A Team-Oriented Investigation of ERP Post-Implementation Integration Projects: How Cross-Functional Collaboration Influences ERP Benefits

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 4)

Abstract

The benefits companies achieve by implementing an ERP system vary considerably. Many companies need to adapt their ERP integration solution in the post-implementation stage. But after the completion of such a usually very complex integration project, benefits do not emerge by all means. A misfit between the organization and the IS, especially the aspect of cross-functional team collaboration, could explain these divergences. Using an initial theoretical framework, we conducted a single case study to explore the team-oriented perceptions in a post-implementation ERP integration project. To analyze the benefits and the influences in greater depth we disentangled the integration benefits into their particular parts (process, system and information quality). Our findings show that post-implementation ERP integration changes are not always perceived as beneficiary by the involved teams and that cross-functional collaboration has an important influence.

Keywords

ERP benefit Post-implementation change Integration project Cross-functional team collaboration Team interdependence 

References

  1. 1.
    Strong, D.M., Volkoff, O.: Understanding organization-enterprise system fit: a path to theorizing the information technology artifact. MIS Q. 34, 731–756 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Learning from notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation. Technical report. Center for Coordination Science, MIT, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gattiker, T.F., Goodhue, D.L.: What happens after ERP Implementation: understanding the impact of interdependence and differentiation on plant-level outcomes. MIS Q 29, 559–585 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goodhue, D.L., Wybo, M.D., Kirsch, L.J.: The impact of data Integration on the costs and benefits of information systems. MIS Q. 16, 293–311 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robey, D., Ross, J.W., Boudreau, M.-C.: Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 19, 17–46 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    El Amrani, R., Rowe, F., Geffroy-Maronnat, B.: The effects of enterprise resource planning implementation strategy on cross-functionality. Inf. Syst. J. 16, 79–104 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Galbraith, J.: Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davenport, T.H.: Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sandoe, K., Corbitt, G., Boykin, R.: Enterprise Integration. Wiley, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alshawi, S., Themistocleous, M., Almadani, R.: Integrating diverse ERP systems: a case study. J. Enterp. Inf. Manage. 17, 454–462 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Themistocleous, M., Irani, Z., O’Keefe, R.M.: ERP and application integration: exploratory survey. Bus. Process Manage. J. 7, 195–204 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Davenport, T.H.: Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harvard Bus. Rev. 76, 121–131 (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Markus, M.L., Tanis, C.: The Enterprise system experience—from adoption to success. In: Zmud, R.W. (ed.) Framing the Domains of IT Research: Projecting the Future…Through the Past, pp. 173–207 Pinnaflex Educational Resources, Inc., Cincinnati (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Furneaux, B., Wade, M.: An exploration of organizational level information systems discontinuance intentions. MIS Q. 35, 573–598 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peslak, A.: A study of information technology integration. J. Inf. Syst. Appl. Res. 4, 19–27 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seddon, P.B., Calvert, C., Yang, S.: A multi-project model of key factors affecting organizational benefits from enterprise systems. MIS Q. 34, 305–328 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Markus, M.L.: Paradigm shifts—E-business and business/systems integration. communications of the association for information systems 4. http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol4/iss1/10/ (2000)
  18. 18.
    DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 19, 9–30 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 3, 60–95 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zellner, G.: A structured evaluation of business process improvement approaches. Bus. Process Manage. J. 7, 203–237 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berente, N., Vandenbosch, B., Aubert, B.: Information flows and business process integration. Bus. Process Manage. J. 15, 119–141 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage publications, Newbury Park (1994)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yin, R.: Case Study Research. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., Mead, M.: The case research strategy in studies of information systems. Manage. Inf. Syst. Q. 11, 369 (1987)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nicolaou, A.I., Bhattacharya, S.: Organizational performance effects of ERP systems usage: the impact of post-implementation changes. Int. J. Acc. Inf. Syst. 7, 18–35 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BerneBerneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations