Microsoft Word - Sammon-Adam-Carton-set

616 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
616
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Microsoft Word - Sammon-Adam-Carton-set

  1. 1. Benefit Realisation Through ERP: The Re-Emergence of Data Warehousing David Sammon, Frederic Adam and Fergal Carton University College Cork, Ireland dsammon@afis.ucc.ie fadam@afis.ucc.ie fcarton@afis.ucc.ie Abstract: The need for an integrated enterprise-wide set of management information pronounced Data Warehousing the ‘hot topic’ of the early-to-mid 1990’s, however, it became unfashionable through the mid-to-late 1990s, with the approach of Y2K and with it the widespread implementation of ERP systems. However, in recent times, the re-emergence of Data Warehousing, to address the limitations and unrealised benefits of ERP systems implementation, provides researchers with a new challenge in understanding the ‘double learning curve’ for an organisation, undertaking in quick succession both an ERP systems project and a Data Warehousing project, in an attempt to finally achieve the benefits expected but never realised. Keywords: ERP Systems, Data Warehousing, Benefit Realisation, Post-Implementation 1. Introduction systems. However, while strengthening their needs discourse, organisations are now being There is no doubt that the introduction of a subjected to successive waves of post-ERP new Information System into an organisation hype. To date, researchers have looked at the should deliver multiple benefits and achieve ERP market as the place where organisational the desired Return On Investment (ROI), in needs, in terms of integrated enterprise-wide that it meets a business need or solves a systems, were met by the packages proposed business problem. Therefore, an organisation’s by ERP vendors. However, current research in ability to identify the need for the introduction ERP (e.g. Hossain and Shakir, 2001; Wood of an Information System is extremely critical and Caldas, 2001 and Sammon and Adam, to ensure success and realised benefits. In 2002) has found that the ERP market is relation to ERP systems, benefits have not characterised by a strong vendor and been realised due to the lack of understanding consultant push whereby organisations appear by managers of what these systems entail to have little choice but to jump on the (Sammon et al., 2003) both in terms of bandwagon (as described for Activity-Based implementation and use. Therefore, it seems Costing by Jones and Dugdale, 2002; and IT that there is an inherent danger in the way that outsourcing by Michell and Fitzgerald, 1997; ERP systems, were and are currently being, and to some extent for e-commerce adopted by organisations. As ERP systems are development by Howcroft, 2001). The strong being introduced, the specific needs of the vendor push that characterises the ERP organisations and the specific features that movement inherently favours the sales make them different may be lost or eroded in a discourse (that which is proposed by ERP way that is not controlled or understood by vendors and ERP consultants) and replaces managers. In certain cases the enormity of the the needs discourse (that of the implementing system leads the business rather than the organisation). According to Westrup and business leading the system. Brown and Knight (2000) Vessey (2003) comment on improving the understanding on how to leverage, what they the deployment of ERP systems call, the ‘enterprise system maturity curve’ in takes place in a marketplace of an effort to reduce the high risks and costs of ERP vendors generally mediated implementing ‘the next wave of complex by ERP consultants. Their aims, enterprise systems’. though never publicly formulated, are to sell ERP systems and Based on these observations, we propose that consultancy services respectively organisations need to dictate the ERP systems (p.641). agenda, now and in the future, to a much This contention can prove increasingly greater extent, therefore, strengthening their problematic for the implementing organisation, needs discourse and thereby improving their leading to what we term a ‘double learning chances of realising all of the benefits curve’ for organisations, who are now expected from integrated enterprise-wide undertaking both ERP and Data Warehousing www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  2. 2. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation Volume 6 Issue 2 (2003) 155-164 156 initiatives. Furthermore, ERP vendors and ERP Gorry and Scott Morton (1971) report on their consultants are extending their range of general observations about the different products and services to provide these Data categories of management activity (strategic Warehousing functionalities (Watson and planning, management control, operational Schneider, 1999; Inmon, 2000). This further control) and also highlight differences in the strengthens the sales discourse and in effect information requirements to support these reduces the implementing organisations activities. chances of successfully implementing either ERP or Data Warehousing. However, for the This suggests the reason why many most part, Data Warehousing is a complete organisations have found it increasingly culture shock to the ERP vendors. For difficult to realise some of their long-range instance, Inmon (1999) poses the question plans for information systems. Many of these “why would any company want to have the plans are based on the "total systems same data warehouse as any other company approach". Some of the proponents of this in the same industry?” Data Warehousing is approach advocate that systems throughout about gaining a competitive advantage and the organisation be tightly linked, with the differentiation from the competition. However, output of one becoming the direct input of “SAP seems to think that data warehouses can another, and that the whole structure be built be turned out like cookies, which is just one on the detailed data used for controlling more sign of their applications’ ‘get the data in’ operations. In doing so, they are suggesting an mentality” (Inmon, 1999). This trend further approach to systems design that is at best heightens our contention that the implementing uneconomic and at worst based on a serious organisation needs to be empowered and misconception. To say that management made aware of the complexities of the ERP information systems activity must wait "until we market and needs to internally assess, if not get our operational control systems in hand" is their readiness for ERP and Data to say that efforts to assist management with Warehousing, their ability to manage the systems support will be deferred indefinitely. external parties (the ERP consultant and the ERP vendor) within the ERP community On further examining the implications of the (Sammon and Adam, 2002). framework to system design differences Gorry and Scott Morton (1971) noted that because 2. ERP: Understanding a complex the information requirements ‘differ sharply’ phenomenon among the three areas of managerial activity there are ‘few occasions in which it makes In examining the theoretical underpinning of sense to connect systems directly across the ERP concept, it is useful to go back to the boundaries’. Therefore, as an implication of the first classification of systems and the most decision classification (structured, semi- referenced framework for the implementation structured, unstructured) of the framework, of management information systems, that of Gorry and Scott Morton (1971) state that Gorry and Scott Morton (1971; 1989). In their totally-integrated-management- seminal 1971 article, they developed a information-systems ideas so framework that has become the foundation popular in the literature are a poor stone for much of the research work in design concept. More particularly, Decision Support Systems (Hamilton et al., the integrated or company-wide 1982; Kirs et al., 1989). The framework allows database is a misleading 'notion’, an organisation to gain a perspective on the and even if it could be achieved field of Information Systems and focuses on would be exorbitantly expensive understanding the ‘evolution of MIS activities within organisations’, and recognises some of However, this old notion is in fact a new reality the potential problems and benefits resulting for all organisations experiencing ERP systems from ‘new technology’. This framework has implementations. An ERP system is built on an been criticised, most notably by Keen (1987) enterprise data model and the ERP systems and Alter (1992), but it remains that are expensive. Another old notion which is in fact a further new reality is that expressed by The Gorry and Scott Morton Dearden (1972) who stated framework is perhaps the best known, most durable and most The notion that a company can frequently cited in the IS field (Kirs and ought to have an expert (or a et al., 1989, p. 184). group of experts) create for it a single, completely integrated supersystem - an MIS - to help it www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  3. 3. 157 David Sammon, Frederic Adam & Fergal Carton govern every aspect of its acitivy Warehousing concept, there is yet to evolve an is absurd ‘inclusive’ definition of Data Warehousing. However, proposed definitions identify the goal Overall, despite the strong push towards ERP, of Data Warehousing as enabling the provision there is, in relation to ERP implementations, a of better corporate information to support an lack of understanding of the difficulties that can organisation. As a result, the main objective of arise when the business models used by a Data Warehousing solution is to turn data organisations clash with the business models into information. Therefore, by design, Data underlying the ERP packages implemented by Warehousing is informational, analysis and these organisations. There seems to be a decision support oriented, rather than oriented subtle but profound danger that the logic of the towards transaction processing (Babcock, software package supplants the organising 1995). However, there is also no agreed upon logic of the organisation as a whole. There is definition for ERP systems, although their also significant evidence that the disruption to characteristics position these systems as everyday business while ERP systems are integrated, all-encompassing (Markus and implemented are putting unduepressure on Tanis, 2000), complex mega-packages (Gable organisations, regardless of their size and et al., 1997) designed to support the key financial means. For example, Dell Computers, functional areas of an organisation. Therefore, after months of delay and cost over-runs, by design, an ERP is an operational-level abandoned their ERP project because they system. found that the new system was not appropriate for its decentralised management model Table 1: Defining Characteristics of Data (Stefanou, 2000). Warehousing and ERP Characteristics ERP DW Thus, Wood and Caldas (2001) have of IS Approach (operational) (informational) commented that, in practice, the reality of ERP Focus/Origin Operational Informational implementation for many organisations Benefit Efficiency Effectiveness implementing this type of software is one in Design Implement Create Best Best Practice Practice which ‘a golden dream has turned into a Development Software Evolving nightmare’. The important question of course System Package Concept is: where did this ‘golden dream’ come from? Data Model Abstract Concrete The answer, as we see it when talking to Characteristics ERP DW managers in organisations where ERP is being of IS Project (operational) (informational) implemented or debated is: business media, Implementation software vendors, consulting firms, academics Project High High and their collective discourses. This highlights Complexity the existence of the sales discourse, on the Project Failure High High push side of the ERP market, which sells the Rate dream as opposed to selling the reality Clarity and Low Low (Carlton Collins 2000). Facing this Understanding of Project overpowering push, we contend that the pull Initiative by side of the ERP market has not developed, Organisation which puts organisations at risk of spending large resources to acquire applications that do Reflecting on the early-to-mid 1990s Data not truly serve their needs. Warehousing can be described as an informational solution to an operational problem in terms of data integration, as 3. The enterprise systems era illustrated in Figure 1. The emergence of the For more than a decade, organisations have Data Warehousing concept can be viewed as adopted a number of different approaches to an evolution of Management Information IS integration; from Data Warehousing in the Systems (Wu and Buchmann, 1997). The early-to-mid 1990s, striving to achieve limitations of the traditional Management informational integration, through to ERP in the Information Systems (MIS), perceived as being mid-to-late 1990s, focusing on operational unable to maintain a consistent view of an integration. Although Data Warehousing and organisation’s reconciled data, was identified ERP represent two alternate approaches to IS as the potential benefit of a Data Warehousing integration in organisations, a number of system. To overcome the problems with common defining factors exist between these traditional approaches of accessing large two types of IS project implementation, as amounts of data in heterogeneous, illustrated in Table 1. Due to the constant autonomous distributed systems, the regeneration and redefinition of the Data emergence of Data Warehousing introduced www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  4. 4. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation Volume 6 Issue 2 (2003) 155-164 158 the concept of a ‘logically centralised data further due to the growing demand within repository’. Therefore, the concept of Data organisations to analyse (internal and external) Warehousing emerged due to the evolution of business information. As a result, Data IS objectives within organisations (emerging Warehousing was ‘thought to be merely a from concerns with operational efficiency to counterpoint to transaction processing considerations of market competitiveness), and applications’ (Inmon, 1999). the provision of better management information to support an organisation turn data into information informational, analysis and decision support oriented, rather that oriented towards transaction processing support the key functional areas of an organisation also promised to deliver on the infromational requirements of an organisation INFORMATIONAL IS only gets data in, does not prepare data for use and analysis 1990 Integration 1995 MONOLITHIC 2000 Integration learning curve Integration DOUBLE learning curve Data Warehousing ERP Data Warehousing Legacy Systems ERP ERP learning curve 1990 Fragmentation 1995 2000 Integration OPERATIONAL IS need for analytical and decision support capabilities convergence of ERP and DW Figure 1: IS Integration Approaches and Learning Curves However, by the mid-to-late 1990s ERP illustrated in Figure 1, and referencing the systems (e.g. JBOPS) provided an alternate insights of Wood and Caldas (2001), ERP can operational solution to the operational be described as: integration problem, with one of the most … a comprehensive information significant factors for ERP adoption being Y2K technology package built on the preparation (Brown et al., 2000; Kalakota and promise that all critical information Robinson, 2001; Themistocleous et al., 2001; should be totally integrated in one Hayler, 2003). Furthermore, ERP systems also single information database promised to deliver on the informational (p.387) requirements of an organisation, such is its scope, therefore, the perceived need and Unfortunately, as organisations moved toward along with it, the rate of Data Warehousing the post-implementation phase of ERP project project implementations, was reduced. Due to implementations, post Y2K for the vast majority the fact that an ERP systems implementation of organisations, the real issue of benefit replaced many of the legacy systems realisation emerged and with it came the re- throughout the organisation, it can be emergence of the need for Data Warehousing, perceived as the ‘base line application’, as illustrated in Figure 1. Due to the monolithic containing integrated application data, style integration of the mid-to-late 1990s, many generated as a ‘by-product of transaction organisations are now discovering that the processing’, or as an ‘ODS’ (Operational Data solution to leveraging investment decisions in, Store), a ‘hybrid structure’ that contains some and retrieving useful data from, an ERP aspects of a data warehouse and other system is to undertake a Data Warehousing aspects of a transaction processing initiative in conjunction with the implemented environment (Inmon, 1999). As further www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  5. 5. 159 David Sammon, Frederic Adam & Fergal Carton ERP system (Sims, 2001; Raden, 1999; goal of this research paper is in highlighting Inmon, 2000; Radding, 2000; Riggle, 2000; the need for a benefits classification to Hewlett-Packard, 2002; Hayler, 2003; Sammon understand the impact of unrealised benefits et al., 2003). The harsh reality of ERP systems (from ERP projects) and the re-emergence of implementation, to the expense of those Data Warehousing type developments to organisations that invested resources in the address the issue of realisation of these initiative, is that ERP only gets data into the benefits. system, it does not prepare data for use and analysis (Inmon, 2000). ERP systems provide 4. Benefit realisation through ERP mission-critical operational workflow but do not support decision support systems (DSS) It is argued that an ERP system, one that is directly, therefore, the need to source a data properly implemented, can achieve warehouse from the ERP system is obvious unprecedented benefits for business (Riggle, 2000). This is due to the fact that ERP computing (Watson and Schneider 1999). systems lack certain functionality and reporting However, some companies have difficulty capabilities (Adam and Doyle, 2001). However, identifying any measurable benefits or it bears thinking that as long as organisations business process improvements (James and can analyse data, supporting different Wolf 2000; Donovan 2001). It is further business processes, even across differing data reported that a large number of ERP structures that change with the diversity of implementations fail to meet expectations systems, there is no need to force a rigid (Stefanou 2000) as many adopters have not standardisation of business processes (a yet realised the benefits they had anticipated. straightjacket) across the organisation (Hayler, Therefore, are ERP systems living up to their 2003). For example, organisations that expectations? For example, Pallatto (2002) expected ERP systems to solve their comments on the fact that some vendors and Information Systems problems have found that consultants are presently ‘soft-peddling’ the ERP systems solved some, but hardly all, of term ERP due to bad experiences and these problems. Many organisations management frustration, when original experience frustration when they attempt to business goals and benefits were not use their ERP system to access information achieved, with their ERP implementations. In a and knowledge (Radding 2000). It has been recent product brochure titled ‘Optimise your quickly realised that ERP systems are good for ERP Investment’ by Cap Gemini Ernst & storing, accessing and executing data used in Young (CGEY), CGEY reveal that “most daily transactions, but it is not good at companies have high expectations of their providing the information needed for long term ERP implementations but some of these fail to planning and decision making (Radding, 2000; deliver on all the benefits that were promised. Adam and Doyle, 2001) as ERP systems are In fact, these ERP implementations experience not designed to know how the data is to be high dissatisfaction levels, which is