Post-Implementation ERP Software Development: Upgrade or Reimplementation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Identification of risks resulting from negligence during the maintenance phase;
- Proposal classification: extensions, patches, updates, upgrades and reimplementation;
- Convergence identification between no continuous ERP improvement and a necessity to reimplement the system;
- Comparative analysis of methodologies according to post-implementation phase.
2. Implementation and Post-implementation ERP System Background
2.1. ERP Implementation Projects
2.2. ERP Post-Implementation Activities
2.2.1. ERP Upgrades
2.2.2. ERP Re-Implementation—Enhancement Functional Upgrades
3. Methodology and Data Collection
- Company 1: A company from the utilities industry that has been operating in the current form for over 70 years. The company employs around 800 employees. The ERP system is implemented in the following areas: finance and accounting, human resources, maintenance, sales, purchasing, and payroll.
- Company 2: A company from the utilities industry that has been operating for over 80 years on the Polish market. The company employs around 400 employees. The ERP system is implemented in the following areas: finance and accounting, human resources, maintenance, sales and operations planning, payroll, purchasing, and warehouse. The ERP is integrated with GIS.
- Company 3: The company was founded over 100 years ago as a producer of modern solutions in the field of sanitary and heating fittings. The company employs over 1,000 employees in three production plants in Poland. The ERP system is implemented in the following areas: finance and accounting, human resources, supply chain, sales and operations planning, manufacturing, production planning, and payroll. The ERP is integrated with EDI.
- Company 4: The company was founded in 1990 as a family business. The company produces and exports solutions for aluminum systems to more than 50 countries. The company employs over 500 employees in 2 production plants in Poland. The ERP system is implemented in the following areas: finance and accounting, human resources, supply chain, sales and operations planning, manufacturing, production planning, and payroll. The ERP is integrated with EDI automated warehouse and sales tools.
- Company 5: The company was founded as a family business and has been producing and selling furniture and office equipment for about 30 years. The company employs over 300 employees in 2 sites. The ERP system is implemented in the following areas: CRM, finance and accounting, human resources, supply chain, sales and operations planning, manufacturing, and production planning. The ERP is integrated with MES.
4. Analysis and Results
5. Discussion
- Inaccessible database service;
- Operating system restrictions;
- Environmental limitations (hardware);
- Limitations related to system integration and its expansion necessity.
- maladjustment to the current requirements of the business environment;
- Up-to-date optimization;
- support for remote work.
- The initial implementation of the ERP system burdened the organization and subsequent attempts at development and improvement work were reluctantly undertaken;
- In the initial phase of the system maintenance, the client carried out independent developments and carried them out so unskillfully that a system upgrade became impossible;
- The initial implementation contained so many modifications that the system upgrade cost became a serious barrier for the client.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Davenport, T.H. Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1998, 76, 121–131. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Galy, E.; Sauceda, M.J. Post-implementation practices of ERP systems and their relationship to financial performance. Inf. Manag. 2014, 51, 310–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davenport, T.H.; Harris, J.G.; Cantrell, S. Enterprise systems and ongoing process change. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2004, 10, 16–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olson, D.L.; Staley, J. Case study of open-source enterprise resource planning implementation in a small business. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2012, 6, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hirt, S.G.; Swanson, E.B. Emergent maintenance of ERP: New roles and relationships. J. Softw. Maint. Evol. Res. Pract. 2001, 13, 373–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gattiker, T.F.; Chen, D.; Goodhue, D.L. Agility through standardization: A CRM/ERP application. In Strategic ERP Extension and Use; Bendoly, E., Jacobs, F.R., Eds.; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 2005; pp. 87–96. [Google Scholar]
- Goyette, S.; Cassivi, L.; Courchesne, M.; Elia, E. Knowledge transfer mechanisms in an ERP post-implementation stage. Procedia Technol. 2014, 16, 430–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ng, C.S.P.; Gable, G.; Chan, T. An ERP maintenance model. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, USA, 6–9 January 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Oseni, T.; Foster, S.V.; Mahbubur, R.; Smith, S.P. A Framework for ERP Post-Implementation Amendments: A Literature Analysis. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 2017, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Markus, M.; Tanis, C. Chapter 10: The Enterprise System Experience-From Adoption to Success. In Framing the Domains of IT Management: Projecting the Future Through the Past; Pinnaflex Educational Resources: Bozen-Bolzano, Italy, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Klaus, H.; Rosemann, M.; Gable, G.G. What is ERP? Inf. Syst. Front. 2000, 2, 141–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Supramaniam, M.; Kuppusamy, M. ERP System Adoption in Malaysia: A Comparative Analysis between SMEs and MNCs. In The European Conference on Information Systems Management; Academic Conferences International Limited: Reading, UK, 2010; p. 372. [Google Scholar]
- Olson, D.L.; Zhao, F. CIOs’ perspectives of critical success factors in ERP upgrade projects. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2007, 1, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Justyna, P.M. Assessing the Impact of Erp Implementation in the small Enterprises. Found. Manag. 2012, 4, 51–62. [Google Scholar]
- Patalas-Maliszewska, J.; Krebs, I. A Model of the Tacit Knowledge Transfer Support Tool: CKnow-Board. In Information and Software Technologies; Dregvaite, G., Damasevicius, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 30–41. [Google Scholar]
- Pech, M.; Vrchota, J. Classification of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises Based on the Level of Industry 4.0 Implementation. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haddara, M.; Elragal, A. The Readiness of ERP Systems for the Factory of the Future. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 64, 721–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Estefania, T.V.; Samir, L.; Robert, P.; Patrice, D.; Alexandre, M. The integration of ERP and inter-intra organizational information systems: A Literature Review. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 1212–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grabski, S.V.; Leech, S.A. Complementary controls and ERP implementation success. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2007, 8, 17–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mabert, V.A.; Soni, A.; Venkataramanan, M. Enterprise resource planning: Managing the implementation process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2003, 146, 302–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panorama Consulting Group. 2018 ERP Report. Available online: https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2184246/2018%20ERP%20Report.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2021).
- Nagpal, S.; Khatri, S.K.; Kumar, A. Comparative study of ERP implementation strategies. In Proceedings of the 2015 Long Island Systems, Applications and Technology, Farmingdale, NY, USA, 1 May 2015; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Kraljic, A.; Kraljic, T.; Poels, G.; Devos, J. ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks: A literature review. In Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on IS Management and Evaluation (ECIME), Ghent, Belgium, 11–12 September 2014; Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited: Reading, UK, 2014; pp. 309–316. [Google Scholar]
- Bancroft, N.; Seip, H.; Sprengel, A. Implementing SAP R/3. How to Introduce a Large System into a Large Organization, 2nd ed.; Conn: Greenwich, CT, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Kuruppuarachchi, P.R. Organisational factors and IT projects-a critical review. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology, ICMIT 2000 ’Management in the 21st Century’(Cat. No. 00EX457), Singapore, 12–15 November 2000; Volume 2, pp. 496–501. [Google Scholar]
- Mäkipää, M. Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning System–theoretical research approach and empirical evaluation in two cases. In Proceedings of the 26th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, Porvoo, Finland, 9–12 August 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Parr, A.N.; Shanks, G. A taxonomy of ERP implementation approaches. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, 7 January 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Ross, J.W.; Vitale, M.R. The ERP revolution: Surviving vs. thriving. Inf. Syst. Front. 2000, 2, 233–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Umble, E.J.; Haft, R.R.; Umble, M.M. Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2003, 146, 241–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hietala, H.; Päivärinta, T. Benefits Realisation in Post-Implementation Development of ERP Systems: A Case Study. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 181, 419–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hasan, N.; Miah, S.J.; Bao, Y.; Hoque, M.R. Factors affecting post-implementation success of enterprise resource planning systems: A perspective of business process performance. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2019, 13, 1217–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, N.C.; Chang, J. Adapting ERP Systems in the Post-implementation Stage: Dynamic IT Capabilities for ERP. Pac. Asia J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2020, 12, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kucharska, E.; Grobler-Dębska, K.; Gracel, J.; Jagodziński, M. Idea of impact of erp-aps-mes systems integration on the effectiveness of decision making process in manufacturing companies. In International Conference: Beyond Databases, Architectures and Structures; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 551–564. [Google Scholar]
- Chorafas, D.N. Integrating ERP, CRM, Supply Chain Management, and Smart Materials; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, C.S.P. A decision framework for enterprise resource planning maintenance and upgrade: A client perspective. J. Softw. Maint. Evol. Res. Pract. 2001, 13, 431–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicolaou, A.I.; Bhattacharya, S. Organizational performance effects of ERP systems usage: The impact of post-implementation changes. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2006, 7, 18–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svejvig, P. Using institutional theory in enterprise systems research: Developing a conceptual model from a literature review. Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. IJEIS 2013, 9, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Best ERP Software. Available online: https://www.selecthub.com/erp-software/ (accessed on 1 March 2021).
- Nah, F.F.H.; Lau, J.L.S.; Kuang, J. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2001, 7, 285–296. [Google Scholar]
- Kapetanopoulou, P.; Kouroutzi, A. An Empirical Study of Drivers, Barriers, and Cost Efficiency of Information Systems in Greek Industry. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Author(s) | ERP Implementation Model |
---|---|
Bancroft et al. (1998) [24] | (1) Focus, (2) Creating As-Is picture, (3) Creating of the To-Be design, (4) Construction and testing, (5) Actual Implementation |
Kuruppuarachchi (2000) [25] | (1) Initiation, (2) Requirement definition, (3) Acquisition/development, (4) Implementation, (5) Termination |
Markus and Tanis (2000) [10] | (1) Project chartering, (2) The project, (3) Shakedown, (4) Onward and upward |
Makipaa (2003) [26] | (1) Initiative, (2) Evaluation, (3) Selection, (4) Modification, Business process Re-engineering, and Conversion of Data, (5) Training, (6) Go-Live, (7) Termination, (8) Exploitation and Development |
Parr and Shanks (2000) [27] | (1) Planning, (2) Project: setup, re-engineer, design, configuration and testing, installation, (3) Enhancement |
Ross (2000) [28] | (1) Design, (2) Implementation, >(3) Stabilization, (4) Continues improvement (5) Transformation |
Umble et al (2003) [29] | (1) Review the pre-implementation process to date, (2) Install and test any new hardware, (3) Install the software and perform the computer room pilot, (4) Attend system training, (5) Train on the conference room pilot, (6) Established security and necessary permissions, (7) Ensure that all data bridges are sufficiently robust and the data are sufficiently accurate, (8) Document policies and procedures, (9) Bring the entire organization online, either in a total cut over or in a phased approach, (10) Celebrate, (11) Improve continually |
Verviell and Halingten | (1) Planning, (2) Information search, (3) Selection, (4) Evaluations, (5) Negotiation |
Vendor Name | Methodology |
---|---|
IFS | IFS Implementation Methodology, with these phases: Initiate Project, |
Confirm Prototype, Establish Solution, Implement Solution, Go Live. | |
INFOR | Infor Deployment Method, with five phases of the implementation |
process: Inception, Elaboration, Construction, Transition and Optimization. | |
MICROSOFT | MS Dynamics Sure Step Methodology, with these phases: Diagnostics, |
Analysis, Design, Development, Deployment, Operation. | |
ORACLE | A.I.M. (Applications Implementation Methodology), with these phases: |
Definition, Operations Analysis, Solution Design, Building, Transition, | |
Production. | |
SAP | ASAP methodology, with these phases: Project Preparation, Blueprint, |
Realization, Final Preparation, Go Live Support, Operation. |
Company | ERP Implementation | ERP Upgrade 1 | ERP Upgrade 2 | ERP Reimplementation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Company 1 | In 2008/2009, scope: FIN, HR, SCM, S & S modules | Upgraded in 2013 with a version of the application with a small optimization in processes | Upgraded in 2018 with version of the application with a small optimization in processes and new PAYROL module | |
Company 2 | In 2008/2009, scope: FIN, HR, SCM, S & S modules | In 2017/2018 new version of previous implemented modules and news was applied: GIS integration functionalities, mobile solutions, preventive maintenance | ||
Company 3 | In 2005/2006, scope: FIN, HR, SCM, S & S, MFG modules | Upgraded in 2012 with a version of the application with a small optimization in processes | Upgraded in 2017/2018 with a version of the application and new functionalities: CRM, MRP, preventive maintenance, B2B, workflow | |
Company 4 | In 2002/2003, scope: FIN, HR, SCM, S & S, MFG modules | has been stopped | In 2018/2019 new version of previous implemented modules with big changes in all processes and new functionalities such as PAYROL, CRM and integration with WMS was applied | |
Company 5 | In 2002/2003, scope: FIM, HR, SCM, S & S, MFG modules | has been stopped | In 2019/2020, a new version of previous implemented modules with big changes in all processes and new B2B modules was applied |
Scope of Work (SOW) | ERP Extension (on Request) | Patches (Fixes) | Updates | Upgrades | ERP Reimplementation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure installation, company business processes analyses and implementation | ● | ||||
Functional changes, optimization in module functionalities with influence on company processes | ● | ● | |||
New functionalities in a tight field, period package with legal changes and bug fixes | ● | ● | ● | ||
Optimization—on request, changes with impact on company business processes or local functionalities | ● | ● | ● | ● | |
Legal changes, bug fixes (often on demand) patches | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● |
Activity Type: | ERP Implementation | ERP Upgrade 1 | ERP Upgrade 2 | ERP Reimplementation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Company 1 | 15 | 9 | 6 | |
Company 2 | 18 | 12 | ||
Company 3 | 16 | 9 | 9 | |
Company 4 | 18 | 13 | ||
Company 5 | 16 | 1—stopped | 13 |
Scope of Work (SOW) | ERP Extension (on Request) | Patches (Fixes) | Updates | Upgrades | ERP Reimplementation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Infrastructure installation, company business processes analyses and implementation | 12–13 | ||||
Functional changes, optimization in module functionalities with influence on company processes | 3–9 | ||||
New functionalities in a tight field, period package with legal changes and bug fixes | 1–2 | ||||
Optimization—on request, changes with impact on company business processes or local functionalities | ∞ | ||||
Legal changes, bug fixes (often on demand) patches | 0.25–0.5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Domagała, A.; Grobler-Dębska, K.; Wąs, J.; Kucharska, E. Post-Implementation ERP Software Development: Upgrade or Reimplementation. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4937. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114937
Domagała A, Grobler-Dębska K, Wąs J, Kucharska E. Post-Implementation ERP Software Development: Upgrade or Reimplementation. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(11):4937. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114937
Chicago/Turabian StyleDomagała, Adam, Katarzyna Grobler-Dębska, Jarosław Wąs, and Edyta Kucharska. 2021. "Post-Implementation ERP Software Development: Upgrade or Reimplementation" Applied Sciences 11, no. 11: 4937. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11114937