• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Public sector enterprise resource planning
 

Public sector enterprise resource planning

on

  • 430 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
430
Views on SlideShare
430
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Public sector enterprise resource planning Public sector enterprise resource planning Document Transcript

    • Public sector enterprise resource planning Thomas R. Gulledge School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Rainer A. Sommer School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Keywords processes, and we draw comparisons with the Resources, 1. Introduction DoD experience. We describe a public sector Resource management, Public sector organizations, The Department of Defense (DoD) enterprise management model that is consistent with Computer software, is large and complex. The largest business private sector models, and we demonstrate United States of America process is manage defense acquisition, with how the model should be implemented. The manage defense installations being second. discussion covers all aspects of the new Abstract The management of the US However, the two processes are different in private sector management paradigm, Department of Defense (DoD) structure. For example, the execution of ranging from strategic planning to enterprise must change. Years of acquisition functions is unique, with no information system implementation. We under-funding have led to a wide comparable private sector business process. provide details on the implementation steps, gap between enterprise support requirements and resources. Other business processes, including manage and make suggestions on selecting DoD and Private sector firms have faced defense installations, are not particularly contractor teams for implementing a new similar choices. This paper shows unusual, with functions that have direct way for managing the public enterprise. how the public enterprise can be analogies to those in the private sector. This paper covers significant material in changed. Our hypothesis is that private sector implementations of We assert that the DoD will eventually limited pages. It draws heavily on our standard software will lead to change the way that it manages the personal experiences working for the US increased effectiveness and non-unique business processes. The DoD. However, it also draws on our efficiency in public sector declining resource base will not support the experiences in working for private sector organizations. Sufficient detail is provided on how to transition to a existing infrastructure but, even if resources organizations, including interviews with modern integrated public sector were plentiful, there would still be strong senior executives in some of the largest enterprise, and the steps for incentives to change. New IT-enabled process implementing such a project are corporations in the world. We begin the management methodologies have been discussion by making a case for why the DoD outlined, following standard private sector implementation implemented world-wide, and organizations must consider a new approach for enterprise practices. To explain the problem are achieving enhanced efficiency and management, and then we move directly to and solution, the DoD installation effectiveness through the use of these new management enterprise is used as the management and technology models. management approaches. Since 2000, these an example. new approaches have been spreading to the public sector, and the DoD is an early 2. Change is inevitable This research was implementer and a leader for other public sponsored in part by Russell organizations. The following quote sets the stage for this E. Milnes, Director of Appropriate models and systems have been section: Installation Management, Office of the Secretary of implemented in the private sector, and we The mission support and services provided to Defense (Industrial Affairs argue throughout this paper that the DoD can our forces at base level are an extensive and Installations). learn from these private sector experiences. business enterprise. This enterprise is on the Private sector implementations have led to path to a critical failure unless DoD rethinks competitive advantage, better management installation management. Before we consider making changes at the margin, we need a new control, and cost reductions. While DoD lens through which to view our bases (Milnes, incentives and performance measures are 1997). different from the private sector, better management control and cost reductions are The consensus is that there is not a certainly public sector objectives. coordinated and integrated view of how to We describe in detail how private sector manage DoD business processes, with Industrial Management & Data Systems organizations are integrating their business installations being just one example. 103/7 [2003] 471-483 # MCB UP Limited The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at [ISSN 0263-5577] [DOI 10.1108/02635570310489179 ] http://w ww .emeraldinsight.com/researchregister http://w w w .em eraldinsight.com /0263-5577.htm [ 471 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and We apply the ideas outlined by Milnes transition, many were successful, and have Rainer A. Sommer (1997) to the entire DoD enterprise. The obtained competitive advantage, while Public sector enterprise following items are needed: reducing their size and focusing on their core resource planning a statement of the purpose for the DoD competencies. The open question is the Industrial Management & Data Systems enterprise; following: Will the DoD enterprise 103/7 [2003] 471-483 a vision of how the future enterprise will successfully make the transition? Will look and what it will produce; reductions sacrifice military capability? a