evidenced used once it is gathered (Inmon, 1999). by many operational glitches and limitations”. Consequently, in the post-implementation Furthermore, they state that “in effect, the ERP phase organisations are often dismayed to find implementation gives you sight of business that they haven’t improved their analytical and potential – but may not deliver much of the decision support capabilities (Raden, 1999; expected value”. Pallatto (2002) adds that Inmon, 1999; 2000; Radding, 2000) as ERP concessions and compromises in the design of systems do not provide an environment for these rushed Y2K upgrade projects (ERP) had decision support activities such as analysing negative impacts on systems performance and historical trends, drawing conclusions, scenario benefits which were not promptly and fully building and planning (Raden, 1999). communicated to the implementing organisation. While Hendrickson (2002) To our way of thinking this creates a ‘double supports this argument, stating that learning curve’ for an organisation, undertaking “organisations that have future designs in quick succession both an ERP project and a developed from a clear understanding of DW project, in an attempt to finally achieve the [business] requirements will gain more vision benefits expected but never realised. This has and value from their ERP implementation”. been referred to as a ‘dilemma’ by Inmon (1999). As a result, the significance of A study conducted by Sammon and Lawlor generating a benefits classification for both (2004) reiterates this argument, highlighting ERP and Data Warehousing maybe greater that a failure to carry out an analysis of the than previously considered in our approach to mandatory and desirable features required in a research in this area. Therefore, the focus and system with an open mind will lead to the blind acceptance of the models underlying the ERP www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  6. 6. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation Volume 6 Issue 2 (2003) 155-164 160 packages currently on sale on the market, with business benefits that organisations might be detrimental effects on the organisation and its able to achieve from their use of ERP systems. operations. Furthermore, Sammon and Lawlor They present 25 ERP benefits consolidated (2004) comment on the short-term and long- across five benefit dimensions (Operational, term benefits realised in the case studied. The Managerial, Strategic, IT Infrastructure, underlying rationale of the organisation in Organisational). Shang and Seddon (2003) selecting the ERP system was that of global analysed the features of ERP systems, single instance, however, only short-term literature on IT benefits, web-based data on benefits (on a site-by-site basis) had been 233 ERP-vendor success stories, and realised when the research was undertaken. interviews with 34 ERP cases to provide a “Even though the initial implementation of SAP comprehensive foundation for planning, began in 1998, the organisation will not know if justifying and managing the ERP system. They the benefits of having global integration and a focus on the benefits of an ERP system in use SAP global single instance will materialise, and comment that there are few details of until 2002” (Sammon and Lawlor 2004). ERP-specific benefits in academic literature However, business circumstances may change and further noted that ‘trade-press articles’ and over such an extended period of time, causing ‘vendor-published success stories’ were the some of the possible benefits not to be major sources of data. However, Shang and realised, a problem existing with all ERP Seddon (2003) point out that, “cases provided systems, offering a single instance (Sammon by vendors may exaggerate product strength and Lawlor 2004). Therefore, one needs to and business benefits, and omit shortcomings question if the rationale and justification for of the products” (p.1007). Furthermore, Adam implementing an ERP system will ever in fact and Sammon (2004) examine a number of realise the desired benefits. related issues, in their examination of the ‘ERP Community’ and the sales and needs Rutherford (2001) observed that only around discourse that exists to define it. This 10% to 15% of ERP implementations deliver discourse is also identified by Bonerjee (2001) the anticipated benefits. According to James who comments that the ERP market is all and Wolf (2000) companies that were able to about ‘marketing’ and all about ‘hype’. identify benefits, thought they could have been realised without the implemented ERP system. As a result, in proposing our benefits “80 percent of the benefit that we get from our classification for this research study we use the ERP system comes from changes, such as five categories of the Shang and Seddon inventory optimisation, which we could have (2003) framework. An ERP system and Data achieved without making the IT investment” Warehousing clearly has a multitude of (James and Wolf 2000). However, in addition, different benefits, however, we provide an according to James and Wolf (2000), reporting explanation for the ERP benefit categories in on an instance of an ERP implementation, our proposed classification, as illustrated in “many of the benefits that we are able to Table 2. When we examine the short achieve today could not have been predicted explanation for each of the ERP benefits we at the time that we started work on ERP. In can question if ERP systems actually deliver fact, in hindsight it appears that much of the on these benefit categories. Although every value of these large systems lay in the organisation implements an ERP system or infrastructure foundation they created for future Data Warehousing for its own unique growth based on Information Technology”. requirement, there are numerous similarities across the rationales and benefits within 5. Towards a benefits organisations. However, the degree of classification realisation of these benefits can vary dramatically. According the Shang and Seddon Bonerjee (2001) pose a question regarding the (2003) it is not expected that every ERP reality of how many organisations actually system will produce all the benefits in each of ‘reaped the benefits’ of an ERP the 5 categories. Therefore, the adoption implementation, concluding that ‘the answer is rationale and post-implementation realised far less than most might think’. Furthermore, benefits associated with the deployment Shang and Seddon (2003) pose the question approaches need to be analysed and that if organisations around the world spent presented in a format which facilitates the US$100bn. or more on ERP in 1999 “what sort foundation of a framework for understanding of benefits did they [the organisation], or can why organisations embark upon their ERP and they, achieve?” In answering this question, Data Warehousing implementation. they present a comprehensive framework of www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  7. 7. 161 David Sammon, Frederic Adam & Fergal Carton Table 2: Developing a Benefits Classification ERP Benefit Dimension Explanation Operational Since ERP systems automate business processes and enable process changes, one would expect ERP systems to offer all of this type of benefit Managerial With centralised database and built-in data analysis capabilities it seems likely that ERP systems will provide informational benefits to management Strategic ERP systems, with their large scale of business involvement and internal/external integration capabilities, could assist in achieving these strategic benefits IT Infrastructure ERP systems with their integrated and standard application architecture provide an infrastructure that could support this dimension Organisational The integrated information processing capabilities of ERP systems could affect the establishment of the organisational capabilities The justification for adopting ERP centres around the benefits that can be realised, 6. Concluding Remarks however, Donovan (1998) believes that to receive benefit from implementing ERP there Based on our initial observations, it appears must be no misunderstanding of what it is that further investment of resources is required about, or underestimation of what is involved in for an organisation to realise the initial benefits implementing it effectively, and even more promised from their ERP system investments. important, organisational decision makers must However, the worrying issue here seems to be have the background and temperament for this ERP vendors and ERP consultants admittance type of decision making (Donovan 2001). All of not addressing critical implementation too often the argument emerges that the costs issues, or fulfilling the organisational of ERP implementation are meagre when requirements, in the previous ERP compared to the potential benefits offered by a implementations. Some of our early successfully implemented system. However, observations in studying the emergence of DW the majority of ERP implementations are not in the ERP post-implementation phase have entirely successful as organisations experience proved worrying. From a synthesis of existing varying degrees of success for a variety of literature on ERP project implementation, one reasons. Therefore, there is an obvious need noticeable area of omission is that of the focus to structure the potential benefits that on data specific critical success factors, organisations might expect to gain from the highlighting the lack of focus being placed on implementation and use of ERP systems. At the importance of data for the implementation this point it is worth re-emphasising that, for of an ERP project. In no small part, this is one the most part, organisations only realise of the main reasons in many organisations to operational and IT infrastructure benefits from legitimise undertaking a Data Warehousing ERP systems (Shang and Seddon, 2003) project. However, in the case of Data whereas Data Warehousing facilitates the Warehousing, data related issues would be realisation of informational benefits, which considered one