User perceptions, motivations and implications on ERP usage: An Indian Higher Education Context

Jyoti M. Bhat, Bhavya Shroff & Rajendra K. Bandi

Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, India

CONFENIS -2012

Agenda

•Study ERP implementation from user perspectives

•Case study of ERP implementation in an Indian higher

education institution.

Theoretical Background

Existing literature

ERP Product

•HE modules being

added to products

•Maturity of the HE

functionality

•Critical Success

Factors for ERP

implementation

Change Mgmt. in

HE

•Challenges of Org.

Structure

•Communication

mechanisms

•Decision Making

Process

•Org. Resistance

ERP Implementation

in HE

•User motivation and

involvement

•Lack of shared

understanding of

project goal

•Semi formal business

process in HE

•Change in job

characteristics and role

ERP in Developing

countries

•Challenges of IT

experience, firm

size, infrastructure

• lack of “computer”

culture

• “Cultural misfit” of

ERP product

Literature Gap

• ERP studies from a user perspective

• Study CSF priorities based on national and cultural issues.

Research Question & Method

• Does the Indian HE context offer unique context for ERP

implementation?

• Explores in terms of administrative and management work practices, perceptions

of the administrative and academic work-force about ERP, decision-making and

change management.

• Case Study using semi-structured open-ended interviews

• Twelve interviewees across various roles of Administrative Officer,

Admissions officer and staff at various program offices and functional

departments

Case study - The HE institute

• Indian Graduate Business School (GBS) – established in 70s, one of

the premier institutes for management education and research

• Quasi-government organization

• 2000 students, 200 staff, 30 interns and consultants, 85 contract employees and

120 faculty members

• Administrative staff with the Institute since the early days of Institute

- much longer than the faculty

• Most of the staff is due to retire

• Manual Processes with spread sheets and documents

• Very little process documentation, Processes have evolved over time

• Many support services have been outsourced – facilities management,

IT infrastructure support

GBS – Organization Structure

• Management and Administrative roles handled by faculty as additional

responsibilities with support from Admin staff

• Types of functions

• Purely administrative (facility management, estate maintenance, travel etc.),

• Academic administration (library, computer centre, placement cell) and

• Purely academic (the programs, faculty research)

Director

Dean

(Academic)

Dean

(Administration)

Chief

Administrative

Officer

Head ,

Finance

Head,

Personnel

Head, Hostel &

Mess admin

Chairperson,

Program 1

Chairperson,

Program n

Chairperson

Area n

Chairperson

Area1

…

….

IT at GBS

• No in-house IS team, No executive role for IS

• IT infrastructure and support operations outsourced

• Prior to ERP

• Admin processes were ‘islands of automation’

• Many manual processes – Fee payments, HR processes, Student feedback, course

and resource scheduling

• Processes not standard across programs

• Lack of information on utilization and availability of resources

• Lack of regular reporting, data in silos

• Not every employee had access to desktop computers till recently

Why ERP ?

• Increased scale, scope and complexity of administration

due to increased student intake and new programs

• Increasing expectations from stakeholders on the

services, productivity and responsiveness of the Institute

• Issues of aging workforce, retention of organizational

process knowledge and sustenance of administrative

process improvements

• GBS’s vision of being a world class institution using a

process-centric approach, leveraging tech for optimal

utilization of resources

ERP Implementation at GBS

First attempt at

ERP (2006)

Abandoned - organizational dynamics and lack of consensus on

decisions

• Product Selection Team -Finance

head, CAO and a few faculty

members

• Process scripts used for evaluation

• Software and implementation by

same vendor

• Demo by vendor to process users

• Phased implementation

Product evaluation &

selection

Current ERP

implementation

(2008)

Championed by

Dean (Admin)

with Director’s

support

Implementation

•Implementation team ( Finance Head, ERP

Chairperson, External ERP Consultant,

Vendor Manager)

• GBS - No Implementation experience

•No ERP related goals for staff and Depts.

• No formal communication mechanisms from

Management on ERP

•Vendor - First ERP HE in India; no ERP

experience with India team

People Issues

• Unable to attend training sessions

• Resistance to double data-entry

• Hesitance to share knowledge

Case Analysis (1/2)

Management motivation

•Handle administration complexity by

centralization and automation of

processes across programs

•Retention of organizational process

knowledge

•Ensure continuity in efficiency

improvements in administration

• Meet the rising expectations from all

stakeholders

• Provide shared access to data for

decision support

User Motivation

• Focus on other student activities

• Reduce data entry requirement

• Follow orders

• Learn new technology

Motivations User Perceptions

•System does not meet their needs

•Indian Universities are not like US Univs

•Can’t change our process to suit the

system

•Processes are different across programs –

ERP can’t handle this

•Not involved in ERP selection

•Requirements not taken from them

•Training not provided on time

•External Consultant seen as a bottleneck

•Change Job Characteristics

•Senior staff felt ERP can’t handle all

complexities, human intervention

required

•Junior staff feel they can do more value

adding work

•Minor power struggle visible

Case Analysis contd.. (2/2)

Decision

•Level of customization based on

department type ( admin, pure

academic, academic admin)

• ERP design considered data security,

control and data integrity

• One-off type of reports not included

as standard report types

• Policy decisions on data calculations

and exception handling

• Prioritize automation as compared to

usability

Technical Issues & Decisions

Impact

•Users unaware of the decision

•Users expected the flexibility, forms and data formats

currently used Felt ERP was not meeting their needs

• No explicit data security and privacy policy formed or

communicated

• Users confused as they did not have access to data

available in system which was not relevant to them

• Users perceived too many checks and controls on data

• User perception that the reports are not flexible

• Staff felt ERP reports did not match manual

calculations

• Employee frustration due to bad user interface and no

visible benefits

• Training focused on data entry and not ERP usage

Lessons Learnt !

• Perceptions built during the course of the ERP implementation lead to

user resistance

• Negative perceptions can spread through peer influences

• Implicit goals for ERP implementation affect user perceptions:

• Organization structure affects the long-term perspective of ERP

• Aging workforce issues hinder ERP implementation

• ERP product ‘fit’ to the Indian HE context has to be checked

• Absence of in-house IS team creates conflicts

• User training needs to be customized to the level of awareness

• Need for explicit data related policies during ERP implmentation

Key References • Abugabah, A., Sanzogni, L.: Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System in Higher

Education: A literature Review and Implications, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, vol 71. (2010)

• Gyampah, K. A.: ERP implementation factors A comparison of managerial and end-user perspectives. Business Process Management Journal, vol 10, iss 2, pp. 171-183. (2004)

• Hong, K..K., Kim, Y.G.: The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an organizational fit perspective. Information & Management, vol 40, pp. 25–40. (2002)

• Huang,Z.,Palvia,P.: ERP implementation issues in advanced and developing countries. Business Process Management Journal, vol. 7, iss. 3, pp. 276 – 284 (2001)

• Lechtchinskaia, L.,Uffen, J.,Breitner, M.H.: "Critical Success Factors for Adoption of Integrated Information Systems in Higher Education Institutions – A Meta-Analysis” AMCIS 2011 Proceedings. (2011)

• Von Hellens L., Nielsen S., Beekhuyzen J.: Qualitative case studies on implementation of enterprise wide systems. Hershey PA: Idea Group. (2005)

Thank You!

Dr. Rajendra K. Bandi

rbandi@iimb.ernet.in

Indian Institute of Management Bangalore

Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore – 560 076, INDIA

www.iimb.ernet.in