A model of ERP project implementation

Presented to: Dr. Dina RatebSystems 508Presented ByEl 3yal El Cobar

Outlines:

Terminology and Introduction

ERP implementation process models

The PPM of ERP implementation

The PPM phases

The PPM CSFs

Two case studies

Implications of the PPM for practice and research

Conclusion and future research

Terminology:

• ERP: Enterprise Resource planning.

• PPM: Project Phase Model Process Models).

• CSFs: Critical Success Factors.

Introduction:

ERP:

• Is the Enterprise Resource Planning.

• Implementation of ERP system is an extensive, lengthy, and costly process.

• Investment in the ERP is investment in both the software itself and the related services such as; consulting, training…etc.

• Although companies spend millions on both the packages and the implementation process, most companies experience considerable problems in the actual implementation project.

Introduction:

ERP:

• Focus on

• Evaluate

• Define

Relevant company processes in precise details

Introduction:

ERP:

• Beginning with system planning.

• Constructing project team.

• Moving on discrete project phases.

• Post-implementation review.

• Stabilization phase.

Introduction:

PPM /Process Models:

• Provides deeper understanding of the process.

• Provides guidelines for successful ERP implementation.

CSFS:

• Addresses difficulties of ERP implementation.

Both help better planning and more successful ERP implementation.

ERP Process Models

• Justification of creating PPM of ERP implementation.

• Allocation of responsible individual.

• Discrete phases of implementation

i.e. project is not another phase in the whole implementation enterprise.

• Presenting two case studies relating CSF to the PPM implementation phases.

* Unsuccessful case.

* Successful case.

What is A Best Practice Of ERP Implementation Process Model?

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Model

It has 5 phases:

1.Focus

2.As is

3.To be

4.Construction& Testing

5.Actual implementation

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Model

1.Focus:

Planning phase to set up key activities of the committee.

Selection of team members.

Developing guidelines principles.

Creating project plan.

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Model

2. As is

Analysis of current business process.

Istallation of ERP.

Mapping of the business process to ERP finctions.

Training of project team.

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Model

3.To be:

Outlines the high level design then detailed user-accepted design.

Interactive prototyping.

Constant communication with the user.

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Model

4. Construction and testing phase:

Development of comprehensive configuration.

Population of test instances with withreal data.

Building and testing interfaces.

Writing and testing reports.

System and user testing.

ERP Process Models

First: The Bancroft et al Mode

5. Actual Implementation:

Building networks.

Installing desktops.

Managing user training and support.

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

1.Design

2.implementation

3.Stabilization

4.Continuous improvement

5.Transformation

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

1. Design

Planning phase for critical guidelines and decision making for implementation.

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

2. Implementation

Phases are similar to model 1.

Stabilization:

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

3.Stabilization

After cut-over.

System problems are fixed.

Improvement of company performance.

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

4.Continuous improvement

Functionality is added.

ERP Process Models

Second: Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

5.Transformation

Organizational boundaries and systems are maximally flexible.

Third: Markus and Tanis model

It has 3 phases:

1.Chartering

2.Project

3.Onwards and upwards

Third: Markus and Tanis model

It has 3 phases:

1.Chartering

Focus and designing phase.

Development of the business case of ERP.

Package selection.

PM identification.

Budget and schedule approval.

Third: Markus and Tanis model

It has 3 phases:

2. Project

Same as Bankroft’s

Software configuration, system integration, testing, data conversion, training.

Third: Markus and Tanis model

It has 3 phases:

3.Onwards and upwards

Subsidiary of Ross continuous improvements and stabilization phases.

Comments on the three models:

1.Markus & Tanis and Ross models include a planning phase which occurs prior to the actual implementation project.

2.These two models,unlike the Bancroft et al. model, collapse the actual implementation into one discerete unit.

3.Ross& Markus and Tanis models include a post-project phase in the model of the whole ERP implementation enterprise.

4.None of them relates critical success factors (CSFs) to the phases of implementation.

The following points will be discussed:

Introduction

ERP implementation process models

The PPM of ERP implementation

The PPM phases

The PPM CSFs

The case studies

Implications of the PPM for practice and research

Conclusions and future research

Introduction:

-ERP is the Enterprise Resource Planning.

-Implementation of ERP system is an extensive, lengthy, and costly process.

-Investment in the ERP is investment in both the software itself and the related services such as; consulting, training…etc.

-Although companies spend millions on both the packages and the implementation process, most companies experience considerable problems in the actual implementation project.

ERP implementation process models

In this section we review three of the ERP implementation process models:

Firstly, The Bancroft et al.model

It has 5 phases:

1.Focus 2.As is 3.To be

4.Construction& Testing 5.Actual implementation

Secondly, Ross Model

It has 5 phases:

1.Design 2.implementation 3.Stabilization

4.continuous improvement 5.Transformation

Thirdly,Markus and Tanis model

It has 4 phases:

1.Chartering 2.Project

3.Shake-down 4.Onwards and upwards

Comments on the three models:

1.Markus & Tanis and Ross models include a planning phase which occurs prior to the actual implementation project.