doctrine for how the enterprise should operate; a set of tools for getting the job done 3. DoD managers can learn from efficiently; and private sector experiences a plan for reaching the future state. It is clear that government is managed This paper provides one approach to differently than the private sector. The addressing part of this challenge, but it is performance measures and incentives are important to reiterate that we are only distinctly different. There are no public focusing on the business processes. The sector performance measurement war-fighting processes are unique, and they equivalents for ``profitability’’ and cannot be aligned with private sector ``return-on-investment,’’ and public business processes. Because of their special managers have a special obligation to spend requirements, private sector approaches to the taxpayers’ dollars wisely. However, there enterprise integration are not directly are many public sector processes that are transferable to the war-fighting processes. equivalent to private sector business The war-fighting processes are not the processes. These are mundane but necessary subject of this paper. processes that are essential for sustaining the Why is such a rethinking of the defense enterprise. What is the nature of these enterprise so critical at this time? Why not processes, and how are they managed? Again, just refine and fine-tune the existing model? we quote Milnes (1997): These questions are similar to those that In all there are over 100 unique business were facing private sector enterprises in the functions that take place on installations to support installation commanders and their late 1980s. In the case of private sector tenants. The nature of these base support companies, their market shares were business functions more closely parallels that decreasing, and they were strapped with of a large commercial enterprise. In the USA, inefficient and bloated infrastructures that this base support ``business’’ consumes did not enhance competitive advantage, but roughly $40 billion annually and manages required internal funding. The DoD faces a assets (real estate and facilities) approaching similar situation. Since 1989, the DoD has $1 trillion at about 400 installations. Our US under-funded many of its support activities. installations provide facilities and service to The simple fact is that years of under-funding about one million active military, around two million family members, nearly 800,000 have led to a wide gap between support civilian employees and one million military requirements and resources. This gap has retirees. On average, each installation been estimated to be as wide as $5 billion, just commander is in charge of an activity that for the installation management process. services 2,500 active military, 5,000 family This leaves few options: members, 2,000 civilian employees, and 2,500 Make significant cuts in capabilities and retirees, has assets approaching $2.5 billion, infrastructures. This would close the gap, and expends $100 million annually. To but unfortunately history has shown that manage this business enterprise efficiently, it is easier to reduce capability than we need a long-term perspective and infrastructure. investment strategy. Currently, though, our installation management parallels our Add additional dollars to close the gap. wartime management practices and While it is true that the politicians are structure, following established doctrine for already discussing possibilities for near-term engagements without seeing a need spending future budget surpluses, it is for establishing priorities for long-term unlikely that this alternative would be (multi-year) engagements. realized. Our assertion is the following. There is Make cuts in some items, but do some nothing special about the management of things smarter, so that effectiveness is public organizations that precludes them maintained while cost is reduced. from implementing modern private sector These are the same alternatives that faced management practices and integrated many private sector firms, and the third information systems. The performance alternative was the path that was chosen. measures and incentives may be different, While all firms did not successfully make the but the business processes are essentially the [ 472 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and same as the private sector. The need for these corporate models had much less Rainer A. Sommer accurate and timely management success in the DoD (Gulledge et al., 1995), and Public sector enterprise information in the public sector is the same consequently the DoD was facing a resource planning as in the private sector. If the processes are management crisis in the late 1990s[1]. The Industrial Management & Data Systems the same as the private sector, there is no message was presented by Admiral William 103/7 [2003] 471-483 reason why the information systems that Owens (retired), the former Vice Chairman support the processes should not be the same. of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at a meeting at the If the DoD does not learn from the private Brookings Institution (Owens, 1997). The sector, how would change occur? The private obverse of Figure 1 captures the essence of sector has been experiencing this change for the management problem within the DoD. 15 years. The corresponding cost reductions The core is stagnant, and the overhead and are also finally being documented. There is underhead burden from higher management much that the public enterprise can learn levels continues to grow. from many of our large private sector enterprises. This paper focuses on smart and modern management methods, enabled by 5. The management model: why commercial off-the-shelf technology IT-enabled process management? solutions. Process management is as old as the discipline of industrial engineering. Localized implementations of process 4. Management after the management (e.g. manufacturing processes, millennium shipping processes, etc.) have been prevalent Current DoD management of the mundane for years (Grass, 1956). The process business processes is top-down and management approach involves: hierarchical, with many mid-management documenting the process to obtain an levels exerting considerable micro- understanding of how work flows through management from above. Some estimate the process (elaborate and paper-based that these non-value-added mid-level ``mapping’’ methodologies were designed management processes account for well for this documentation process (Mullee over a third of the management activities. and Porter, 1956)); With respect to public enterprise the assignment of process ownership in management, the analogy shifts to large order to establish managerial corporate models that were common in the accountability; post-Second World War period. This model managing the process to optimize some is the current approach to managing most measures of process performance; and public business processes. improving the process to enhance product As firms moved to new management quality or measures of process models, they reduced their management performance. bureaucracies. Figure 1 describes the nature In the late 1980s, US manufacturers of the reductions that occurred in most US discovered that the new information corporations in the late 1980s and early 1990s. technologies allowed managerial control of Many US organizations found that, due to enterprise-wide process management competitive pressures, growth in their (Davenport and Short, 1990). The application customer-focused value-adding processes of business process management in the was stagnant. However, the overhead and public sector has been discussed in detail underhead (that is, non-value-added middle (Gulledge and Sommer, 2002), so that these management) components continued to grow. details are not repeated in this research. We The era of reengineering was focused on note that process management is a reducing overhead and underhead, while prerequisite for successful implementation of focusing reclaimed resources on core business process-oriented enterprise processes; that is, those processes that add systems, and refer the reader to the earlier value to the customer (Earl, 1994). Figure 1, research for the details. through the size of the boxes, reflects the pattern of overhead reduction that the modern organization hopes to achieve over time. 6. Properly aligned and integrated This simple model in Figure 1 was the information systems impetus for most of the corporate We use an example from the US Navy to reengineering activities of the early 1990s, describe why the management model (i.e. and the model did not go unnoticed by the business process management) and the DoD. We have written extensively about how information systems model (i.e. enterprise [ 473 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Figure 1 Rainer A. Sommer Reduction of overhead and underhead as an enterprise objective Public sector enterprise resource planning Industrial Management & Data Systems 103/7 [2003] 471-483 resource planning (ERP) must be aligned. from various information systems. From the Figure 2 (taken from a Logistics Management executive’s point of view, an information Institute briefing) is used as a case study to query should be to a single integrated demonstrate why alignment is so important. system, as opposed to a number of Figure 2 provides one scenario for stand-alone systems. This is a relatively extracting information from a sequence of standard presentation, and with this model stand-alone (i.e. stovepiped) systems to a the executive has better access to senior or regional Navy executive. Ignoring information; that is, a query is made to a the technical issues, the idea is to provide the single system as opposed to searching for executive with a ``roll-up’’ of information information from multiple systems. Figure 2 Systems to support installation management [ 474 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Figure 2 represents a technical solution that management, the information owners Rainer A. Sommer is suboptimal because it ignores the business within the stovepipes stymie effective Public sector enterprise processes that define the executive’s resource planning process management. There is tremendous management responsibilities. In modern pressure to revert to hierarchical Industrial Management & Data Systems enterprise integration implementations, it is management practices. However, the 103/7 [2003] 471-483 the business process that provides the reverse is also true. If systems are aligned mechanism for integrating the systems with processes, then it is much easier to (Scheer, 1994b). That is, the business maintain a process-oriented culture. That is, processes generate organizational outputs the stovepipe owners have less power, and it and executives are responsible for managing is difficult for them to sabotage the process the output creation process. The information management efforts. systems should align with (i.e. integrate in accordance with) the business processes. This key concept is indicated in Figure 3. The business processes deliver value to the 7. Transition to a modern business customer, and the executive’s primary process-oriented management objective relates to the delivery of value to model the customer. The integrated systems are By 1995 most large private sector companies secondary and subservient; they enable a had shifted from purely hierarchical more efficient and effective delivery of value organizational structures to those that better to the customer. The organization’s systems accommodate horizontal workflows. It was should be integrated around the business clear that a properly implemented process process. It is possible to integrate systems management model could deliver without this alignment, but there is no competitive advantage, and managers were guarantee that these non-aligned systems trying to address the critical questions will add value to the customer. involving strategy and management practice Organizations that attempt process (Garvin, 1995). The most important lesson management without realigning their learned is that it was extremely difficult to information systems do not reap the full implement process management in benefits that process management can hierarchically managed organizations deliver. They cannot respond quickly to the (Majchrzak and Wang, 1996). A new customer, and management does not have appropriate information, but these are only management model is required. Having the obvious observations. studied the process management If organizations maintain their stovepiped implementation in many private sector systems while attempting business process firms, we have identified the following critical items: Figure 3 A strategic plan that contains specific Properly aligned process management model objectives with time-dated targets. A business process architecture that documents how organizational processes relate to functions, organizational units, and information flows. An implementation plan that aligns information systems with processes, so that managers have the proper information to manage by process. A change management plan that guides the transformation from functional to process management. A resource plan that can be linked to requirements, and sufficient resources to complete the implementation. This paper addresses the first three items. The change management plan is not the subject of this paper, but we note that it is a critical item for success, and we adhere to the eight critical steps for success, as presented by Kotter (1995). Without such a plan, the transformation effort is likely to fail. [ 475 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and 7.1 The vertically and horizontally boundaries and, when carried out in concert, Rainer A. Sommer integrated business process management addresses the needs and expectations of the Public sector enterprise marketplace and drives the organization’s resource planning model 7.1.1 Vertical integration capabilities (Johansson et al., 1993, p. 16). Industrial Management & Data Systems Process management requires that senior Most DoD functions have been defined at the 103/7 [2003] 471-483 management activities be focused on core highest level. This was accomplished in the processes as opposed to function. The development and publication of the primary agreement among managers about Department of Defense Enterprise Model. future courses of action is the strategic plan. With respect to DoD business functions, the The structure of a plan varies but, in general, functions need to be linked (via events) to it contains a future vision, a mission, a set of define the processes. Some of these processes strategic goals, strategies for achieving the will be core, and others will be support. After goals, specific objectives, and performance process engineering, the objectives in the measures. Since business processes cross plans should be formally linked to the functional boundaries, business process processes. An example of the linkage is ownership is an issue; i.e. these boundaries presented in Figure 6. transcend the organizational chart to include Figure 6 describes several fundamental political and budgetary boundaries. process management concepts. First, plans Objectives define specific targets for function must contain quantifiable objectives, and performance. Functions are embedded in these objectives are formally linked to cross-functional processes; hence the processes. The link to processes is objectives in the plan must be formally accomplished by identifying the functions linked to functions. This linkage is indicated within the processes that are impacted by a in the two upper levels of Figure 4. particular objective. This linkage is The links may seem trivial, but they are essential, or one cannot establish not. Complexity arises because there are accountability or performance measures. If a many nested plans, each with a set of function does not map to any objective, then objectives. Without proper documentation, it that function is a prime candidate for is difficult to establish managerial elimination or outsourcing. accountability. The complex nesting of plans Figures 4-6 capture the basic high-level is demonstrated in Figure 5, using a concepts of business process management by decomposition of DoD installation linking planning objectives to core processes. management plans. Of course, the mapping is much more 7.1.2 Core process management complex, because functions are A core business process, as distinct from decomposable. An automated documentation other processes, is a set of linked activities tool is required, if for no other reason than (i.e. functions) that both crosses functional configuration management[2]. Figure 4 7.1.3 Horizontal integration Vertically linked process management model Unfortunately cross-functional enterprise management is more complex than organizing to manage by process. We have discussed these issues elsewhere (Gulledge et al., 1999), and they are critical for understanding the alignment problem. The business processes provide one ``view’’ of a complex organization. Managers must be provided with appropriate process information, or it is difficult to manage by business process. The nature of the problem is apparent from Figure 7. We use the installation management example to demonstrate the point. The various installation management functions are currently supported by stand-alone information systems. These information systems provide support