Upload
dreadnoughter
View
169
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Selection of an ERP System for a Construction Firm in Taiwan: A Case
Study
Jyh-Bin Yang, Chih-Tes Wu and Chiang-Huai Tsai
Institute of Construction Management, Chung Hua University, Taiwan, ROC
Abstract The primary functions of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) are to integrate the
inter-departmental operation procedures and Management Information System (MIS)
modules, and to reallocate the resources of a company. How to successfully implement an
ERP system in an organization is always a hot research topic for researchers as well as a
pending problem for an organization that wants to implement it. This research is a case
study on the selection of system suppliers and contract negotiation during the ERP
implementation of a local construction company in Taiwan. After reviewing the common
key success factors discussed in the literature, this study discussed seven issues: coding
system, working process reengineering, priority of ERP functionality implementation,
customization, participant roles, consultant role and performance level of subcontractor,
which also affected the implementation. Lessons learned from the case study in discussed
seven issues are valuable for a construction company in deciding to implement an ERP
system. This research suggests that additional case studies are necessary for the successful
application of ERP systems in the construction industry.
Keywords: case study, enterprise resource planning, supplier evaluation, contract
negotiation, contractor.
2
1. Introduction
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is a system for the seamless integration of all the
information flowing through the company such as finances, accounting, human resources,
supply chain, and customer information [1]. Recently, ERP has become a strategic and
survival weapon for most firms in which Information Technology (IT) is widely used.
Implementing an ERP system requires an enormous investment for a firm in terms of time,
cost and resources. Thus the decision to implement ERP must be considered carefully.
Additionally, an ERP system will be the IT backbone of an enterprise [2]. A firm must
address the culture and general practice of the business in order to achieve its expected
implementation objectives [3]. The range of functionality of ERP systems has further
expanded in recent years to include more front-office, back-office and even strategic
functions. Detailed function descriptions and discussions are out of the scope of this study,
but can be found elsewhere [3-6]. Although there are many world famous ERP providers,
including SAP, Oracle (integrated with PeopleSoft and J. D. Edwards) and IFS, no system
specifically designed for the construction industry is yet available. Construction companies
wishing to implement an ERP system must generally select a general ERP system
mentioned above. However, the construction industry has some uniqueness, which should
be considered by the ERP vendor, namely the construction industry is a highly fragmented
one with specialized segments requiring specialized systems and driven by projects [7, 8].
Recently, ERP systems have been used in construction-related companies because of
their benefits in improving responsiveness in relation to customers, strengthening supply
chain partnerships, carrying out remote procurements and inventory management,
enhancing organizational flexibility, improving decision-making capabilities, reducing
project completion time, analyzing accurate business profile and lowering costs [8,9].
However, there are very few studies conducted concerning the implementation of ERP
3
systems in the construction industry, particularly for the construction contractors.
Successfully implementing an ERP system in a firm is extremely difficult. Many studies
have provided numerous success factors [10-14]. It still exists that the standard and best
methodology for implementation of an ERP system does not exist [7]. O’Connor and Dodd
recommended that it is beneficial to develop a case study on how a contractor implements
an ERP system [15]. This study aims to fulfill this need.
Commercial ERP packages cannot provide a once-and-for-all business model for all
processes in all industries. Thus, no single ERP packaged software can meet all firm
functionalities or all special business requirements [10-14]. Therefore, firms must choose a
flexible ERP system and a co-operative vendor that effectively responds to customer
requirements. So far, none of the construction management modules provided by software
suppliers have been found to be suitable for construction firms. Moreover, some companies
that introduced ERP were unsuccessful or even went bankrupt eventually. These failures
occurred because the level of application of IT of construction companies is comparatively
low and thus, considerable attention needs to be paid and caution in advocating ERP
systems.
However, previous studies have also suggested that language, culture, politics,
government regulations, management style, and labor skills affect various ERP
implementation practices in different countries [16, 17]. Language differences (the
common language used in Taiwan’s IT software is traditional Chinese) and the entry
barrier of using an English-based ERP system for a general contractor in Taiwan (or other
non-native-speaking English areas) must be carefully considered.
The construction industry is a localized industry. In Taiwan, successful ERP
implementation is still rare in the construction industry. Researches performed in Taiwan
regarding ERP mainly focused on the procedures of application and software system
4
functionalities, respectively. On the contrary, only a few studies have been related to the
selection of system suppliers and the content of the ERP contract and specifications. This
study aims to remedy the lack of discussion of the above issues.
In sum, this study focuses on the early stage of ERP system implementation for a
general contractor in Taiwan. A detailed discussion of the costs and benefits of system
implementation, that is confidential information of studied company, is beyond the scope
of this study. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the research
method, case study method, and why this method was chosen. Section 3 then reviews the
literature on ERP implementation. Next, Section 4 describes the case information
concerning ERP implementation. Subsequently, Section 5 discusses seven issues that affect
successful ERP implementation. Conclusions are finally drawn in Section 6, along with
future research directions recommended as well.
