The paper "Company Y’ s ES Implementation" is a perfect example of a business assignment. Introduction of the new enterprise system (ES) model came shortly after the turnover of company Y to the CorpeX. According to Grainer and McKay (2015, p. 93), CorpeX had newly acquired the Y company interpreting to the lack of enough information about corporate activities of Y preceding the introducing the cutover. The haste yet inappropriately planned ES implementation in company Y identifies with a lack of prior knowledge and understanding of the New Zealand firm (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p.
99). It is clear that the leadership of the implementation exercise failed to account for the differences and complexities in the current firm and only imposed a prior successful model to a new venture (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p. 99). At this point, important to realise that as much as the application of the ES can integrate firm business processes; it requires a comprehensive study of the existing business to learn of its characteristics (Fui-Hoon Nah, Lee-Shang Lau & Kuang, 2001, p. 286). Therefore, a proper recommendation includes performing research about the Y enterprise to learn of the functionality of their legacy system and its complexity before the acquisition and the introduction of the ES strategies. Cooperation is an imperative component in any organisation, especially when it comes to introducing an innovation.
The case in Grainer and McKay (2015, p. 93) has high levels of incorporation between the locals and the implementing team from Australia. To begin with, employees at Y did not welcome the acquisition by CorpeX resulting in a negative attitude towards the suggestions by the new management (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p.
97). Further evidence includes the experience of David Butcher and Trevor Grey whose arrival at Y became unexpected and unwelcome (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p. 97). Moreover, the position of Stuart Barker to impose strictly the new model at Y without seeking the collaboration of the local employees is evidence that the ES implementation in New Zealand began without appropriate support and cooperativeness of personnel. According to Fui-Hoon Nah et al. (2001, p. 287), important is for the implementation partners to work together to realise the desired goals of an ES implementation process.
Therefore, a collaborative approach to the project phase is more desirable for the effective proceeding of the implementation exercise. The absence of teamwork at firm Y explains the occurrence of decline in sales, the rise of cost and ultimately the loss of customers to other competitors. These drastic outcomes emerge six months after the introduction of the ES model which highlights its poor functioning of the Y’ s (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p. 93). A significant point to consider includes the plan executed following the acquirement of Y by the CorpeX.
Grainer and McKay (2015, p. 97) explain that soon after the acquisition, CorpeX left the responsibility of the company to the Y employees. In this case, the absence of an active presence of CorpeX at Y created a void pointing the absence of efficient cooperation of the two businesses. It is important to highlight the events occurring in company Y, especially after the shift in management. Grainer and McKay (2015, p. 97) paints a picture of the situation at Y where other than the sign at the front of the firm, CorpeX was largely absent.
Surprisingly, the management directs two individuals to direct the ES implementation at Y providing a short deadline and expect the complete adherence of the locals to these changes. It is not surprising to understand the reaction of the staff at Y including their unavailability during meetings, lack of interest in the education and training sessions, and the poor dedication of extra time to learn and contribute to the implementation exercise (Grainer & McKay, 2015, p. 98). Examining the participation of the local management, Grainer and McKay (2015, p.
98) include that the General Manager at Y delegated his responsibilities to the IT manager. The imperative in the case is the absence of support from senior management that may have helped improve the attitude of New Zealand’ s. At this point, the challenge not only includes the lack of cooperativeness of the parties but also a problem in the communication channel. Fui-Hoon Nah et al. (2001, p. 291) speaks highly of the necessity of the top management to the effective implementation exercise. Moreover, communication should occur at all stages of the process to provide a complete understanding and engagement of the workforce to the course (Fui-Hoon Nah et al.
2001, p. 291; Leonard & Higson, 2014, p. 67; Tarhini, Ammar and Tarhini, 2015, p. 26; Umble, Haft and Umble, 2003, p. 245). The discussion by Leonard and Higson (2014, p. 68) provides a strategic approach to aiding the implementation process. The functioning of the strategy as illustrated in Figure 1 explains the need to involve a collaborative methodology in the course.
Ahmad, M.M. and Cuenca, R.P., 2013. Critical success factors for ERP implementation in SMEs. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 29(3), pp. 104-111.
Bala, H. and Venkatesh, V., 2013. Changes in Employees’ Job Characteristics During an Enterprise System Implementation: A Latent Growth Modeling Perspective. MIS quarterly, 37(4), pp. 1113- 1140.
Fui-Hoon Nah, F., Lee-Shang Lau, J. and Kuang, J., 2001. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems. Business process management journal, 7(3), pp. 285- 296.
Gargeya, V.B. and Brady, C., 2005. Success and failure factors of adopting SAP in ERP system implementation. Business Process Management Journal, 11(5), pp. 501-516.
Gebauer, J. and Lee, F., 2008. Enterprise system flexibility and implementation strategies: aligning theory with evidence from a case study. Information Systems Management, 25(1), pp. 71-82.
Grainer, N. and McKay, J., 2015. The long and winding road of enterprise system implementation: finding success or failure?. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 5(2), pp. 92- 101.
Hoch, J.E. and Dulebohn, J.H., 2013. Shared leadership in enterprise resource planning and human resource management system implementation. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), pp. 114-125.
Ko, D.G., Kirsch, L.J. and King, W.R., 2005. Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations. MIS quarterly, pp. 59-85.
Leonard, J. and Higson, H., 2014. A strategic activity model of Enterprise System implementation and use: Scaffolding fluidity. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 23(1), pp. 62-86.
Mabert, V.A., Soni, A. and Venkataramanan, M.A., 2003. Enterprise resource planning: Managing the implementation process. European journal of operational research, 146(2), pp. 302-314.
Somers, T.M. and Nelson, K.G., 2003. The impact of strategy and integration mechanisms on enterprise system value: Empirical evidence from manufacturing firms. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2), pp. 315-338.
Strong, D.M. and Volkoff, O., 2010. Understanding Organization—Enterprise System Fit: A Path to Theorizing the Information Technology Artifact. MIS quarterly, pp. 731-756.
Sykes, T. A., 2015. Support Structures and Their Impacts on Employee Outcome: A Longitudinal Field Study of an Enterprise System Implementation. MIS quarterly, 39(2), pp. 437- 495.
Sykes, T. A., Venkatesh, V. and Johnson, J.L., 2014. Enterprise system implementation and employee job performance: Understanding the role of advice networks. MIS quarterly, 38(1), pp. 51- 72.
Tarhini, A., Ammar, H. and Tarhini, T., 2015. Analysis of the critical success factors for enterprise resource planning implementation from stakeholders’ perspective: A systematic review. International Business Research, 8(4), p. 25.
Umble, E.J., Haft, R.R. and Umble, M.M., 2003. Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors. European journal of operation research, 146(2), pp. 241- 257.