to specific domains, such as ``utilities management’’ or ``family housing’’ in Figure 7. The ``utilities management’’ system is neither integrated nor interoperable with the ``family housing’’ and ``environmental [ 476 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and management’’ systems. Efficient and realized that it could not reap the full Rainer A. Sommer effective management of the ``installation benefits of the change without implementing Public sector enterprise resource planning management’’ core process requires that a a new information system that supports the Industrial Management & single system should support the newly engineered processes. After a two- Data Systems cross-functional process. Otherwise, process year effort, the integrating system was 103/7 [2003] 471-483 management is difficult if not impossible. implemented. After many years of Private sector organizations understand this implementation experience, we do not premise clearly ± in order to manage by believe that the Eastman experience is that business process, the organization’s unusual. information systems must be aligned with The single information system provides the process. The aligned situation is the public sector manager with complete presented in Figure 8. information about the business process This critical point about business process through a single query to the process-aligned management was uncovered in our system. The concept is simple, but the interviews with Eastman Chemical implementation can be quite complex. The Company, where we encountered precisely next section discusses two ways that have this problem. After reorganizing the been used in the private sector to achieve corporation with a focus on process and process-alignment of information systems, extensive process engineering, the company while maintaining and productively using legacy systems. Figure 5 Example of the nesting of plans 7.1.4 Information system realignment The alignment of information systems with cross-functional processes in order to meet strategic organizational objectives has been a major topic in the literature in recent years. The design and implementation of a new system will provide alignment, but this is typically infeasible. It is too risky and costly. Two approaches to achieving alignment are discussed in the following sections. 7.1.5 Brokered systems (integration without a business process focus) Consider the model in Figure 9, which continues to receive considerable attention in private sector organizations. The approach in Figure 9 maps data elements through a separate architecture tier that is called a broker. The logic is simple. Since data standardization is difficult to achieve, direct legacy system alignment is difficult to implement. The ``broker’’ draws information from the legacy Figure 6 systems, maps data elements, and Linking plans to processes distributes information to the users. From the user’s point of view, the interaction is with a single system that provides information about all functions. If this approach is implemented through a Web server and client browsers, it is the familiar client-server model of the World Wide Web. Those with experience in implementing these types of architectural models will attest to the fact that the implementation can be complicated. An integrated enterprise model is essential, and legacy wrapping (Winsberg, 1995; Aronica and Rimel, 1996) may be required. [ 477 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Figure 7 Rainer A. Sommer Process management with stovepipe systems Public sector enterprise resource planning Industrial Management & Data Systems 103/7 [2003] 471-483 Figure 8 Installation management with process-aligned information systems [ 478 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and processes (and dataflows by default) that Rainer A. Sommer 8. Standard software solutions define the standard software. That is, the first Public sector enterprise through reference models (ERP rule of reengineering is: focus first on resource planning systems) business process, and then search for Industrial Management & Data Systems This approach has proven successful in the enabling technologies. The implementation 103/7 [2003] 471-483 private sector and, in our opinion, should be of a standard software solution requires the considered by the DoD. As previously opposite. The business processes that are mentioned, proprietary development and supported by the software are implemented, implementation of integrated systems are and the organization’s business processes are costly and risky. The radical approach of altered to agree with the software. Hammer and Champy (1993) proved to be This approach, which uses reference very difficult and costly to implement in process, data, and function models, is organizations. Reengineering was difficult, appropriate for generic business processes. but the investment costs for new systems and For example, every company has a slightly technologies to support the reengineered different procurement process, but basically processes were often staggering. they all do the same thing. Hence, if the By the mid-1990s, the approach taken by reference model implied by the standard most private sector organizations to software meets 80 per cent of required reengineering was to purchase functionality, it is more cost-effective to alter preengineered and integrated software internal business processes to agree with the products called ``standard software reference model than to design, develop, and solutions’’. The generic term for standard implement a proprietary system that meets software solutions used in industry circles is 100 per cent of required functionality. Hence, ERP systems. The world’s largest supplier of one can see that reference models are not standard software solutions is SAP AG, and a appropriate for many types of