2. Research method
There are three factors that distinguish research method selection [18]: (1) the type of
research question being asked; (2) the control a researcher has over actual behavioural
events; and (3) the degree of focus on temporary as opposed to historical events. Historical
methods are useful when a researcher has no control over the sources of data. Experiments
are the preferred method if the researcher can manipulate behavior directly, precisely and
systematically. As the research conducted is examining contemporary events, but the
relevant behavior is unable to be manipulated, the use of the case study method is the
preferred method for answering the research questions. Generally, the case study method is
a preferred strategy when “how” and “why” questions are being posed, and the researcher
has little control over events [18].
5
The case study method, a qualitative and descriptive research method, looks intensely
at an individual or small participants, drawing conclusions only about that participants or
group and only in that specific context [18]. The case study method is an ideal
methodology when a holistic, in-depth investigation is required [19]. The case study
method has been used in various domains, particularly in sociological investigations. The
case study research is not sampling research [18-20]. However, selecting suitable cases
must be done so as to maximize what can be learned in the period of time available for the
study [21].
There are three types of case study method: exploratory, explanatory and descriptive
[18]. The research questions used in this research are explanatory types of question (e.g.,
why the studied company did not select a localized ERP system in evaluation), which are
most likely to require the use of the case study method, because such questions deal with
operational links that need to be traced by involved persons.
The case study is known as a triangulated research strategy [18, 21-22]. The
protocols that are used to ensure accuracy and alternative explanations are termed
triangulation [20]. Triangulation (sometimes known as triangulation) encourages a
researcher to collect information from multiple sources but aims at corroborating the same
fact or phenomenon. The need for triangulation arises from the ethical need to confirm the
validity of the processes [21, 22]. In the case study methodology, triangulation could be
done using multiple sources of data [18]. This study interviewed the project managers who
are from the studied company and ERP implementation consultant respectively to improve
the accuracy of the study findings.
The case study method has been proven a useful tool in investigating the problems of
ERP implementation [16, 23-25]. Such a fact is also fit for this study. Based on the above
discussions, this study used the case study method as a data collection method and then
6
used participant interviews and comparison with the literature to validate the findings from
the case study.
3. Literature review
The ERP system is an increasingly popular management tool to reshape a business or
organization. The ERP system was developed and derived from the previous MRP
(Materials Requirement Planning) system and MRPII (Manufacturing Resource Planning)
system. Modern ERP system encompasses all integrated information systems that can be
used across an organization [26]. The key idea of ERP is using IT to achieve the capability
to plan and integrate enterprise-wide resources [27]. ERP has become a necessary tool of a
progressive firm who wants to hold the edge in his comparative domain. However, there
are a number of examples in which organizations were not successful in obtaining the
potential benefits that motivated them to make large investments in ERP systems [1, 28-30].
The problems that led to the failure of ERP implementation can be grouped into the
categories of human/organizational (e.g. lack of strong and committed leadership),
technical (e.g. problems in software customization and testing, and lack of technically
knowledgeable staff) and economic (e.g. lack of economic planning and justification) [23].
The question of how to successfully implement an ERP system in an organization remains
a hot research topic for researchers and a pending problem for organizations wishing to
implement this system.
There is a lot of research focusing on critical success factors (CSFs) for ERP
implementation. For instance, Nah et al. [30] identified 11 factors based on a review of the
ERP literature. The identified CSFs include ERP teamwork and composition, top
management support, software development and so on. Based on a survey of 10 Canadian
government organizations, Kumar et al. [31] reported that the top three CSFs affecting the
7
selection of ERP product/vendor are (1) functionality of the system, (2) systems reliability
and (3) system recommended by the Treasury Board. Furthermore, Kumar et al. [27]
examined the same issue of product/vendor selection with a questionnaire and structured
interviews of 20 Canadian organizations and then revealed that the five most prominent
CSFs affecting selection are: (1) functionality of the system, (2) systems reliability, (3) fit
with parent/allied organization systems, (4) available business best practices in the system
and (5) cross module integration. One of the general CSFs that only occurred in Asia was
the cultural difference. Popular ERP software are developed by Western companies, Asian
companies need to customize some ERP functionalities because their business models are
different from the Western practices that are embedded in the ERP systems [12, 25, 32, 33].
A study focusing on the construction industry discussed the topic of executing the
capital facility delivery with an ERP system by conducting a survey to evaluate the
functionality and adequacy of a famous ERP system [15]. This study concluded that there
were many functional, technical and usability problems that existed in their examined ERP
system and it is necessary for ERP system designers to understand the detailed work
processes of the engineering and construction industry for broad product acceptance.
Another study, based on the construction companies that had ERP systems in place,
revealed that there are the barriers to the implementation of ERP systems in the
construction industry and the major CSFs in small construction firms are financial capital
and human and technical resources [34].
Lee et al. [8] investigated the development of ERP systems and their implementation
in materials management in the construction industry. This study evaluated the benefits of
an ERP implementation case by simulation techniques and then this study concluded that
an ERP system can shorten the procurement cycle through automating most repeated
transactions, and by reducing manpower to perform the tasks. Shi and Halpin [3] thought
8
that an internet-based integrated resource planning system offers a potential solution for
achieving construction enterprise-wide business automation. This study proposed a
conceptual Construction Enterprise Resources Planning (CERP) architecture that is project-
oriented, integrated, paralleled and distributed, open and expandable, scalable, remotely
accessible, transparent, and reliable and robust. For a company wishing to successfully and
quickly implement an ERP system, the construction customized ERP, or the CERP, is
unrealistic. Mature commercial ERP systems are the first choice for most companies
because firms required long term technical support and custom service.
The method of using a case study to discuss ERP implementation in the construction
industry is rare. A case study involving three ERP implementations in different business
units of a Dutch-based construction firm concluded that the ERP system is appropriate for
the firms that are changing their business strategy from a low-cost strategy for all market
segments to a differentiation strategy for one or a few market segments, as well as being
appropriate for firms adopting tools for the inter-organizational standardization of primary
business processes, and moreover can transform IT function within firms from computer
management to information management [24].
4. Case description
4.1 General information about the studied company
The studied company (subsequently termed company X) is a registered “A class”
general contractor in Taiwan. The company was established in the 1970s and had a staff of
about 500. In the construction industry in Taiwan, the studied company was ranked among
the top ten construction firms according to their annual revenue. Recently, the types of
projects in which company X is involved have included: housing and hi-tech buildings,
infrastructure, and mass transit projects.
9
Company X had developed several single-functionality programs to facilitate
independent management. For instance, a construction information system based on FoxPro
language was developed to collect site information by a dial-up protocol. Despite being out
of date, the systems were able to meet the basic requirements of conventional construction
management style. Owing to the need to provide more real and accurate information for
both top management staff and project clients, company X decided to evaluate whether it
was necessary to implement an ERP system to enhance its IT competence.
4.2 Evaluation process
Before implementing an ERP system, company X developed a four-phase
implementation plan to obtain desired information and to make necessary decisions, which
are beneficial to its ERP implementation. The four phases include (1) self evaluation of the
feasibility of ERP implementation, (2) Request for Proposal (RFP) preparation, (3) ERP
systems evaluation and (4) ERP contract negotiation. Some substantial issues in each phase
are depicted below.
4.2.1 Self evaluation
To evaluate the feasibility of ERP implementation, company X formed a task force to
deal with the affairs of ERP implementation. The criteria for assessing the staff to be
included in the task force consist of the following conditions: (1) An individual must have
experience of construction computerization, (2) An individual must be a department
director and have sufficient computer skills and (3) An individual must be familiar with
company business processes and have sufficient computer skills. Following an interview
with company staff, the task force included seven members (one project manager who is a
department manager, five company staffs and one outsourcing university professor). The
10
work force received authorization from the general manager of company X. The work force
carried out a self evaluation program that uses an evaluation sheet (see Figure 1) to serve as
the key for determining whether the ERP implementation is required or not. By the
information shown in Figure 1, the members of the task force conducted independent
evaluations. The relative weightings of the evaluation items, excluding those in the cost
category, are determined by the task force by the majority. The sum of the weightings in all
items equals 100. Owing to the decision regarding whether to implement ERP were
essential to success or to failure to some extent, company X set the average value of 80 as
the threshold for executing the ERP implementation project. The self evaluation result
drove company X into the second phase: RFP preparation.
4.2.2 RFP preparation
Establishing a request for proposal (RFP) for unbiased competition offers benefits in
terms of correct ERP system selection that is another key to successful ERP
implementation. RFP preparation for a company with no related computerization
experience is a tough and hard task. On the one hand, the existing information systems in
company X were developed by the staff of company X. Therefore, purchasing a
commercial information system or an ERP system is a difficult decision that requires
careful consideration. On the other hand, there is no available RFP template for ERP
implementation for company X. Consequently, the preparation of a suitable RFP is another
issue for ERP implementation in company X. Before preparing the RFP, company X
invited several ERP vendors to demonstrate their systems and to provide system
functionalities and requirements, as well as to adopt company lists and preliminary
quotations. Simultaneously, company X conducted a self inspection program for collecting
the requirement information on ERP implementation. The self inspection program gathered
11
basic ERP requirements of all departments, depicted the current working processes of all
departments, and assembled the working processes and ERP requirements according to a
centralized management perspective.
Based on the results of the self inspection program and the data provided by ERP
vendors, the work force generated a RFP that consisted of the work scope of the required
ERP system, as well as the major ERP functionalities including preliminary sub functions,
implementation priority and relative schedule and preliminary ERP implementation
contract. Furthermore, the work force also recommended candidates for invitation to
participate in the final competition.
4.2.3 System evaluation
This evaluation phase evaluates all possible ERP vendors to determine the priority of
contract negotiation during the next phase. Although the system functionalities and the
strengths and weaknesses of individual vendors can be evaluated by structured evaluation
items, none of the systems fully fit the requirements depicted in RFP. Initially, local
construction-related ERP vendors were invited to demonstrate their systems. However, the
lack of process reengineering and other business management modules, such as financial
and accounting management, forced company X to reject those local construction-related
ERP vendors. After focusing on global ERP vendors, company X changed its consideration
to find an ERP system with long term usability, system stability, functionality completeness
and internationalization possibility. Based on the above attributes, two final ERP vendors
were targeted. This decision is identical to the advice offered by Shi and Halpin [3].
Following several scenarios involving separate discussions with two vendors
regarding the system functionality and the requirements of company X, a modified RFP
was prepared for final invitation and evaluation. The modification in RFP included the
12
scope and schedule of ERP implementation, a list of customizations on request and a list of
client-furnished items. Company X issued the new RFP with a formal quotation sheet (see
Figure 2) to two candidates and used an evaluation framework (see Figure 3) to determine
the final ranking of ERP vendors for contract negotiation. Figure 3 shows the sheet used for
ERP system evaluation. The evaluation items in the sheet were collected from relevant
literature and ERP vendors and then determined by the work force. The evaluation sheet
contains 36 evaluation items which are grouped into ten categories, each with a weight of
ten. The evaluator (the member of the work force) was then asked to fill out the score fields
and opinions in the sheet. Following independent evaluation by all evaluators, one of the
two candidates was awarded the right to negotiate the contract. The contract winner was an
ERP implementation consultant company, not an ERP total solution company.
4.2.4 Contract negotiation
During this phase, company X negotiated with the contract winner based on the
submitted quotation and preliminary contract provisions. Figure 4 shows the contracting
configuration before and after the contract negotiation. At the beginning of contract
negotiations, company X planned to sign three contracts with an implementation consultant,
a hardware vendor and a software vendor, respectively. During the negotiations with the
implementation consultant, company X decided that negotiating with a firm in a domain
with which it was unfamiliar was hard work owing to the lack of IT specialists in the
company. Therefore, company X finally signed only one contract with the implementation
consultant who would have sub-contracts with the IT hardware vendor, ERP system vendor
and construction domain consultant, respectively. Notably, owing to the selected ERP
system being a general purpose ERP system, the implementation consultant needs to find a
construction domain consultant with IT implementation experience to help in resolving the
13
problems of implementing a general purpose ERP system for the construction domain and
performing construction domain specified customizations.
The chapters of the signed contract include: (1) project scope, schedule and standard
(consisting of the provisions of the scope of the ERP implementation project,
implementation schedule, service standard and principles, testing and acceptance process,
and change and resolution of service standards), (2) obligations of contracting parties
(consisting of the authority and responsibility of the project team members and project
manager), (3) privacy protection, operation guidance and data manipulation principles, (4)
consultant fee and payment conditions (consisting of the consultant fee, exclusive cost,
payment terms that are tied to implementation milestones, and payment associated with
changes in service), (5) intellectual property rights, (6) change of local laws or regulations,
(7) contract duration and termination, (8) contract trade, (9) emergency support plan, (10)
work transfer under contract termination (11) indemnification of damage, (12) dispute
resolution and applicable laws, and (13) other special provisions.
4.3 Implementation phases and current status
In the ERP implementation proposal prepared by the work force, the estimated
duration of the implementation project is about 18 months, and can be divided into four
phases. The first phase is a preparation period for ERP implementation, during which an
EIP (Enterprise Information Platform) is established and a new coding system is
established for company X. The second phase is the initial stage of ERP implementation,
during which the core system (the ERP infrastructure which consists of system hardware
and software) of ERP is implemented. The third phase is the second stage of ERP
implementation, during which a CSIS (construction site information system) integrated
with the core ERP system, is implemented. During this phase, an independent ERP portal is
14
established for each construction project, via which project clients can easily access project
execution information. The fourth phase is the third stage of ERP implementation, during
which the functionality customization of human resources and accounting management
systems of ERP is completed.
The implementation project was initiated on September 2002, and the project work
force was established on December 2002. The project work force surveyed available ERP
software, conducted RFP preparation, and evaluated candidates for about ten months.
During October 2003, the implementation contract was awarded to an ERP implementation
consultant who was identified as the best provider. At this time, about one year later, the
implementation project was initiated. The contract negotiations lasted about four months.
Therefore, the ERP implementation project began in February 2004. Whereas the
difference between the planned schedule and actual schedule concerning system evaluation
and contract negotiation was about six months, the implementation duration was extended
from 11 to 16n months. The causes of the delay in the ERP implementation schedule were
summarized as follows. (1) Company X has no experience with large scale IT
implementation. Top management thus needs to carefully consider all evaluation results of
the consultant and the task force provided. This decision-making style wasted some
implementation time. (2) Integrating the ideas and opinions of involved staff is challenging.
The task force is a project-oriented team. All members came from different departments
and backgrounds. This inconsistency in the thinking of task force members also delayed the
implementation schedule. (3) A perfect implementation project is difficult to prepare. As
the implementation project proceeded, new information and technology emerged. Some of
the new ideas were put into the implementation project by some consultation meetings with
the staff of company X. This unexpected change delayed the schedule to some extent. Up to
15
now the project is still in the fourth phase. The task of education training before go-live has
completed but there are minor bugs being ridded.
5. Discussion
5.1 Coding system
Available ERP systems generally include a coding system that is mainly designated
for the manufacturing industry, rather than for the construction industry, and certainly not
for the construction industry in Taiwan. Company X was aware that this problem was a key
issue in successfully constructing the ERP system. Company X thought that the
compatibility and scalability of the coding system in the candidate ERP system should be
an essential criterion in determining the final ERP system. Furthermore, a public coding
system in Taiwan’s construction industry was issued [35], and a public available cost
estimate system, known as PCCES (Public Construction Cost Estimate System) [36] was
developed and propagated, and has since become popular in Taiwan’s government agencies
when performing construction projects. It is necessary to make an ERP system compatible
with the public coding system and the PCCES. Therefore, the coding system sued by the
selected ERP system should also consider this compatibility problem.
The public coding system used in Taiwan is one of the many products completed and
developed by the Integration Center for Construction Specifications for Public Works of
the Public Construction Commission [35]. The aim of the center is to develop Master
Construction Specifications that was evolved from the MasterFormat by the Construction
Specifications Institute [37], which had 17 divisions. Detailed coding systems can be
obtained at the web site. The coding system is completely congruous to the specification
and is built in the cost estimate system (PCCES).
16
The resolution of the coding system problem in company X is to incorporate a
construction consultant to deal with the problem. The consultant should not only develop a
conversion system to transfer existing coding systems to the employed ERP system, but
should also modify the coding system in the selected ERP system to make it compatible
with the public coding system and the PCCES. Transfer problems still exist at this point,
because company X has huge cost and resource data that are difficult to quickly and
completely transfer to the ERP system.
Clearly, a coding system is the core for storing and transferring data among modules
in an ERP and between the ERP and other existing systems inside and outside the firm. The
existing ERP system does not have a well-structured coding system for the construction
domain or for Taiwan’s construction firms. It is required for ERP venders to develop a
construction-based ERP system with construction-oriented coding system. Otherwise, it is
difficult for construction firms to purchase a high cost commercial ERP system.
5.2 Working process reengineering
The computerization task in the construction industry always faces the dilemma of
customizing the functionalities of a new system to fit the needs of existing working
processes in business management or reengineering the working processes to fit the new
system’s functionalities. No standard solution exists to this dilemma. As mentioned earlier,
company X is a conservative firm, and hopes to minimize the changes in business processes
and ERP customization. Consequently, the selected ERP system cannot fully fit the
requirements of company X, and it is also necessary to reengineer the business processes.
To resolve the problems encountered during working process reengineering, company X
dictated that the task force should analyze the discordant working processes, and then
decided to reengineer or maintain existing processes.
17
Although the changes are as least as possible, a problem still exists in setting proper
rights to the right person at the right time for the new processes. This problem is another
issue arising from process reengineering. The construction consultant and top managers are
responsible for conflict resolution. However, until now, the reengineering processes
following ERP system implementation will still take a long time because ERP
implementation and business processes reengineering occurred concurrently. This
concluded that to run above two tasks concurrently waste a lot of time. For firms that wish
to run business processes reengineering and ERP implementation, the best solution to the
dilemma is to perform ERP implementation after completing a business processes
reengineering.
5.3 Priority of ERP functionality implementation
The implementation priority of all ERP functionalities is always difficult to decide.
Conventionally, the priority of all functionalities is determined based on company
requirements and the cost management or accounting functionality of ERP system is
generally implemented first. Owing to company X having a conservative business culture,
the human resources and accounting management systems of ERP were planned to be
implemented last. Comparatively, the EIP of the ERP system was implemented first
because the success or failure of EIP has a minimal effect on the firm. On the other hand,
the first implementation phase was used to check whether the next phase needs to proceed.
The evidence from the case study demonstrated that the ERP functionalities do not have a
fixed priority, and firms can determine the priorities based on their own evaluation.
5.4 Customization
18
It is difficult to customize functionalities of an ERP system that are completely
developed and are not designated for a construction company. Although the selected ERP
system is a module-based system, a firm can select suitable modules to develop the system
is desires. Company X removed some default modules and requested that the
implementation consultant should develop certain new functionalities. This customization
cost many man-hours but the customization results fitted the requirements of company X
regarding business management.
