Case5 Group4 SectionA

1. Why has R/3 been so successful in the US?
Why does it appear to be so

ahead of its competitors?
When compared to other competing ERP applications, the R/3 framework supported by SAP
is considered to be more functional. R/3 is a device with a special client-server infrastructure
that is technologically advanced. Many roles, including finance, order management,
development, logistics, and human resources, are incorporated into R/3. R/3 modules openly
exchange and distribute information and concentrate all information in a database that can
help businesses use their processes, save time and boost performance across all access
modules. The marketing approach of SAP has also led to its success. SAP cooperates with
most major consulting companies, offering R/3 as part of a larger business plan to executives,
rather than selling it as part of the software to IS executives.
2. Why have so many re-engineering efforts been failures? Will "technology-

enabled" change management help improve the success rate?
There were many re-engineering efforts being done by Vandelay Industries so as to keep up
with the competitors. These efforts included adopting lean production methods, rationalizing
the products, and introducing simpler, better, and cheaper machines.
Even with these measures, their efforts were in vain as a lot of time and expense were added
to the manufacturing cycle by the fragmented systems. This was primarily because:
 The dissimilar manufacturing scheme of the plants made it difficult to integrate across

sites. At the beginning of the week, the criteria for plants were kept, and no other
entries were permitted during that period. This raised a concern about the
responsiveness of the organization.
 Monthly forecasting was done.
 The customer orders at times got lost as they were being taken manually by an inside
sales organization and were then routed to the plant, where they were again entered
manually.
 The manufacturing software was not connected to the financial package, and
therefore, manual methods were used, which introduced error potential and required
periodic reconciliation.
The "technology-enabled" change would help influence the strategy, people and, processes.
The introduction of SAP R/3 can end existing fragmentation by standardization, and the
success rate can be improved by integration.
However, if executive management and Deloitte did not make the correct decisions about the
level of configurations allowed by the different user groups, it might also fail to decide what
level of business process re-engineering would be necessary to accommodate the new
solution, if any.
3. Why are consultants so often part of ERP implementations?

 The consultant can play a big role in transferring external knowledge expertise gained
through prior experience and training.
 They have detailed knowledge of different kinds of technological initiatives and
specifications for system implementation.
 The transition in the market climate is best handled by consultants.
 Consultants are capable of designing the organization and leadership of the team
successfully.
 They will better measure both the efficiency and the performance of the vendor.
 Along with legal considerations, they may recommend the right business and
organizational strategy.
4. What are the major drawbacks that you see from undertaking an ERP
implementation? Are there any drawbacks once the system is up and
running?
 First and foremost, the strong tradition of empowering development, innovation, and
autonomy. So, they can protest when not conveying the actual framework. Indeed,
even with submitted change specialists set up, a great many people didn't totally
acknowledge another framework until they truly accepted that it was unavoidable.
 Besides, despite the fact that R/3 had an expansive ability, there would be
circumstances where it would not actually fit the ideal Vandelay measure plan. R/3
just meets 80-95% of prerequisites.
 Also, R/3 had an added functionality of modifying source code directly. Anyone can
misuse this feature to harm the company, and this could lead to a loss of support for
the software.
 In spite of the fact that R/3 was proposed as a "standard" application that didn't need
huge change for every client, it was as yet important to design the framework to meet
an organization's particular necessities. Configurations were achieved by making
changes in the settings, i.e., in the R/3 configuration tables.
5. If you were Elaine Kramer, what would your greatest worries be as you
started this implementation? What about if you were the Vandelay CEO?
Worries for Elaine Kramer –
 Responding to Hall's request – Kramer has to respond to Hall's request for R/3
system training and determine how to let him and other plant managers know that they
have not regulated all R/3 decisions.
 Getting Managers onboard – Vandelay managers realized that putting R/3 in place
would be an enormous effort, of which installation of hardware and software was only
a small part, so they might resist the change.
 Timeline and budget – For the scope of implementation, the timeline and budget
were very aggressive; thus, she was worried if all the elements were in place to
accomplish the desired improvement.
 Development Team – Selecting the best development team was also one of the causes
to worry, and the team would have to be sure that any universal processes did not run
afoul of local ones.
 Plant implementation – The plant installation would require a lengthy preparation
period to align its operations with business practices.
 Fit for process design – While R/3 has the broad capability, there would be
circumstances where the ideal Vandelay process design would not exactly suit.
Worries for CEO –
 Competitive advantage – The biggest question for the CEO would be whether or not
the introduction of R/3 would have a sustained competitive advantage. Instead of
competitive advantage, ERP became a source of competitive levelers. Companies
must look for ways to differentiate themselves outside of their systems.
 Tinkering (customization of software) – Since each manufacturing facility had the
liberty to purchase its own manufacturing resource planning (MRP) software, now the
difficulty is to decide whether tinkering should be encouraged or should the system
and processes be locked down as much as possible.
 Skeptical employees – The employees do not have confidence in the new system.
Hence its is also a cause of worry to the CEO whether or not the employees will
respond favorably towards the new system.
 Right Decision – If executive management and Deloitte did not make the correct
decisions about the level of configurations permitted by the different user groups and
decide what level of business process re-engineering, if any, would be required to
support the new solution, the new software implementation would be a failure.

Case5 Group4 SectionA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case5 Group4 SectionA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case5 Group4 SectionA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1. Why has R/3 been so successful in the US?

Why does it appear to be so

2. Why have so many re-engineering efforts been failures? Will "technology-

 The dissimilar manufacturing scheme of the plants made it difficult to integrate across

3. Why are consultants so often part of ERP implementations?

Worries for Elaine Kramer –

Worries for CEO –

You might also like