processes. detailed examination of SAP’s R/3 From the perspective of the providers of client/server standard software solution may standard software solutions, they are be found in Buck-Emden and Galimow (1996) appropriate for processes that occur in many or Bancroft (1996). Keller and Teufel (1998) organizations. discuss the process-oriented implementation issues of R/3. Other useful references are 8.1 Public sector example provided by Gupta (2000), Rao (2000), Hong Since every defense installation has similar and Kim (2002), and Willis and Willis-Brown business processes, installation management (2002). would seem to be a good candidate for In some sense, the implementation of a reference model implementation. The standard software solution is the antithesis management of facilities is slightly different of reengineering. The software is at every installation, but there is significant implemented, and the implementing firm overlap in required functionality. It is alters (i.e. engineers) its business processes probably more cost-effective for the DoD to to agree with the reference business achieve information system alignment through the development and Figure 9 implementation of DoD-wide reference An information broker approach to legacy system alignment models, as opposed to service- or agency-specific proprietary solutions. These concepts are explained using Figure 10. Figure 10 shows how the reference model would be applied. The lower level of the Figure indicates the basic reference model. This model integrates all common installation management functions. It is based on the concept of a generic base. Since all bases are not the same, there will be installation-specific modules, similar to industry solutions in the private sector. For example, there may be inherent differences in Air Force versus Navy installations. Finally, there may be specific tailoring at the installation level. The top level of Figure 10 indicates this. The idea is simple: if the reference model captures 80 per cent of the required functionality, then there you can save many hours of ``reinventing the [ 479 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Figure 10 Rainer A. Sommer Reference models for installation management Public sector enterprise resource planning Industrial Management & Data Systems 103/7 [2003] 471-483 wheel’’ by developing and implementing 8.2 Developing reference models for the DoD different system configurations across For reference model development, we describe installations. a methodology called the Architecture of The large gains from reference models Integrated Information Systems (ARIS) come from the reuse of data models; i.e. it (Scheer, 1993, 1994a, 1999a, b). This takes much more time and effort to develop methodology can be used to define the data models than function or business requirements for reference models for any of process models. Reference data models are the major standard software solution vendors, defined by Hars (1994) as a general and it was originally used to develop the SAP industry-oriented conceptual data model. reference models. The methodology is Specifically, the models represent a generic supported by an automated toolset that description of an organization’s generally automates the C4I/SR Architectural applicable structures (such as order Framework (US Department of Defense, 1997). processing, bill of materials) that are typical It also supports business process-oriented ERP for a specific industry. Information on an implementations from reference models organization’s data knowledge is stored in (Scheer, 1994b). module libraries that are then used as Most modern information system planning building-blocks for efficient databases. approaches argue for decomposing the Reference models offer the organization a organization into ``views.’’ Some views are in means of storing and controlling data the domain of managers (for example, through the use of rigorous standards, which organization and function) and others are in reduce erroneous data, inconsistent terms the domain of technologists (for example, data). and provide a consistent semantic structure. These views are modeled separately, and then Furthermore, data models can be used to reassembled (that is, integrated) to form an identify areas of organizational integrated model of the organization. This improvement, because the analysis required documented set of organizational views is to generate the model will often show called an integrated enterprise model. Scheer deficiencies in related business processes. (1999a, b) accomplishes the modeling objective Of course, the reference models must be by considering multiple views: developed, and the associated standard Organizational view. This represents the software must be developed once, and then user and/or organizational units, which implemented at every DoD location with exist to perform work within an similar business processes. The savings are organization. obvious, and the DoD should consider Functional view. This represents functions methodologies that have been used to that are performed (and their relationships) successfully develop large private sector along with a detailed description of the total reference models. function hierarchy. [ 480 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Data view. This represents the conditions users require direct access to the stand-alone Rainer A. Sommer and events that exist when data are updated systems, as indicated in the upper right section Public sector enterprise with a data-processing environment. of Figure 11. Direct access is required for resource planning Process/control view. This represents the performance reasons, and the access is directly Industrial Management & Data Systems relationships that exist between the views through the broker. The private sector analogy 103/7 [2003] 471-483 and the