picture than
dollars and cents. There are many factors that come into play. What these
factors may be and how they may be evaluated (before and after implementation) are two core issues that are addressed in a more complete
value evaluation of implemented ERP systems. Such a discussion, with
particular attention to PIA concerns, can prove extremely valuable within
the scope of a larger management of technology framework.
Review of Development Phases
173
Uncertainty andS
external competitiveS
environment
Strategy=
formulation and=
integration
CorporateS
strategic planning
FunctionalS
strategic planningS
and integration
Process andS
systemsS
engineering
Conguration designS
and functionalityS
requirements
Systems evaluationS
and justication
SystemsS
implementation
Post-S
implementationS
audits
FIGURE
12.1
ReconcileS
factors,S
performance,S
expectations,S
and strategy
175
176
At this stage, the primary nancial analysis determines the economic feasibility and justication of the system or subsystem. Factors for
evaluation need to be determined and utilized by the organization. These
factors and measures should evolve from the previous phases. They will
also be required for auditing and maintenance of the systems performance. A listing of potential factors is presented later in this chapter. Typically, there are many factors with many characteristics to consider in an
evaluation: tangible, intangible, nancial, quantitative, qualitative, etc.
For effective analysis of this type of data, utilizing multiple objective decision techniques is clearly warranted. Some of these multiple objective
techniques are also provided with an overview and concern, especially
from an auditing perspective. At this stage, the nal outcome should be a
business case for ERP in general and the selected system in particular.
This business case must be well documented so that PIAs can be completed efciently (Tompkins and Hall, 2001).
System Implementation
The post-implementation audit (PIA) stage is one of the most neglected steps of many ERP management projects (Levinson, 2003). It helps
close the loop for future development of the system and is also the primary
step required for the inclusion of the concept of continuous improvement.
There are a number of reasons posited by the literature on why
PIAs are not completed, including:
They take too much time and drain away valuable personnel
resources.
They require reams of documentation so that processes and
results can be validated.
Project sponsors and implementers fear that the results of an
audit, if unfavorable, will be used against them.
To overcome these difculties, auditing should:
Encourage personnel to prepare investment proposals in a
more realistic and objective manner because the results of
their forecasts will be monitored.
Help improve the evaluation of future projects.
177
178
As we have mentioned, to fully conclude a business case and to further complete a PIA, performance measures must be determined. These
measures, especially for strategic evaluation, need to go beyond standard
operational or cost factors. The literature provides a number of possible
performance measures that can be used, and we have categorized them
into cost measures and IT requirements.
Ta b l e 1 2 . 1
Project cost categories
Direct project costs
Environmental operating costs
Initial hardware costs
Initial software costs
Installation and conguration costs
System development costs
Project management costs
Training costs
Maintenance costs
Unexpected hardware costs
Unexpected software costs
Security costs
Consumables
Cost Factors
179
180
181
182
Davis et al. (1989) and Adams et al. (1992) have considered the
importance of perceived value from the individuals perspective,
while Brynjolfsson and Hitt (1996) and Kohli and Devaraj
(2003) have studied rm-level value of an IT.
Ta b l e 1 2 . 2
Strategic, tactical, and operational performance metrics within an
organizational supply chain or value chain
Level
Performance metrics
Strategic
Tactical
Operational
183
184
StrategicS
performanceS
metrics/factorsS
MonolithicS
ERPS
ComponentS
ERP
LocalS
system
FIGURE
12.2
Supply chainS
factors
IT factors
SeniorS
managementS
MiddleS
management
OperationalS
managers
185
M
M
H
M
H
M
H
L
Cost of
implementation
M
M
H
M
H
M
H
L
Data
requirements
L
L
L
M
M
L
H
L
Ease of
sensitivity
L
M
H
H
M
M
H
L
Economic
rigor
M
L
M
L
M
L
H
H
Management
understanding
L
H
H
H
M
M
H
L
Mathematical
complexity
H
M
H
L
H
M
M
H
Parameter
mixing/
exibility
A, B, C
D, E
F, G
C, H, I
J, K
L
M, N
O, P
References*
*A Albayrakoglu (1996), B Kleindorfer and Partovi (1990), C Suresh and Kaparthi (1992), D Khouja (1995), E Sarkis (1997), F Borenstein
(1998), G Padmanabhan (1989), H Stam and Kuula (1991), I Suresh (1991), J Chandler (1982), K Pandey and Kengpol (1995), L Parsaei,
Wilhelm, and Kolli (1993), M Suresh and Meredith (1985), N Primrose (1991), O Nelson (1986), P Semich (1994).