of the most important and could be understood as managerial, strategic critical areas of research focus (Sammon and and organisational from the Shang and Adam, 2000). With ERP, unlike Data Seddon (2003) framework. These informational Warehousing, an in-depth knowledge of the benefits emerge from the successful use of organisational data is not perceived as being integrated organisational information. If we important, due to the fact that [a] the consider that ERP is about data consistency, positioning of an ERP system requires an while Data Warehousing is about data understanding and examination of an accessibility, we can understand these organisations business processes, and [b] the benefits. Data Warehousing is concerned with organisation adopts the business model and providing an optimised environment for data data model of the ERP package and therefore, manipulation and reporting, therefore, does not have to invest in the establishment of providing an integrated set of management a sound enterprise-wide data model. For information. Furthermore, Data Warehousing is example, ERP offers enterprise-wide data an enabler of business strategies and strategic consistency, however, ERP systems make the decision making based on turning data into task of creating accessible data much more information, therefore, not only understanding difficult “because of their overall complexity but influencing customer behaviour, and and the higher level of abstraction in their data competitive position of the organisation. models” (Riggle, 2000). Inmon (1999) reiterates the importance of this point stating www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  8. 8. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation Volume 6 Issue 2 (2003) 155-164 162 that a clear definition of the required data www.zdnetindia.com/biztech/enterpris models needs to exist for the ‘base line e/features/stories/17623.html applications’, and/or ‘ODS’, (an ERP can be 09/12/2003. perceived as both), and therefore, a major Brown, C. and Vessey, I, (2003). Managing the concern when introducing an ERP into an Next Wave of Enterprise Systems: organisation is whether a distinction has been Leveraging Lessons from ERP. MIS made, between ‘base line applications’ and Quarterly Executive, 2(1), March. ‘ODS’, by the vendor. Brown, C.V, Vessey, I. and Powell, A, (2000). The ERP Purchase Decision: There is no doubt in the researchers minds Influential Business and IT Factors, In that initially, when organisations commenced Proceedings of the 6th Americas the implementation of ERP systems they did Conference on Information Systems, not expect to have to invest in future Data August 10th-13th, Long Beach Warehousing solutions to leverage their ERP California, pp.1029-1032. investments. As a result of this, the early Carlton Collins, J, (2000). Opinion - Be Wary of lessons learned by organisations, in relation to Enterprise Consultants, Accounting Data Warehousing, should not be dismissed. Software News, This new era of enterprise-wide systems www.accountingsoftwarenews.com/ch integration projects introduces an increased arts/warning.htm 13/12/2001. level of complexity to an already complicated Dearden, J, (1972). MIS is a Mirage, Harvard organisational initiative. In the past, in relation Business Review, January-February. to ERP systems, organisations have been too Gable, G., van den Heever, R., Scott, J. and accepting of the promises of the sales Erlank, S, (1997). Large Packaged discourse. Nowadays, in the enterprise Software: the need for research, In systems market, managers, for the most part, Proceedings of the 3rd Pacific Asia want “assurances that the system will deliver Conference on Information Systems the performance and business benefits that (PACIS). were promised when they agreed to sign on Gorry, A. and Scott Morton, M, (1989). the dotted line”. That is because they know Retrospective commentary on the from bitter experience that “keeping such Gorry and Scott Morton framework, promises is easier said that done” (Pallatto, Harvard Business Review, Spring, 2002). Therefore, an implementing pp.58-60. organisation needs to be empowered and Gorry, G.A. and Scott Morton, M.S, (1971). A made aware of the increasing complexities of Framework for Management the ERP market and strengthen their needs Information Systems, Sloan discourse in relation to enterprise-wide Management Review, Fall. systems project requirements, in an effort to Hamilton, S. and Ives, B, (1982). Knowledge realise the benefits of implementation. utilization amongst IS researchers, MIS Quarterly, December, pp.61-77. References Hayler, A, (2003). ERP II – Déjà vu? IT Toolbox – ERP Knowledge Base. Adam, F. and Doyle, E, (2001). Enterprise http://erp.ittoolbox.com/documents/doc Resource Planning at Topps Ireland ument.asp?i=2515 28/10/2003. Ltd. In Johnson and Scholes (Eds.) Hendrickson, D. (2002). Getting More Out of Exploring Corporate Strategy, Prentice ERP. IT Toolbox – ERP Knowledge Hall, 6th Edition. Base. Adam, F. and Sammon, D, (2004). The www.erpassist.com/documents/docum Enterprise Resource Planning Era: ent.asp?i=1268 15/10/2002. Lessons Learned and Issues for the Hewlett-Packard, (2002). Strategic Systems of Future, Idea Group Publishing, the Future: Integrating ERP Hershey, PS, forthcoming. Applications and Data Warehouses. Alter, S, (1992). Why persist with DSS when DM Review, March. the real issue is improving decision Hossain, L. and Shakir, M, (2001). Stakeholder making?, In Decision Support Involvement Framework for Systems: Experiences and Understanding the Decision Making Expectations, Jelassi (Ed.), North Process of ERP Selection in New Holland. Zealand, Journal of Decision Systems, Babcock, C, (1995). Slice, dice & deliver, 10(1), pp.11-27. Computerworld 29(46), pp.129-132. Howcroft, D, (2001). After the goldrush: Bonerjee, A, (2001). 10 Commandments of deconstructing the myths of the ERP Implementation, www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  9. 9. 163 David Sammon, Frederic Adam & Fergal Carton dot.com market, Journal of Information Sammon, D. and Lawlor, D, (2004). An Technology, 16, pp.195-204. Examination of an ERP Software Inmon, W.H, (1999). Data Warehousing and Selection Process: An Irish Case ERPhttp://www.billinmon.com/library Study, In Adam and Sammon (2004) 24/11/2001 The Enterprise Resource Planning Inmon, W.H, (2000). ERP and Data Decade: Lessons Learned And Issues Warehouse: Reading the Tea Leaves For The Future, Idea Publishing www.billinmon.com/library/articles/arte Group, Hershey, PS, forthcoming. rpfu.asp 18/10/2001 Sammon, D., Adam, F. and Carton, F, (2003). Jones, T.C. and Dugdale, D, (2002). The ABC The Realities of Benefit Realisation in bandwagon and the juggernaut of the Monolithic Enterprise Systems Era- modernity, Accounting, Organizations Considerations for the Future. In and Society, 27, pp.121-163. Proceedings of the 10th European Kalatoka, R. and Robinson, M, (2001). E- Conference on Information Technology Business 2.0: Roadmap to Success, Evaluation. Madrid, Spain, September Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. 25th-26th. Keen, P, (1987). Decision Support Systems: Shang, S. and Seddon, P.B, (2003). A the Next Decade, Decision Support Comprehensive Framework for Systems, 3, pp.253-265. Assessing and Managing the Benefits Kirs, P.J., Sanders, G.L., Cerveny, R.P. and of Enterprise Systems: The Business Robey, D, (1989). An experimentation Managers Perspective, In Second- of the Gorry and Scott Morton Wave Enterprise Resource Planning framework, Management Information Systems (Implementing for Systems Quarterly, 13, pp.183-197. Effectiveness), Shanks, G, Seddon, Markus, M.L. and Tanis, C, (2000). The P.B. and Willcocks, L.P. (Eds.), Enterprise Systems Experience – from Cambridge University Press. Adoption to Success, Claremont Sims, D, (2001). ERP Integration Strategies, Graduate University. EA Community, Michell, V. and Fitzgerald, G, (1997). The IT www.eacommunities.com/articles/art2 outsourcing market-place: vendors and 3.asp 15/10/2001. their selection, Journal of Information Stefanou, C, (2000), The Selection Process of Technology, 12, pp.223-237. Enterprise Resource Planning, ERP Pallatto, J, (2002). Get the Most Out of ERP. IT Systems, In Proceedings of the 6th Toolbox – ERP Knowledge Base. Americas Conference on Information www.erpassist.com/documents/docum Systems, August 10th-13th, Long ent.asp?i=1334 15/10/2002. Beach California, pp.988-991. Radding, A, (2000). Knowledge management Themistocleous, M., Irani, Z. and O’ Keefe, appears on ERP radar, Datamation, R.M, (2001). ERP and application http://itmanagement.earthweb.com integration: exploratory survey. 18/10/2001. Business Process Management Raden, N, (1999). ERP and Data Journal, 7(3). Warehousing, Archer Decision Watson, E. and Schneider, H, (1999). Using Sciences www.archer- ERP Systems in Education, decision.com/artic11.htm 18/10/2001. Communications of the AIS, 1(9), Riggle, M, (2000). Solving the ERP Paradox, February, pp.1-47. Intelligent Enterprise, Westrup, C. and Knight, F, (2000). Consultants www.intelligententerprise.com/000320/ and Enterprise Resource Planning feat3.shtml 19/11/2003. (ERP) Systems, In Proceedings of the Rutherford, E, (2001). ERP’s ends justify its European Conference on Information means, CIO Online Quick Poll Report, Systems, pp.637-644. http://www.cio.com/poll/042401_erp.ht Wood, T. and Caldas, M, (2001). Reductionism ml 18/07/2001. and complex thinking during ERP Sammon, D. and Adam, F, (2002). Decision implementations, Business Process Making in the ERP Community, In Management Journal, 7(5), pp.387- Proceedings of the 10th European 393. Conference on Information Systems, Wu, M.C. and Buchmann, A.P, (1997). June, Gdansk, Poland. Research Issues in Data Sammon, D. and Finnegan, P, (2000). The Ten Warehousing, In Datenbanksysteme in Commandments of Data Warehousing, Buro, Technik und Wissenschaft, DATABASE, 31(4), Fall. Berlin, Germany, pp.61-82. www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited
  10. 10. www.ejise.com ©Academic Conferences Limited

×