synchronization of their might involve linking the organization’s ERP combined information flows. system (i.e. the standard software solution) to the product data management system, the Other methodologies advocate slightly enterprise document management system, the different views, but the concepts are the same. procurement execution system, etc. The power We omit the details of the reference model users of the product data management system, development for this concept paper, but we for example, would require direct access to offer the following suggestion for how the that system. reference model would align existing installation information systems with the 8.3 Developing and implementing newly defined and documented business reference models for the public enterprise processes. Figure 11 is used to aid the This section contains a discussion of all tasks discussion. that must be completed in order to plan for Figure 11 presents an architecture that implementation, develop the reference private sector organizations have used to model, and monitor contractor performance integrate legacy applications with standard in the implementation of the standard software solutions. Users query the system software solution. The strong through the standard software solution. recommendation to the DoD is to define the These users are the upper-left clients in requirements using contractors who have Figure 11. If the users need information from experience in requirements definition-level the various stand-alone systems (lower right modeling for enterprise integration. Then, section of Figure 11), the transfer occurs the project should be completed by a through proprietary APIs at the application company or companies that have actually (or database) level. designed and built reference models for large There may be intense users (i.e. data private sector implementations; e.g. SAP, creators) for the stand-alone systems. These Baan, Oracle, etc. Figure 11 Installation management enterprise architecture [ 481 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and The following steps provide a rough outline unlikely that our leaders will be able to reduce Rainer A. Sommer of how the effort should proceed. It follows infrastructure while increasing effectiveness. Public sector enterprise many of the ideas that were introduced by There seems to be general agreement that a resource planning Kirchmer (1998): tweaking of the old model is not appropriate, Industrial Management & Data Systems 1 Begin the following items simultaneously: since it is unlikely to deliver the desired 103/7 [2003] 471-483 assemble all strategic plans; and results. This paper argues for the review all existing rules and implementation of private sector methods regulations, using the original that have been successfully implemented in legislation as a base line. most large Western corporations. 2 Develop the high-level function and We argue that there is nothing special organizational views (use the C4I/SR about public sector business processes that Architectural Framework as a guide). insulate them from modern private sector 3 Integrate the function and organization management methods. The model that is views around core processes. proposed is integrated and information 4 Link the objectives in the strategic plans technology-enabled process management. to the functions that are embedded in the The paper suggests a combination of a core processes, and document using process management model with private objective diagrams, a modeling sector process-aligned standard software methodology that is included in the ARIS solutions. This approach has been effectively Toolset. used by most of the largest US corporations. 5 At this point, the highest business process Hence, the paper focuses on the interaction management level is completed, as are between organizational processes and the three views of the integrated enterprise new information technologies. Integrated model. information systems are desirable, but they 6 Request permission to continue under are effective when they enable the new rules of process ownership. organization’s value-adding processes. The 7 Reconcile regulatory review with business process forms the basis for enterprise model and suggest changes in integration, with the organization’s system regulations. integrated in such away that it is aligned 8 Develop data view at the cluster level and with the process. Process-aligned run gap analysis. information systems help to create a culture 9 Generate requirements for the standard that enables process management. software solution reference model. We provide sufficient detail to define a 10 Develop architecture for integrating high-level plan for a project to transition a existing legacy applications. public organization to the process-aligned 11 Write SOW to be targeted to a contractor enterprise. We explain modern private sector who has actually developed standard approaches for achieving enterprise software solution reference models. integration, including both vertical and 12 Evaluate proposals and ensure that the horizontal integration. We also show how the contractor captures all requirements in technology model aligns with the the development plan. management model, and discuss the 13 Monitor development of the reference implications for implementing such a model models. in an example, using the DoD Installation 14 Develop a second RFP for a contractor to Management enterprise. Finally, we outline implement the reference models. the steps for implementing a project, 15 Monitor the implementation, using following standard private sector implementation performance measures implementation practices, within a and management practices that have been particular public enterprise. used by large private enterprises that have implemented reference models in Notes their organizations. 1 There were also many reengineering 16 Evaluate the implementation and plan for implementation problems in the private the implementation of the reference sector. A good summary of the issues is models at other DoD organizations. provided by Drago and Geisler (1997). 2 Luo and Tung (1999) discuss some of the issues surrounding the selection of methodologies 9. Conclusions and tools. This paper focuses on new ways of managing References public enterprises. New methods are essential Aronica, R. and Rimel, D. Jr (1996), ``Wrapper for a number of reasons. The primary reason your legacy systems’’, Datamation, Vol. 42 is that, in the absence of new methods, it is No. 12, 15 June, pp. 83-8. [ 482 ]