AHP
DEA
Expert systems
Goal program
MAUT
Outranking
Simulation
Scoring models
Evaluation
technique
Ta b l e 1 2 . 3
Summary of multiple-criteria evaluation techniques and methodologies for evaluation of
ERP systems and factors (H high, M medium, L low)
187
188
189
190
13
192
193
194
Recommendations
Bottom line: If its broken, x it; if its failing, shore it; if its working, advance it! If the system is not supporting current operations, or on
the road to that state, then either modify the system or modify operational procedures for conformity. Firms that simply ignore misalignment
set themselves up for a myriad of unorganized local decisions. A sustained
policy of usage accountability must be engaged as an extension of the implementation process to ensure that ERP systems continue to complement
operational processes and are advantageously leveraged through time
(e.g., Sarkis, Chapter 12). We outline some of the tasks required in such
an ongoing accountability below:
Broadly review current processes and procedures. Current operational procedures may have changed to meet changing market requirements since initial implementation. Evaluate the
changes against existing processes and ERP functionality. Additional core ERP products may have been bundled with the
original purchase or could be added for a minimum investment. The real advantage here is that all of the new processes
will build on the existing database and the new functionality
may be fully integrated throughout the system. This is a good
way to leverage the knowledge of your business, customers,
and markets to gain competitive advantage.
Perform a formal gap analysis. Analyze how the solution or
system is being used. Assess how the rm is currently using the
ERP architecture. Get consulting help if needed to maximize
the use of the software to support operations. Consider using
consulting like you would laser surgeryvery focused for a
short duration. Make sure internal managers have an understanding of the global picture to guide this focus.
Consider the physical resources that drive ERP effectiveness.
Determine whether a hardware upgrade would improve system
operation. The technology race has reaped fast, more efcient,
economical hardware, but do not limit resource considerations
to the technology. If slow response time or problem-resolution
accuracy is a problem, look for efciency improvements in
the workforce. Training and greater exposure of users to
enterprise-wide functional linkages can create a culture of
extended useand can yield much greater results than many
technical options.
Consider rolling out the solution to a wider user base. Expand
to eld personnel via intranet and Internet access, share information, and link customers and vendors. There are several
software solutions that can Web enable the software, even if
the current vendor does not offer it at the current ERP release
that is running.
195
196
197
198
TechnologyS
adoption
ImitableS
technologyS
resources
Inter-org.S
externalities
Inter-org.S
tech ambiguity
Inter-org.S
external cues
StrategicS
process andS
relationalS
resources
FuzzyS
knowledgeS
resources
Composite techS
assessments
FIGURE
13.1
StrategicS
value-S
clarifyingS
knowledge
Higher-levelS
knowledgeS
resources
contrast to any inexibility imposed by embedded standards. This diversity of opportunities in turn opens the door to levels of competitive
distinction that many rms may not have even considered in the past
provided that these resources are in fact used to their full potential at all
levels of the rm. This includes use of the system in identifying capabilities and driving new strategic directions by top-level managers, as well as
application in the weeding out of process constraints by front-line workers familiar with the direct links between the transactional data collected
and the ow of operational activities. Much of this is not the kind of use
mandated by system design, but rather promoted by a concerted organizational culture of development.
This isnt a missed ship. It still waits in the harbor for intrepid
rms interested in preventing extinction through inertia. When asked, Is
this as good as it gets? regarding resource planning technologies, competent and responsible managers need to feel condent in replying, You
aint seen nothing yet. They need to be aware of their options and of
deciencies of their current capabilities. Resources that have as great a
potential as ERP systems to motivate the evolution of competitive strengths
and strategic prowess can make the sky the limit, but only for managers
and organizations willing to embrace inward scrutiny, confront long-lived
challenges, and drive continual development through the future. There
will always be a few that are willing to test the waters. For these we have
the highest regard and look forward to seeing the new worlds, innovations,
and fortunes that await them.
199
References
Adams, D., Nelson, R., and Todd, P. 1992. Perceived usefulness, ease of use and
usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly 227245.
Adler, P. S. 1989. Technology strategy: A guide to the literature, research in
technological innovation. In Management and Policy, Rosenbloom (Ed.).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 25 151.
Adler, P. S., and Kwon, S. 2002. Social capital: Prospects for a new concept.
Academy of Management Review 27(1): 17 40.
Aiken, P., Muntz, A., and Richards, R. 1994. DoD legacy systems. Communications of the ACM 37(5): 26 41.
Akkermans, H. A., Bogerd, P., Yucesan, E., and van Wassenhove, L. N. 2003.
The impact of ERP on supply chain management: Exploratory ndings from
a European Delphi study. European Journal of Operational Research 146(2):
284 301.
Albayrakoglu, M. M. 1996. Justication of new manufacturing technology: A
strategic approach using the analytical hierarchy process. Production and
Inventory Management Journal 37(1): 7176.
Allen, S. J., and Schuster, E. W. 1994. Practical production scheduling with
capacity constraints and dynamic demand: Family planning and disaggregation. Production and Inventory Management Journal 35(4): 15 21.
Allen, S. J., and Schuster, E. W. 2004. Controlling the risk for an agricultural
harvest. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management 6(3): 112.
Allen, S. J., Martin, J., and Schuster, E. W. 1997. A simple method for the
multi-item, single level, capacitated scheduling problem with set-up times
and costs. Production and Inventory Management Journal 38(4): 39 47.
202
References
References
203
204
References
References
205
206
References
Fischchoff, B., Slovic, P., and Lichtenstein, S. 1978. Fault trees: Sensitivity of
estimated failure probabilities to problem representation. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perceptions and Performance 4: 330 344.
Fisher, M. L. 1997. What is the right supply chain for your product? Harvard
Business Review 105 116.
Forrester, J. W. 1958. Industrial dynamics. Harvard Business Review July/August:
37 66.
Fox, M. L., and Holmes, J. L. 1998. A model of market leadership. Supply
Chain Management Review 54 61.
Gattiker, T., and Goodhue, D. 2004. Understanding the local level costs and
benets of ERP through organizational information processing theory.
Information and Management 41(4): 431 443.
Geffen, D., and Straub, D. W. 2000. The relative importance of perceived ease
of use in IS adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 1(8): 235 261.
Gimenes, I., and Barroca, L. 2002. Enterprise framework for workow management. Software-Practice and Experience 32: 755 769.
Goldman, S. L., Nagel, R. N., and Presis, K. 1995. Agile Competitors and
Virtual Organizations: Strategies for Enriching the Customer. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Goldratt, E. M. 1984. The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement. Great
Barrington, MA: North River Press.
Grackin, A., and Gilmore, D. 2004. Advanced planning systems implementation: A four-year analysis of results and benets. Available online at
www.scdigest.com /archive/articles.cfm
Grant, R. M. 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review 114 135.
Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the rm. Strategic
Management Journal 17: 108 122.
Greenough, M. 2003. Corporate Presentation, SSA Global Client Forum,
Orlando, FL.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., and McGaughey, R. E. 2004. A framework for
supply chain performance measurement. International Journal of
Production Economics 87(3): 333 347.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., and Tirtiroglu, E. 2001. Performance measures and
metrics in a supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations
and Production Management 21(1/2): 71 87.
Gunneson, A. O. 1997. Transitioning to Agility: Creating the 21st Century
Enterprise. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Haberman, A. L. (Ed.). 2001. Twenty-Five Years Behind Bars. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
References
Haeckel, S. H. 1999. Adaptive Enterprise: Creating and Leading Sense-andRespond Organizations. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hammer, M., and Champy, J. 1993. Reengineering the Corporation: A
Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: Harper Business Press.
Hauschildt, J. 1992. External acquisition of knowledge for innovationsa
research agenda. R&D Management 22(2): 105 110.
Hauser, H. E. 2000. SMEs in GermanyFacts and Figures. Bonn, Germany:
Institut fr Mittelstandsforschung.
Henn, J. 1998. IBM San Francisco. Software-Concepts and Tools 19: 37 48.
Hill, T. 1999. Manufacturing Strategy. New York: Irwin /McGraw-Hill.
Hinley, D. 1996. Software evolution management: A process-oriented perspective. Information and Software Technology 38: 723 730.
Hitt, L. M., Wu, D. J., and Zhou, X. 2002. ERP investment: Business impact,
productivity measures. Journal of Management Information Systems.
Hong, K. K., and Kim, Y. G. 2002. The critical success factors for ERP implementation: An organizational t perspective. Information and Management
40: 25 40.
Hyman, H. 1970. Interviewing in Social Research. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
IOMA Group. 2003. Vendor Managed Inventory: Reducing Inventory with a
Win-Win Program for Suppliers and Distributors. The Institute of Management and Administration.