2.These two models,unlike the Bancroft et al. model, collapse the actual implementation into one disceret unit.

3.Ross& Markus and Tanis models include a post-project phase in the model of the whole ERP implementation enterprise.

4.None of them relates critical success factors (CSFs) to the phases of implementation.

The PPM of ERP implementation

The PPM model consists of two concepts:1-Implementation phases

2-Critical success factors (CSFs) Implementation phases:

ImplementationPhase

Preliminary Investigation

Analysis Phase

Design Phase

Focus As Is

To be

Construction & Testing

Actual Implementation

Design StabilizationImplementation ContinuousImprovement Transformation

Chartering Project Onward & UpwardsShake-down

Planning Project Enhancement

SDLC

Bankroft et al.

Ross

Markus & Tanis

PPM Phase

Set-up

RE-engineering

Design

Configuration & testing

Installation

Planning Project Enhancement

The PPM Project Phase

OutcomesProject

Outcomes

EnhancementOutcomes Planning

Outcomes Planning

Outcomes Enhancement

Planning Enhancement

Balanced Team

UnswervingChampion

Deliverable Date

(realistic)

Empowered decision makers

Management Support

Release of full time business experts

Vanilla ERP

Commitment to change

Definition of scope

CSFs linked to the success of the outcome

by a known causal mechanism

CSFs that are necessary and

sufficient for success

CSFs that are necessary for

success

CSFs that are associated with

success

OutcomesProject

Project

The CSFsThose few critical areas where things must go

right for the business to flourish.

Combining the PPM with CSFsNot every CSF is necessary for each Outcome

The CSF’s level of power and criticality is as follows:

1- Causal Links , 2- Necessity & Sufficiency,3- Necessity, 4- Association.When comparing a successful case and an

unsuccessful case there exist differences in the relationship between the phases of the PPM and CSFs

The case studies

Two case studies are discussed:

1-Oilco:ERP1

- unsuccessful case,over budget & over time.

-Reasons: full automation,improved levels of customer service,..etc.

-Benefits: better sales forecast, better data quality.

2-Exploreco: ERP 2

-Successful case, under budget &on time.

Reasons: dissatisfying system

-

Benefits: Reduction in mannual processes, re-engineering of processes, and improved time accounting.Phase CSFs

Oilco Exploreco

1.Planning Management support Management support

Champion Champion

Commitment to change Commitment to change

Vanilla ERP Vanilla ERP

Best people ful-time

Deliverable dates

definition of scope

Phase CSFs

Oilco Exploreco

2a.Set-up Management support Management support

Balanced team Champion

Definition of scope & Balanced team

goals

Vanilla ERP

Deliverable dates

Definition of scope & goals

Phase CSFs

Oilco Exploreco

2b.Re-engineering Balanced team Empowered decision makers

Definition of scope Management support

Balance team

Definition of scope &goals

2c.Design Best people full-time Management support

Management support Deliverable dates

Phase CSFs

Oilco Exploreco2d.Configuration

&testing Best people full-time Management support

Balanced team

Installation Management support Management supportCommitment to change Balanced team

Balanced team Commitment to change

Best people full-time

Case findings-similarities

1.The planning phase was clearly considered the most critical by both companies.

2.The installation phase was very similar in both cases.

3.Full-time were considered crucial in the installation phase of PPM.

4.There are no significant enhancement phase in either companies.

Case findings - differences

1.The importance of CSFs over all phases of the PPM

in the Exploreco case

2.The CSFs within the Exploreco were generally considered more important than with Oilco.

3.Strategic differences in the planning phase.

4.Facilitating the achievement of the CSFs.

5.Focus on the set up phase for the Exploreco.

6.Consistency and persistence of the CSFs throughout all phases.

Explanations for the similarities and differences

1-Organizational learning 2-The scope and complexity of each project

Comprehensive, Middle Level, Vanilla What Characteristics are used?

-Physical scope - Technical scope -Module implementation strategy, and -Type of re-engineering involved and resource

scope level

Implications of the PPM for practice and research

1.Large-scale ERP implementation projects are high risk and difficult to implement on time and within budget.

2.In both cases there was no marked enhancement phase.

3.The appointment of an experienced ERP implementer early in the project as a “champion” who is empowered to make decisions about the project is important to the success of the project.

4.The PPM model together with associated CSFs from the Exploreco case provides practitioners with a useful example of successful “Vanilla” ERP implementation.

Conclusions and future research

The PPM has a dual function:1.For researchers; it provides a foundation for further empirical research.

2.For parishioners need to pay more attention to planning phase and the CSFs in each phase.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN

Till We Meet