    • Thomas R. Gulledge and Bancroft, N. (1996), Implementing SAP R/3, Keller, G. and Teufel, T. (1998), SAP Process- Rainer A. Sommer Manning Publishers, Greenwich, CT. Oriented Implementation, Addison-Wesley/ Public sector enterprise Buck-Emden, R. and Galimow, J. (1996), SAP R/3 Longman, Harlow. resource planning System: A Client/Server Technology, Kirchmer, M. (1998), Business Process Oriented Industrial Management & Addison-Wesley, Harlow. Implementation of Standard Software, Data Systems 103/7 [2003] 471-483 Davenport, T. and Short, J. (1990), ``The new Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. industrial engineering: information Kotter, J. (1995), ``Leading change: why technology and business process redesign’’, transformation efforts fail’’, Harvard Business The Sloan Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 4, Review, Vol. 73 No. 2, pp. 59-67. pp. 11-27. Luo, W. and Tung, Y. (1999), ``A framework for Drago, W. and Geisler, E. (1997), ``Business selecting business process modeling process re-engineering: lessons from the methods’’, Industrial Management & Data past’’, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 99 No. 7, pp. 312-19. Systems, Vol. 97 No. 8, pp. 297-303. Majchrzak, A. and Wang, Q. (1996), ``Breaking the Earl, M. (1994), ``The new and old of business functional mind-set in process process redesign’’, The Journal of Strategic organizations’’, Harvard Business Review, Information Systems, Vol. 3, pp. 5-22. Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 93-9. Garvin, D. (1995), ``Leveraging processes for Milnes, R. (1997), What Does the Future Hold for strategic advantage’’, Harvard Business Defense Installations?, White Paper for DoD Review, Vol. 73 No. 5, pp. 77-90. Commanders Conference Attendees, Grass, I. (1956), ``Processing and operation Washington, DC, 26 February. planning’’, in Maynard, H. (Ed.), Industrial Mullee, W. and Porter, D. (1956), ``Process chart Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New procedures’’, in Maynard, H. (Ed.), Industrial York, NY. Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New Gulledge, T. and Sommer, R. (2002), ``Business York, NY. process management: public sector Owens, W. (1997), ``Keynote presentation’’, Annual implications’’, Business Process Management Meeting of the Washington Operations Journal, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 364-76. Research/Management Science Council, Gulledge, T., Hill, D. and Sibley, E. (1995), ``Public The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, sector reengineering: applying lessons 5 November. learned in the private sector to the US Rao, S. (2000), ``Enterprise resource planning: Department of Defense’’, in Grover, V. and business needs and technologies’’, Industrial Kettinger, W. (Eds), Business Process Change: Management & Data Systems, Vol. 100 No. 2, Reengineering Concepts, Methods and pp. 81-8. Technologies, Idea Group Publishing, Scheer, A.-W. (1993), ``Architecture of integrated Harrisonburg, VA. information systems (ARIS)’’, in Yoshikawa, H. Gulledge, T., Sommer, R. and Tarimcilar, M. and Goossenaerts, J. (Eds), Information (1999), ``Cross-functional process integration and the integrated data environment’’, in Infrastructure Systems for Manufacturing, Elzinga, J., Gulledge, T.R. and Lee, C. (Eds), North-Holland, Amsterdam. Business Process Engineering: Advancing the Scheer, A.-W. (1994a), ``ARIS toolset: a software State-of-the-Art, Kluwer-Nijhoff Academic product is born’’, Information Systems, Vol. 19, Publishers, Boston, MA. pp. 607-24. Gupta, A. (2000), ``Enterprise resource planning: Scheer, A.-W. (1994b), Business Process the emerging organizational value systems’’, Engineering: Reference Models for Industrial Industrial Management & Data Systems, Enterprises, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 114-18. Scheer, A.-W. (1999a), Architecture of Integrated Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993), Reengineering Information Systems: Business Process the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Frameworks, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Revolution, Harper Business, New York, NY. Scheer, A.-W. (1999b), Architecture of Integrated Hars, A. (1994), Referenzdatenmodelle: Information Systems: Business Process Grundlagen Effizienter Datenmodellierung, Modeling, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Gaebler Verlag, Wiesbaden. US Department of Defense (1997), C4I/SR Hong, K. and Kim, Y. (2002), ``The critical success Architecture Framework, Version 2.0, C4I/SR factors for ERP implementation: an Architectures Working Group, Washington, organizational fit perspective’’, Information & DC. Management, Vol. 40, pp. 25-40. Willis, T. and Willis-Brown, A. (2002), ``Extending Johansson, H., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A. and the value of ERP’’, Industrial Management & Wheeler, W. III (1993), Business Process Data Systems, Vol. 102 No. 1, pp. 35-8. Reengineering: Break Point Strategies for Winsberg, P. (1995), ``Legacy code: don’t bag it, Market Dominance, John Wiley & Sons, wrap it’’, Datamation, Vol. 41 No. 9, 15 May, Chichester. pp. 36-41. [ 483 ]