Irani, Z., Sharp, J. M., and Race, P. 1997. A case experience of new product
introduction within a once traditional subcontract manufacturing environment. Production and Inventory Management Journal 38(2): 4751.
Jacobs, F. R., and Bendoly, E. 2003. Enterprise resource planning: Developments and directions for operations management research. European
Journal of Operational Research 146(2): 5 12.
Jacobs, F. R., and Whybark, C. 2000. Why ERP? New York: Irwin /McGrawHill.
Kar, P., Li, M., and Schuster, E. W. 2003. A case study of computer service
parts inventory management. In Service Parts Resource Guide. Falls Church,
VA: American Production and Inventory Control Society.
Keeney, R., and von Winterfeldt, D. 1991. Eliciting probabilities from experts in
complex technical problems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 38(3): 191201.
Kelly, R., and ODonnell, T. 2001. Enterprise Application Implementation:
Failure to Train Properly Ensures Implementation Failure. Training
Dimensions, Inc.
Kettinger, W., and Lee, C. 1994. Perceived service quality and user satisfaction
with information-services function. Decision Sciences 25(5/6): 737766.
207
208
References
References
209
210
References
References
211
212
References
References
Stam, A., and Kuula, M. 1991. Selecting a exible manufacturing system using
multiple criteria analysis. International Journal of Production Research
29(4): 803 820.
Stavridou, V. 1999. Integration in software intensive systems. Journal of Systems
and Software 48: 91104.
Suresh, N. C. 1991. An extended multi-objective replacement model for exible
automation investments. International Journal of Production Research
29(9): 1823 1844.
Suresh, N. C., and Kaparthi, S. 1992. Flexible automation investments: A synthesis of two multi-objective modeling approaches. Computers and Industrial Engineering 22(3): 257272.
Suresh, N. C., and Meredith, J. R. 1985. Justifying multimachine systems: An
integrated strategic approach. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 4(2):
117134.
Tatikonda, M. V., and Montoya-Weiss, M. M. 2001. Integrating operations and
marketing perspectives of product innovation. Management Science 47(1):
151172.
Tatikonda, M. V., and Rosenthal, S. R. 2000. Successful execution of product
development projects: Balancing rmness and exibility in the innovation
process. Journal of Operations Management 18(4): 401.
Taylor, J. 1999. Fitting enterprise software in smaller companies. Management
Accounting 80(8): 36 39.
Taylor, S. G., and Bolander, S. F. 1994. Process Flow Scheduling: A Scheduling
Systems Framework for Flow Manufacturing. Falls Church, VA: American
Production and Inventory Control Society.
Tompkins, J. A., and Hall, B. 2001. Did you get what you expected? IIE
Solutions 33(7): 43.
Umble, E. J., Haft, R. R., and Umble, M. M. 2003. Enterprise resource
planning: Implementing procedures and critical success factors. European
Journal of Operational Research 146: 241257.
Unahabhokha, C., Schuster, E. W., Allen, S. J., and Finch B. J. 2003. Master
production schedule stability under conditions of nite capacity. Working
Paper.
Van Everdigen, Y., Van Hillegersberg, J., and Warts, E. 2000. ERP adoption by
European midsize companies. Communications of the ACM 43(4): 2731.
Various. 2003. Does IT matter? An HBR debate. Harvard Business Review
(Letters to the Editor) 81(6): 117.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., and Davis, F. D. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unied view. MIS Quarterly
27(3): 425 478.
213
214
References
Index
Italic page numbers indicate material in tables or gures. Page numbers followed
by n indicate notes.
ABC inventory analysis logic, 125
Accenture, Institute for Strategic
Change, 72n
accountability of usage of ERP systems, 194 97
Ace Hardware, 113
acquisitions, 77
active RFID tags, 162
active tags, Auto-ID, 158, 159
adaptability, 180
add-ons, 49
ad hoc reporting functions, 79
adoption phase, 14, 18, 21, 46. See
also chartering phase
Advanced Planner and Optimizer
(APO), 53, 57
advanced planning and scheduling
(APS) systems, 37, 56 57
advance order commitments (AOC),
102 3, 104, 105
advance ship notice (EDI 856), 118
216
Index
Index
217
218
Index
Index
219
220
Index
Index
IBM WebSphere, 91
identication technology. See Auto-ID
technology
imitated resources, 17
implementation approaches, 43 44,
46 47, 48, 50
implementation of ERP systems: of
Asian companies vs. U.S. and European companies, 76; conversion
strategies, 176 77; infrastructure
projects rst, 75
implementation stages of dyads, 148
52, 149, 151
India, 72n
industrial dynamics research, 97
industry-wide electronic communication standards, 120, 128
informate, 79 80
information asymmetry, 54, 133
information sharing: ERP-driven replenishment systems, 105 6, 106;
supply chain management, 98;
vendor-manufacturing integration,
102 4; in VMI partnership, 109
10, 124
information technology (IT): German
SMEs use of, 39 40; performance
measure requirements, 179 82;
productivity support, 130 32; SME
use of, 36; system adoptions, 52.
See also productivity of IT
information visibility, 109
infrastructure: Auto-ID technology,
159; implementation of, 75; for
supply chain automation, 157;
VMI program, 124
innovation: and creativity in R&D,
135 36, 139; in ERP environment,
15, 35
innovation process vs. standardization
of practices, 132 34
221
222
Index
Index
223
224
Index
nonsubstitutable systems, 18
North Sea oil companies, 77
object naming service (ONS), 160
61, 161
OLeary, 53 54, 56
online auctions, 60
online information, 55
ONS (object naming service), 160
61, 161
onward and upward phase, 14
open standards and protocols for
Auto-ID, 157, 159, 166 67
operating manager, viewpoint of, 4
operational agility, 88
operational performance metrics, 183,
183
operational planning, 99
operations management, 2, 3
optimization, maximizing value from
ES, 78 79
optimization solution procedures, 103
Oracle, 37, 44, 45, 50
order entry feature in bolt-on system,
61
order fulllment module, 59
order-picking feature in bolt-on system, 61
order time-fence, 99 100
order winner/qualier characteristics,
129
organizational afliation of employees
in survey, 24, 25 26, 28, 29
organizational capability of VMI partnerships, 123 24
organizational change, 20
organizational standardization, 54
outranking, 185, 186
outsourcing of noncore components,
36, 39
overcondence bias, 187 88
Owens Corning, 57
Index
225
226
Index
process reengineering, 78
process vs. product, 3, 4
Procter & Gamble, 140
product activity (EDI 852), 118
product catalog information, 118
product data management (PDM) system, 61
product identication, 162
production planning and scheduling.
See planning and scheduling
productivity improvements of bolt-on
systems, 65, 66 69
productivity of IT, 130 32; future,
138 39; in R&D organizations,
134 36; standardization vs. innovation, 132 34; survey on use of
IT, 136 38
product variety, 111
product vs. process, 3, 4
program infrastructure, VMI program, 124
project management system, 61
project phase, 14, 21
prospectors as strategy factor, 15
pull logic, inventory management, 112
pull-manufacturing logic, 37
purchase order, 146, 147
purchase order acknowledgment (EDI
855), 118
QAD, vendor, 37
quality management system bolt-on,
61
quick response, 109
radio-frequency identication (RFID),
128, 156 57
radio waves, 158
rail cars, 156, 158
R&D: intensity, 132; organizations,
134 36
rare resources, 17
readers for Auto-ID tags, 157, 158,
159, 160, 161
real-time information, 55, 163 64
reengineering business processes, 78
reengineering stage, 175
reliability, 181
replenishment deliveries, 118, 127
replenishment frequency, 111
replenishment strategies, ERP-driven,
97107; experimental analysis,
105 6; make-to-order production,
99 102; traditional, 9798, 102,
105; underutilization of, 9799,
106 7; vendor-manufacturer integration, 102 4, 104
research & development (R&D): intensity, 132; organizations, 134 36
research: on ERP, 13 14, 15; implications of PIA factors, 189 90; on
industrial dynamics, 97. See also
studies
reserved product /inventories, 112
resource-based view of rm, 16 18,
33, 197
resources as sources of competitive advantage, 16 17
resource usage, 19799
responding agility (or response
agility), 88 89, 93 94
results from enterprise systems, 71
84; value management, 80 84;
value maximizing, 76 80
retailer managed inventory, 108
retail link program, Wal-Mart, 98
return on investment (ROI), 49, 190
revenue changes, 65, 66, 74
reverse purchase order, 118
RFID (radio-frequency identication),
128, 156 57
risk basis, 155
Index
227
228
Index
Index
229
230
Index
waste reduction, 4
Web-based VMI transactions, 111
WebSphere, 91, 95
work in process (WIP), 165
Xerox, 134
XML (extensible markup language),
127, 160