View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/22/2019 Erp Culture Gitma05 v2
1/4
IMPLEMENTING ERP IN ORGANIZATIONS: INSTITUTIONS, AGENTS AND THEIR CULTURAL
DISPOSITIONS
Alemayehu Molla, IDPM, The University of Manchester, [email protected]
Ioannis Loukis, IDPM, The University of Manchester, [email protected]
Paul S. Licker, School of usiness A!ministration, "aklan! University, licker@oaklan!.e!u
ABSTRACTT#o main sets of culture can $e i!entifie! in any %&P im'lementation an! use. "n the one han!, there is a culture
em$e!!e! in the %&P soft#are reflectin( the vie#s of the %&P !evelo'ers, ven!ors an! consultants. "n the otherhan!, there is a culture reflectin( the vie#s of the im'lementin( or(ani)ation*s 'ro+ect team, mana(ers an! users.
e refer to the first as theERP institution culturean! to the secon! asERP implementing organization culture.e
ar(ue that con(ruency $et#een the a$ove t#o cultures can contri$ute to %&P process an! outcome success.
-o#ever, lack of con(ruency can lea! to cultural mismatch an! contri$utes to %&Pprocess and outcome failure.
INTRODUCTION
An %nter'rise &esource Plannin( %&P/ im'lementation is a si(nificant intervention in or(ani)ational life.
0urrently, it is one of the most challen(in( issues for 'ractitioners an! researchers in the IS fiel! Po))e$on, 1222/.%&P systems have $een foun! to have conce'tual links #ith almost every area of information system IS/ research
Markus an! Tanis, 3444/. Thus, the !iver(ent !efinitions an! 'ers'ectives associate! #ith the %&P5or(ani)ation
linka(e !e'en! on ho# IS researchers conce'tuali)e an! treat the linka(e $et#een IT6IS an! or(ani)ations.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ORGANIZATIONS
IS in or(ani)ations has $een investi(ate! from $oth the technical har!/ an! soft human/ 'ers'ective 0hatfiel!,
1222/. 7rom the technical 'oint of vie#, IS are seen as 8en(ineere! artifacts9 e:'ecte! to !o e:actly #hat they are
!esi(ne! for "rliko#ski, 3441./. Like#ise, or(ani)ations are seen as information 'rocessin( systems, e:chan(in(an! han!lin( information $ase! on certain rules ;at)enstein an! Lerch, 1222/. In contrast, several researchers
a!vocate a softer conce'tuali)ation of IS. As Pro$ert 344
7/22/2019 Erp Culture Gitma05 v2
2/4
community e5tourism !evelo'ment Mason an! Milne, 1221/. -o#ever, in this 'a'er, #e focus only on the first
'hase an! the !ifferences in culture a''arent there.
ERP AS A SOCIO"TECHNICAL SYSTEM
"n the $asis of the ar(uments 'ursue! so far, #e conce'tuali)e %&P systems as socio5technical systems. %&P can $e
seen as #a technological artifact bundling material and symbolic properties in a certain recognizable form ;yun(
an! ;im, 1221=1
7/22/2019 Erp Culture Gitma05 v2
3/4
CULTURAL DIMENSIONS
In the social an! mana(ement science research, culture is !ivi!e! into t#o main cate(ories55 or(ani)ational an!
national ;rum$hol) an! Mai!en, 1222/. "ne of the most #ell5kno#n un!erstan!in(s of or(ani)ational culture
comes from Schein 34B/. Schein, usin( visi$ility an! accessi$ility criteria, i!entifie! three levels of cultural
'henomena as 8surface manifestation of culture9, 8espoused organizational alues and beliefs9 an! 8basic
underlying assumptions9. "n the other han!, -ofste!e 342/ su((este! one of the most 'o'ular !efinitions
frame#ork/ of national culture, #hich is ca'ture! in five !imensions as indiidualism, power distance, uncertaintyaoidance, masculinity and time orientation. Althou(h -ofste!e*s #ork on culture has $een #i!ely acce'te! in the
IS literature Myers an! Tan, 1221/, it has also $een eFually critici)e! Avison an! Myers, 344B alsham, 1221alc)uch, 344B/. Several other authors have conce'tuali)e! culture or(ani)ational an! national/ an! suffuse! it
#ith their o#n inter'retation. 7or instance, Gohnson an! Scholes 344H/ i!entifie!stories, symbols, power structure,
organization structure, control systems an! rituals and routines as in!icators of culture. Trom'enaars 344?/
i!entifie! seven !imensions of cultural !iversity= uniersalism ersus particularism, collectiism ersus
indiidualism, neutral ersus emotional, defuse ersus specific cultures, achieement ersus ascription, human$time
relationship and human$nature relationship !internal ersus external control".
7in!in(s from $oth or(ani)ational an! national culture theories in!icate the im'ortance of norms, beliefs and aluesas manifestations of culture. -ence, these three common conce'ts can $e use! to o'erationali)e the t#o sets of
culture in an %&P situation. In a!!ition, $ecause an %&P system is a (lo$al 'ro!uct, #hich em$o!ies universal
$usiness mo!els of in!ustry $est 'ractices, #e foun! Trom'enaars*s uniersalism s. particularism !imensionrelevant. 7urther, the literature recor! sho#s that national culture esta$lishes certain values, norms an! $eliefs
influencin( cor'orate culture 0i(anek an! Garu'athirun, 122>/. Cational !ifferences in 'ro$lem solvin( a''roach
mi(ht create some !ifficulties !urin( %&P im'lementation ;rum$hol) et al, 1222/. Therefore, #e foun! -ofste!e*s
8power distance9 an! 8uncertainty aoidance9 !imensions relevant to ca'ture such !ifferences.
ERP SUCCESS AND FAILURE
The literature on %&P success an!6or failure is inconclusive. hile some re'ort 'ositive im'acts an! outcome of
%&P, others have reveale! %&P failures. "ne of the reasons lies in the multi!imensionality of the conce't of success
an! the !ifficulty of !evelo'in( a sin(le measurement Delone an! McLean, 122H/. ase! on the revie# of $oth
%&P an! IS success an! failure literature Al5Mashari, et al, 122H in(i et al, 3444 Daven'ort, 1222 Delone an!
Maclean, 122H a$le et al, 122H Lyytinen an! -irschheim, 34
7/22/2019 Erp Culture Gitma05 v2
4/4
ERP Institution Norm vs. Organization Norm
In the Scan!inavian su$si!iary, there #as an esta$lishe! norm un!erlyin( em'loyees* 'erce'tion of #arehouse
activities. 8%he organization belieed that the warehousemen should perform physical tasks in preference to other
tasks !p &'(". An em'loyee in!icates, #%he warehouse personnel worked #out there in the warehouse and
performed physical tasks such as moing products'. 1/. This value emer(es from the social interaction of the
com'any*s em'loyees an! is the 'ro!uct of share! meanin(s to#ar!s the #arehouse 'ersonnel activities. %&P
systems often reflect a num$er of assum'tions concernin( human involvement in or(ani)ations ho# em'loyees arerelate! to the o$+ect of their #ork. The esta$lishe! norm in the Scan!inavian su$si!iary that the #arehousemen
shoul! !o 'hysical tasks #as not 8com'ati$le9 #ith the %&P soft#are*s im'licit culture, #hich reFuires #arehouse'ersonnel to (et involve! in !oin( a!ministrative #orks. As state! in the case stu!y, #)*%+he warehouse staff were
spending more time using the system and less time out there)9 '. 1/ !oin( 'ro'er #arehouse activities. -ence,
there #as incom'ati$ility $et#een the soft#are*s #ay of #orkin( an! !ealin( in the #arehouse an! the acce'te!
norm in the or(ani)ation a$out #hat constitutes #arehouse activities.
ERP Institution Values / Belief vs. Organization Values / Belief
oth the U; an! S#e!ish su$si!iaries have in the 'ast !evelo'e! an! use! their o#n customi)e! systems. The
im'lementin( consultant 'erceive! these systems as the source of several or(ani)ational 'ro$lems an! consi!ere!%&P as the solution. -o#ever em'loyees in the su$si!iaries value! very hi(hly the ol! system*s functionality an!
$elieve! that their 'revious system #as e:actly #hat the com'any nee!e!. 7or instance a marketin( mana(er in the
S#e!ish su$si!iary states #)*%+he old system was just for our needs and was ery effectie'. 1/. As a result,the %&P system #as 'erceive! as very com'licate!, #ith very structure! functions an! at certain level infle:i$le. A
sales key user sai! #rder entry in -P is /uite cumbersome because of the way it is set out and because of the
information that we hae to enter it can make life /uite difficult '.1/
ERP Institution Universalism vs. Organization Particularism
In the U; su$si!iary, there #ere 'ro$lems !ue to the universalistic o'eratin( assum'tions em$e!!e! in %&P.
Particularly, #%he warehouse module cannot match deliery schedules and purchase orders '. 1