There is a need to customize available world-popular ERP systems to fit the
requirements of the construction domain. The case study presented here is a typical
example. One of the critical issues in customization is the coding system discussed
previously. Besides that, adjusting the system performance to reach the satisfied state of the
localized construction property of Taiwan area, or even non-native-speaking English areas,
is another issue that available ERP systems should face. Regarding the language difference
issue, the transformation of the selected ERP system from an English-based interface to
Chinese-based interface has been completed. Additionally, company X asked for a clear
contract provision to ensure the performance of new functionalities. In sum, the
functionality customization of a well-developed ERP system not only increased the cost of
implementation but also complicated its performance. It is necessary to assure the
performance by a contract manner.
5.5 Participant roles
The implementation of an ERP system is the key to improving the efficiency of all
business processes. Reengineering is the main means of smoothing the existing processes.
It needs the support of all levels managers and staff. Namely, successful implementation of
19
ERP requires not only the support of top management, but also the clear authorization of all
participants.
During the early stage of implementation, the project participants in company X were
not all full time staff dealing with implementation matters. Some participants were not
departmental directors or were not authorized by the departmental directors. The
coordination between the members of the ERP work force and departmental staff was not
smooth, leading to slow communications and decision-making regarding ERP
implementation. After several meetings organized by top management, all participants
adopted a more proactive attitude, which smoothed communication and accelerated
implementation. This study demonstrates that effective communication and clear authority
are the key factors ensuring successful implementation.
5.6 Consultant role
The studied case had a signed contract with an ERP implementation consultant with
whom numerous successful cases had been implemented in non-construction domains in
Taiwan. Although the ERP system was implemented by the construction-related company
in several cases, none of these cases were located in Taiwan. The signed consultant, who
was a localized implementation vendor, regarded this case as a pilot case for implementing
its ERP system in the Taiwan’s construction domain. Based on this opinion, the consultant
attempted to assume the majority of control in this implementation case. This situation
resulted in company X facing the problem of being unable to completely customize the
ERP system. The consultant adopted a policy of customizing the system on a minimum
scale or a general style. This caused the consultant to resist rapidly adjusting the ERP
system. Company X thought that the role of consultant should be clearly identified as
involving consulting rather than mere advising. To customize the ERP system on a
20
minimum scale is a common schema, however, there are different concerns of the client
and vendor. The question of how to balance the differences between the client and vender
thus should be carefully defined in the contract.
5.7 Performance level of subcontractor
Most construction companies consider that the evaluation of ERP implementation is
unnecessary in assessing the impact of the performance level of subcontractors or
construction material/equipment vendors. However, ERP implementation should consider
all participants in the construction supply chain. It is necessary to establish an evaluation
system to check the performance of subcontractors or construction material/equipment
vendors. Otherwise, a gap exists between the expected performance of ERP
implementation and real operations.
Discussions with the project manager identified some influences on the performance
of ERP implementation. The influence factors included the level of computerization in
subcontractors or construction material/equipment vendors, the degree of loyalty to the
contractor, the differences in utilized IT platforms between contractors and subcontractors
or construction material/equipment vendors, and the transferring problem between various
payment systems in practice.
In Taiwan, the general level of computerization in subcontractors or construction
material/equipment vendors is not very high. Company X did not consider this issue in
advance of implementation. Although this decision has not influenced the instant
performance of ERP implementation, it may create a barrier to long-term performance. The
above factors were not validated by any research method, but this study identified another
issue that required further investigation.
21
6. Conclusions and Suggestions
ERP has long been applied and promoted in the manufacturing industry. The
construction industry has been slow in implementing ERP. In Taiwan, the main difficulties
for general contractors in applying ERP are the complexities of their working processes
and habits. However, there is no reason to resist the trend of implementing ERP for firms
wishing to hold an edge in their comparative domain.
This research studied a case which described the selection of an ERP system by a
local construction company in Taiwan. Seven issues affecting implementation were
discussed, and then some lessons learned from the studied case were identified, including:
●coding system: selecting an ERP system with a construction-oriented coding system
is the best solution; otherwise, it is necessary to form a transformation protocol
between the existing system and the ERP system.
●working process reengineering: the solution to the dilemma of customizing the
functionalities versus reengineering the existing processes is to first perform
business processes reengineering, and then implement an ERP system.
●priority of ERP functionality implementation: firms can determine the priority
according to their own evaluation. A right priority can provide excellent benefits to
the firm and reduce resistance from involved stakeholders.
●customization: the functionality customization of a well-developed ERP system not
only increased the implementation cost, but also complicated implementation
performance.
●participant roles: in ERP implementation, top management support is essential for
success. Effective communication and clear authority are crucial in ensuring
successful implementation.
22
●consultant role: in ERP implementation, the signed implementation contract with
implementation consultant should clear define consultant obligation.
●performance level of the subcontractors: ERP implementation should consider all
participants in the construction supply chain to maximize the associated benefits.
Achieving this is difficult in the construction industry because the general level of
computerization is low compared to other industries.
The issues discussed above are not just the problems of firms implementing ERP but
also issues faced by ERP vendors. Although this case study has provided some methods of
dealing with these issues, further examinations are also needed. Additional case studies are
necessary and essential for the successful application of ERP systems in the construction
industry.
This case study only discussed some aspects of factors that influenced successful
ERP implementation in the construction industry. Other factors, such as staff training
before ERP implementation and lack of appropriate IT staff in construction firms, should
also be carefully considered. Besides, ERP system vendors should be aware that they must
work with construction industry professionals to develop more customized solutions for
construction firms. That would be the best solution for implementing ERP in the
construction industry.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the project participants of company X for contributing
their experience and knowledge, and the project manager from the ERP implementation
consultant for sharing his practice understanding of this case study.
References
23
[1] T. Davenport, Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system, Harvard Business
Review, July-August (1998) 121-131.
[2] B. Bechler, Evolution of the virtual enterprise, Annual International Conference of
American Production and Inventory Control Society, Alexandria, VA, 1997, pp. 65-67.
[3] J.J. Shi, D.W. Halpin, Enterprise resource planning for construction business
management, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 129(2) (2003)
214-221.
[4] C.X. Scalle, M.J. Cotteleer, Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP), Harvard Business
School Publishing, Boston, MA, 1999.
[5] F.R. Jacobs, D.C. Whybark, Why ERP? A Primer on SAP Implementation. McGraw-
Hill, Irwin, NY, 2000.
[6] B.-G. Valérie, M. Pierre-Alain, A classification for better use of ERP systems,
Computers in Industry 56(6) (2005) 573-587.
[7] ML Payton Consultants, “Use of enterprise resource planning in the construction
industry–summary of findings,” available from
http://www.mlpayton.com/pages/pdf/projectsummaries/erpsummary.pdf, 2000.
[8] S. Lee, A. Arif, W.D. Halpin, Simulation modeling by enterprise resource planning
implementation in medium sized corporation. First International Conference on
Construction in the 21st Century (CITC-2002), Miami, FL, 2002, pp 663-670.
[9] MORSE, (2002). “ERP project for a marine construction company,” available from
http://www.morse.com/templates/casestudy-
initial.xml?content_id=85&the_section_id=4065, 2004.
[10] J. Sarkis, R.P. Sundarraj, Factors for strategic evaluation of enterprise information
technologies, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
30(3/4) (2000) 196-220.
24
[11] A. Teltumbde, A framework of evaluating ERP projects, International Journal of
Production Research 38 (2000) 4507-4520.
[12] K.K. Hong, Y.G. Kim, The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an
organizational fit perspective, Information & Management 40 (2002) 25-40.
[13] C.C. Wei, C.F. Chien, M.J. Wang, An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection,
International Journal of Production Economics 96(1) (2005) 47-62.
[14] I.C. Ehie, M. Madsen, Identifying critical issues in enterprise resource planning (ERP)
implementation, Computers in Industry 56(6) (2005) 545-557.
[15] J.T. O’Connor, S.C. Dodd, Achieving integration on capital projects with enterprise
resource planning systems, Automation in Construction 9(5-6) (2000) 515-524.
[16] C. Sheu, B. Chae, C.L. Yang, National differences and ERP implementation: issues
and challenges, Omega 32(5) (2004) 361-371.
[17] C. Soh, S.S. Kien, J. Tay-Yap, Cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution?
Communications of the ACM 43(4) (2000) 47-51.
[18] R.K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd edition, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 2003.
[19] J. Feagin, A. Orum, G. Sjoberg (Eds.), A Case for Case Study. University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, 1991.
[20] R. Stake, The Art of Case Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, 1995.
[21] W. Tellis, Application of a case study methodology, The Qualitative Report (On-line
serial) 3(3), available from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-3/tellis2.html, 1997.
[22] W. Tellis, Introduction to case study, The Qualitative Report (On-line serial) 3(2),
available from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html, 1997.
[23] S. Sarker, A.S. Lee, Using a case study to test the role of three key social enablers in
ERP implementation, Information & Management 40(8) (2003) 813-829.
25
[24] H. Voordijk, A.V. Leuven, A. Laan, Enterprise resource planning in a large
construction firm: implementation analysis, Construction Management and Economics,
21(5) (2003) 511-521.
[25] J. Motwani, D. Mirchandani, M. Madan, A. Gunasekaran, Successful implementation
of ERP projects: evidence from two case studies, International Journal of Production
Economics 75(1-2) (2002) 83-96.
[26] C. Koch, D. Slater, E. Baatz, The ABCs of ERP, CIO Magazine, ERP research Center,
available from http://www.cio.com/forums/erp/edit/122299—erp.html, 1999.
[27] V. Kumar, B. Maheshwari, U. Kumar, An investigation of critical management issues
in ERP implementation: empirical evidence from Canadian organizations,
Technovation 23(10) (2003) 793-807.
[28] T. Davenport, Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems, Harvard
Business School Press. Boston, MA, 2000.
[29] I.J. Chen, Planning for ERP systems: analysis and future trend, Business Process
Management Journal 7(5) (2001) 374-386.
[30] F.F. Nah, J.L. Lau, L. Kuang, Critical factors for successful implementation of
enterprise systems, Business Process Management Journal 7(3) (2001) 285-296.
[31] V. Kumar, B. Maheshwari, U. Kumar, ERP systems implementation: best practices in
Canadian government organizations, Government Information Quarterly 19(2) (2002)
147-172.
[32] M. Al-Mashari, A. Al-Mudimigh, M. Zairi, Enterprise resource planning: a taxonomy
of critical factors, European Journal of Operational Research 146(3) (2003) 352-364.
[33] Z. Zhang, M.K.O. Lee, P. Huang, L. Zhang, X. Huang, A framework of ERP systems
implementation success in China: An empirical study, International Journal of
Production Economics 98(1) (2005) 56-80.
26
[34] S.M. Ahmed, I. Ahmad, S. Azhar, S. Mallikarjuna, Implementation of Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) systems in the construction industry, Construction Research
Congress in Construction—Wind of Change: Integration and Innovation, Honolulu,
Hawaii, March 19-21, 2003.
[35] Public Construction Commission, Executive Yuan, Taiwan, Integration Center for
Construction Specifications for Public Works, http://140.115.63.229/csi/CD0-
Index/CDE-Index.htm.
[36] Public Construction Commission, Executive Yuan, Taiwan, Public Construction Cost
Estimate System, http://pcces.archnowledge.com/forums/. (in Chinese)
[37] The Construction Specifications Institute, the MasterFormat,
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/sec.asp?TRACKID=&CID=1377&DID=11339.
27
Weight Score ExplanationSystem completeness 10System compatibility 10System usability 10System integrality 10Organization needed to beadjusted 10
Process needed to be improved 10
Tendering ability for publicconstruction projects 5
Coding system that iscompatible for PCCES system 5
Information accuracy andeffectiveness 5
Information retrieve speed 5Knowledge can be used toimprove competitiveness 10
Experience accumulation andsharing 10
Domestic or foreign vender 0Project is phased or not 0Manpower is sufficient or not 0ERP implementation is aninvestment or expense 0
Item in thiscategory isfor referenceonly
Competitiveness inpublic constructionproject tendering
Decision mechanism
Knowledgemanagement
Cost
X Construction Co. Ltd.Evaluation items
Necessary change onexisting systems
Necessary change onexisting businessprocesses
Fig. 1. Self evaluation sheet for ERP implementation.
28
Ven.A Ven.BA1. Employed system technologiesA2. Embedded Database systemA3. System development tool and languageA4. Compatibility with old systemsA5. System efficiencyA6. Completeness of system documentationin Chinese and EnglishB1. Expertise about ERP implementationB2. Ability of project managerB3. Implementation methodology and toolB4. Experience on similar cases
D1. Hardware requirementsD2. Compatibility with old hardwareD3. Hardware upgrade capabilityD4. Fitness of available modulesD5. ScalabilityD6. FlexibilityD7. UsabilityD8. Acceptance by middle-to-high levelmanagersD9. Working load for end usersE1.Familiarity with clientE2. Implementation schedule planningE3. Risk of over-budgetE4. Risk of out-of-scopeF1. Maintenance capabilityF2. Customization capabilityG1. ERP system authorization costG2. Maintenance costG3. Hardware costG4. Consultant feeG5. Education feeH1. Planning of succeeding servicesH2. Construction domain knowledgeH3. Education schedule arrangement
X Construction Co. Ltd.
Evaluation Items Scoring for Opinion
A. Adaptability ofERP system
B. Service qualityof consultants
C. System education
D. Systemacceptance by endusers
E. Guarantee forimplementationschedule
F. Maintenance andcustomization
G. Cost
I. Technical supports from ERP system vender and otherJ. Performance on service proposal and live demo
H. Customerservice quality
Fig. 2. Evaluation sheet of ERP system vendors.
29
No. Item and description QTY Unit price Amount Remark
1ERP system (please list all modulesseparately)
2 Hardware and related cost3 Number of account 804 Database cost5 Customization cost6 Consultant fee
7Implementation cost (includingeducation fee)
8 Annual software maintenance cost9 Annual hardware maintenance cost
10 Others (please list item)
Fax: 123456E-mail :123@xxx
Quotation Company: . .Contact Name:Address: .Tel: .Fax: .E-mail : .
X Construction Co. Ltd.Contact Name: XXXAddress: YYYTel: 123456
SubtotalTax (5%)
Total
Person
From: ??? ERP vendor Quotation valid until:
Unit
For X Construction Co. Ltd.
ERP Quotation Summary Sheet
Fig. 3. Quotation sheet for ERP vendors.
30
Fig. 4. Contracting configuration before and after contract negotiation.