Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects: The significance of gaps

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the dynamics of prioritizing implementation projects. Building on the notion of "fit-gap" work, this chapter emphasizes the significance of "de-prioritization" as a practical technique for managing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation projects. "Fit-gap" is a term that resonates with current academic and professional discussions concerning the use of customization and work-arounds necessary to coax suboptimal implementations into functioning properly as the systems age. These are not idle matters given the near irreversibility of ERP projects once initiated and the reported high probability of failure following implementation. Drawn from in-depth interviews and internal documents collected from a multiyear organizational case study of ERP in an institution of higher education, this chapter reports on various uses, interpretations, and consequences of prioritization techniques used to manage implementation projects. In practice, the idea that complex software implementations can be theoretically reduced to mere gaps in fit serves to obscure the political conflict and ambiguous economic accounting that underlie committee work devoted to identifying gaps, deliberating on possible fits, and then prioritizing which gaps are fit immediately and others scheduled for fit later on. In conclusion, while fit-gap committee work is openly intended to result in fewer customizations overall, de-prioritization, as a management technique, appears to "remove without removing" agenda items from the implementation schedule. The upshot for managers: placing such decisions in purgatory delays indefinitely investments of time and finances into customizing new software to fit old policies, and all the work-arounds necessary to shore-up any lingering idiosyncrasies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationEnterprise Resource Planning
Subtitle of host publicationConcepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications
PublisherIGI Global
Pages329-346
Number of pages18
Volume1-3
ISBN (Electronic)9781466641549
ISBN (Print)1466641533, 9781466641532
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 30 2013

Fingerprint

Software
Prioritization
Enterprise resource planning
Customization
Irreversibility
Agenda
Schedule
Placing
Management techniques
Managers
Finance
Economics
In-depth interviews
Functioning

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Cite this

Rowland, N. J. (2013). Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects: The significance of gaps. In Enterprise Resource Planning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (Vol. 1-3, pp. 329-346). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020
Rowland, Nicholas James. / Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects : The significance of gaps. Enterprise Resource Planning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Vol. 1-3 IGI Global, 2013. pp. 329-346
@inbook{3afa1f816d464ec89934550ef5f156d3,
title = "Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects: The significance of gaps",
abstract = "This chapter examines the dynamics of prioritizing implementation projects. Building on the notion of {"}fit-gap{"} work, this chapter emphasizes the significance of {"}de-prioritization{"} as a practical technique for managing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation projects. {"}Fit-gap{"} is a term that resonates with current academic and professional discussions concerning the use of customization and work-arounds necessary to coax suboptimal implementations into functioning properly as the systems age. These are not idle matters given the near irreversibility of ERP projects once initiated and the reported high probability of failure following implementation. Drawn from in-depth interviews and internal documents collected from a multiyear organizational case study of ERP in an institution of higher education, this chapter reports on various uses, interpretations, and consequences of prioritization techniques used to manage implementation projects. In practice, the idea that complex software implementations can be theoretically reduced to mere gaps in fit serves to obscure the political conflict and ambiguous economic accounting that underlie committee work devoted to identifying gaps, deliberating on possible fits, and then prioritizing which gaps are fit immediately and others scheduled for fit later on. In conclusion, while fit-gap committee work is openly intended to result in fewer customizations overall, de-prioritization, as a management technique, appears to {"}remove without removing{"} agenda items from the implementation schedule. The upshot for managers: placing such decisions in purgatory delays indefinitely investments of time and finances into customizing new software to fit old policies, and all the work-arounds necessary to shore-up any lingering idiosyncrasies.",
author = "Rowland, {Nicholas James}",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
day = "30",
doi = "10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "1466641533",
volume = "1-3",
pages = "329--346",
booktitle = "Enterprise Resource Planning",
publisher = "IGI Global",

}

Rowland, NJ 2013, Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects: The significance of gaps. in Enterprise Resource Planning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. vol. 1-3, IGI Global, pp. 329-346. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020

Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects : The significance of gaps. / Rowland, Nicholas James.

Enterprise Resource Planning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Vol. 1-3 IGI Global, 2013. p. 329-346.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects

T2 - The significance of gaps

AU - Rowland, Nicholas James

PY - 2013/6/30

Y1 - 2013/6/30

N2 - This chapter examines the dynamics of prioritizing implementation projects. Building on the notion of "fit-gap" work, this chapter emphasizes the significance of "de-prioritization" as a practical technique for managing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation projects. "Fit-gap" is a term that resonates with current academic and professional discussions concerning the use of customization and work-arounds necessary to coax suboptimal implementations into functioning properly as the systems age. These are not idle matters given the near irreversibility of ERP projects once initiated and the reported high probability of failure following implementation. Drawn from in-depth interviews and internal documents collected from a multiyear organizational case study of ERP in an institution of higher education, this chapter reports on various uses, interpretations, and consequences of prioritization techniques used to manage implementation projects. In practice, the idea that complex software implementations can be theoretically reduced to mere gaps in fit serves to obscure the political conflict and ambiguous economic accounting that underlie committee work devoted to identifying gaps, deliberating on possible fits, and then prioritizing which gaps are fit immediately and others scheduled for fit later on. In conclusion, while fit-gap committee work is openly intended to result in fewer customizations overall, de-prioritization, as a management technique, appears to "remove without removing" agenda items from the implementation schedule. The upshot for managers: placing such decisions in purgatory delays indefinitely investments of time and finances into customizing new software to fit old policies, and all the work-arounds necessary to shore-up any lingering idiosyncrasies.

AB - This chapter examines the dynamics of prioritizing implementation projects. Building on the notion of "fit-gap" work, this chapter emphasizes the significance of "de-prioritization" as a practical technique for managing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation projects. "Fit-gap" is a term that resonates with current academic and professional discussions concerning the use of customization and work-arounds necessary to coax suboptimal implementations into functioning properly as the systems age. These are not idle matters given the near irreversibility of ERP projects once initiated and the reported high probability of failure following implementation. Drawn from in-depth interviews and internal documents collected from a multiyear organizational case study of ERP in an institution of higher education, this chapter reports on various uses, interpretations, and consequences of prioritization techniques used to manage implementation projects. In practice, the idea that complex software implementations can be theoretically reduced to mere gaps in fit serves to obscure the political conflict and ambiguous economic accounting that underlie committee work devoted to identifying gaps, deliberating on possible fits, and then prioritizing which gaps are fit immediately and others scheduled for fit later on. In conclusion, while fit-gap committee work is openly intended to result in fewer customizations overall, de-prioritization, as a management technique, appears to "remove without removing" agenda items from the implementation schedule. The upshot for managers: placing such decisions in purgatory delays indefinitely investments of time and finances into customizing new software to fit old policies, and all the work-arounds necessary to shore-up any lingering idiosyncrasies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944203460&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84944203460&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020

DO - 10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84944203460

SN - 1466641533

SN - 9781466641532

VL - 1-3

SP - 329

EP - 346

BT - Enterprise Resource Planning

PB - IGI Global

ER -

Rowland NJ. Prioritizing packaged software implementation projects: The significance of gaps. In Enterprise Resource Planning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Vol. 1-3. IGI Global. 2013. p. 329-346 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4153-2.ch020