THE AUSTRALASIAN PRODUCE COOPERATIVE: A GLOBAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS PROJECT – CASE STUDY
Executive Summary
A paper discussing three committed critical mistakes at APCO in designing and implementing their FIST project, mistakes identified are initial strategy planning which basically deals with lack of synergism and/or communication, dearth is users’ consultation and inconsistencies in testing and piloting. The FIST team failed to devise an encompassing terms of reference and feasibility study as well as a communication policy. There is no user consultation also which jeopardise the evaluative process. Errors made in terms of testing are evident on the lack of analysis-requirements definition and systems and software design. As such, there is no implementation and unit testing plan available.
Suggestions of what could have been done better are also three-fold: contingency planning, contextual analysis and multiple realities analysis.
I. 1st Critical Mistake – Initial Strategy Planning specifically Synergism and/or Communication
As part of the business rule relating to the global FIST project unique for the Australasian Produce Cooperative, or simply APCO, an entity-relationship-diagramming and data-flow-diagrams were accomplished. Nevertheless, these tools would be inadequate and incomprehensive as the tools cannot epitomize the whole project life cycle. Because the IS project is intended for designing a global standard of application and deployment of FIST, a detailed terms of reference and feasibility study should be prioritised. In liaison with the project budgeting schema, the former could delineate the areas which the FIST project will cover and the latter could forecast the expected completion of the project in realistic terms. Through the feasibility study also, FIST team could decide the feasibility of the project based on economic terms such as development costs, development timescale and running cost. Combined, they could provide the FIST team an in depth project plan and cost and benefits analysis initially. In this way, the team together with the CEOs could decide on the ‘go-ahead or otherwise’ of the FIST project. A blunder which accurately reflects this fact is that the FIST team could not even accurately define the difference between core and non-core applications.
Considerably, APCO embraces a transnational strategy where its nine regional offices are geographically-dispersed in 140 countries, with 185 offices. From its headquarters down to its subsidiaries, there should be a control and coordination policy wherein modes and/channels of communications are stipulated. Agency theory best supports this control-coordination initiative because it focuses to create incentives for some actors to act in such a way that advances the interests of others (Malone et al, 2003, p. 80). Communication is one of crucial element in the success of the global IS project since it could reflect the consistent monitoring of the data and activities conducted by the FIST team in a consistent manner as well as the points-of-view of the relevant stakeholders like the users. Communication, especially status reporting that makes stakeholders aware whether the project is being delivered on the given budget and schedule and scope, is one of the most important responsibility of the FIST project manager. It is also in this way that the risks management and emergent issues, concerns and projects regarding the IS project are communicated. In both aspects, APCO, the CEO and the FIST team fell short of. As such, communication is important in making known for every stakeholder how the team and the top management deal with the presence of conflicts relating to the project. Another theory that supports the requirement of an effective communication within technologically-based organisation is diffusion of innovations theory which states that the purpose of communication planning is often promotion of an innovation. A planned communication, thus, impacts information model, networking, information gaps and attitude change (Windahl, Signitzer and Olson, 1992, p. 57).
II. 2nd Critical Mistake – Users’ Consultation
Users’ consultation is also an important element on the success of any IS project, but this is also one factor the APCO lacked. APCO chose to employ a top-down approach, leaving behind a wealth of input and feedback that could come from the users. Use involvement was endangered without realizing that the FIST team could acquire and receive quantifiable user feedback which could assist in the development of accurate documentation based on the requirements and expectations of the users. Such situation was also exacerbated by the fact that the team with the approval of the CEO resorted in non-participative systems development. Thereby, the evaluative process, and also sense of ownership of the process, of the project was overlooked. Evident is the fact that although regional directors does not agree with all the decisions of the CEO whom effortlessly sides with the FIST team in more than a single instance, these regional directors push their efforts to voice their concerns. The sad part, however, is that the decisions of the CEO is considered to be final. The expectation confirmation theory explains this stance which claims that aside from knowledge self-efficacy, technology must deliver user satisfaction as much as possible. Initial expectation prior to usage must be obtained before they could accept it as a technology. Their assessment of perceived performance in comparison with their original expectations and the extent to which those expectations are confirmed is also critical. Based on this confirmation level, their acceptance could be confirmed likewise (Khosrowpour, 2004, p. 213). In relation with these issues, it is evident also that the CEO does not really understand the purpose of the FIST project. It is important that the top management must understand how technology (i.e. IS, IT) could add value to the organisation leading to success, and how it could also detriment or jeopardise the business and organisation itself.
III. 3rd Critical Mistake – Testing/Piloting Schema
This is the continuity of the first critical mistake whereby the deficiency stems from the failure to conduct analysis-requirements definition and systems and software design prior to the actual pilot testing. In the analysis-requirement definition period, a requirement analysis and system analysis was to be conducted. In the first, what the user wants in the system at the same time the information on the current system should be obtained and secondly, a physical model and a logical model should be designed. A physical model refers to the model that shows the ‘who does what’ and when while the logical model should illustrate just what is being done. Next step would be updating the cost and benefit analysis. For the systems and software design, system specification and system design are completed. System specification should exemplify what the FIST system will do while system design should demonstrate how the FIST system will fulfill the specifications. Through both, confirmation of system/software specifications, database definition and hardware specifications would be possible.
What had happened in reality, however, is the decision to favor corporate-wide technological changes is one way. At the onset, we should take note that APCO is involved in three niche markets which depicts differing system design specification requirements. Even so, they pushed the need for large scale computerisation of internal processes. For APCO, IS is a strategic objective in which it could involve the whole of the corporation despite the identified problem in standardisation; lack of compatibility already served a threat. But to no avail, the Enquiry to Cash (ETC) business model still pushed through and was pilot tested in New York and Kuala Lumpur. The problem is the FIST team concentrated solely on the software design instead of incorporating both software, hardware and systems designs. In their reengineering effort as well, the CEO and FIST team did not consider the regional concerns. In the process, the requirements analysis was put at risk because the main concern now is the design of the new system. Business specifications suffer all in the name of INVERCROX. Based on actor-network theory, there must be a stable social structure with a constantly open-ended interaction between multitudes of actors. Social structure is a precarious outcome and insists that the outcome is as much technical as it is social in its construction (Coutard, 1999, p. 168).
When it comes to testing, the basis of the testing locations selection proves to be waffly. North American Region was chosen because of the immediate need to evaluate IS same with the South East Asia region that also necessitates systems upgrade. During that time, however, there are already contradictions concerning the generalisability of the ETC model considering the basic differences in business operations. ETC had became the basis of global software, hardware, communications and support minus seriously reflecting on how will ETC impact the long standing business rules. A prototype-based ETC was then implemented in two not very suitable areas as North America and Tajikistan instead of a site in Europe where IT was then striving to perfection until the FIST project became even more complicated to implement and deploy. Task-technology fit theory reflects this situation. The task-technology fit theory simply explains that one crucial ability of the technology must be to support a task, implying that there is a match between the capabilities of the technology to the demands of the task (Khosrowpour, 2006, p. 209).
To err, the FIST team did not engage in implementation and unit testing planning wherein it could devise system development and unit testing plans. It is a requirement that a final definition of data structures and creation of data storage mechanisms be developed first as well as test platform/procedure or a comprehensive test plan and test data especially for each hardware item, each software unit, each clerical procedure and user interface. After which, system testing should be accomplished in order to test whether all units could work together as a system. A fact is that although distinct unit, modules and subsystem may work individually, it is only a test could confirm if they will run as a single, cohesive system. Sign off of the system from the users’ perspective could be then obtained.
IV. Recommendations
A. Contingency Plan
A contingency plan unique to the FIST project could serve as an alternative plan to be used if possible foreseen risk events become a reality. Central to contingency plan is ensuring that APCO has the necessary knowledge and ability in handling various aspects of the organisation which are connected with the computerised system including both hardware and software. For me, a contingency plan is like a ‘thinking out of the box’ approach which could provide profound benefits for APCO and the FIST global project. It is of my best belief that a contingency plan will benefit this globalised agriculture-based business in four key areas. First is the assurance of effective and quality performance of the IT systems. Second is the assurance of employee buy in and commitment. Third would be the inexistence of sound management strategies. And fourth, the long-term business growth of the organisation.
There are five stages of contingency planning as analysis, solution design, implementation, testing and acceptance and maintenance. In the first stage, risks and/or threats and how these will impact the business are analysed. Slay and Koronios (2005) mention that at this stage, it would be necessary to assess the potential impact of that specific event so that to understand the extent of potential loss. In the solution design stage, what is needed is to distinguish which among the recovery solutions would be most cost effective. The execution of the design aspects is the implementation stage wherein the FIST team could take the initial response of determining the estimated duration of failure and compare it with recovery time objective. The next step would be the experimentation in order to satisfy the recovery requirements to determine whether initiating tasks are necessary before applying sustaining tasks. Updates will be critical and also review and documentation.
B. Contextual Analysis of the FIST System
Savolainen (1999) relates that there are specific questions that the FIST team should answer first. Primarily, in what environment and circumstances should the test be made should be reconciled, and it should be participative. Insights of the applicability of the ETC-based prototype to practice could be then determined. The purpose of this is to answer why the test is being conducted and in what regional business objectives do the FIST could be supported. Answers should center the determination of operative efficiency, generality, relevance and reliability of FIST. Followed by sequencing of methodological steps, FIST team could have conducted FIST manuals and at least a two-day introduction course for users in the test environment. Other queries should concern who will perform the tests, when is the right time to do the test and what tools and methods should be used in testing. Technology acceptance model (TAM) supports this activity which states the necessity of verifying the model’s ability to explain and predict user acceptance of information technology at work (Detlor, 2006, p. 70). Afterwards, the FIST team could have employed a use and relevance of instruments and procedures, models and concept analysis. Practical applicability, acceptability and relevance of concepts, instruments and tools and principles could be then clarified.
C. Multiple Realities Mode of Inquiry
The multiple realities governing a business is that what matters now is the ability of modern organisations to adapt and change especially when it comes to new jobs, new career directions, new roles and new technologies. Technology is seen as a response to these multiple realities by which the requirement is to reconcile technology with the social schema. As such, one of the important aspects of the mobile boundaries in working life in an information society is by doing work with the support of information technology. For APCO as a whole, the multiple forms of reality would be the new opportunities which can be found in new practices through the FIST project and through FIST which should be regarded not only as a tool but also an object or product of work. One theory that supports this is the absorptive capacity theory wherein an organisation like APCO could only make use of the knowledge of its people when it possesses a necessary absorptive capacity. Absorptive capacity refers to the ability of an organisation to recognise the value of new information, assimilate it and apply it for commercial purposes (Martinez Fierro and Medina Garido, 2006, p. 127). As such, the FIST team as the smallest unit where technical solutions reside should reevaluate the overall project in terms of physical and virtual realities (Holbeche, 2006; Jones, 1997; Hearn, 2004).
(2, 381 words)
References
Coutard, O 1999, The Governance of Large Technical Systems, Routledge, London.
Detlor, B 2006, Towards Knowledge Portal: From Human Issues to Intelligent Agents, Springer.
Hearn, J 2004, Information Society and the Workplace: Spaces, Boundaries and Agency, Routledge, London.
Holbeche, L 2006, Understanding Change: Theory, Implementation and Success, Butterworth-Heinemann.
Jones, S 1997, Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety, Sage Publications Inc, New York.
Khosrowpour, M 2004, Innovations Through Information Technology, Idea Group Inc. (IGI).
Khosrowpour, M 2006, Emerging Trends and Challenges in Information Technology Management, Idea Group Inc. (IGI).
Malone, T W, Crowston, K and Herman, G A 2003, Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook, MIT Press.
Martinez Fierro, S and Medina Garido, J A 2006, Utilizing Information Technology in Developing Strategic Alliances Among Organizations, Idea Group Inc. (IGI).
Savolainen, V 1999, Perspectives of Information Systems, Springer, New York.
Slay, J and Koronios, A 2005, Information Technology Security and Risk Management, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Windahl, S, Signitzer, B and Olson, J T 1992, Using Communication Theory: An Introduction to Planned Communication, Sage Publications Inc, New York.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment