1 / 23

Enhancing Knowledge Integration in ERP Project Teams: Lessons from Two Case Studies

This paper examines the critical role of knowledge integration in the success of ERP project teams. It highlights the common pitfalls of ERP implementations, including the tendency to reinforce the status quo instead of fostering innovation. Through case studies of two multinational engineering companies, QEL and IEL, we explore the factors affecting knowledge sharing and integration among project teams. We discuss the impact of social capital, team dynamics, and the organizational approach to ERP on achieving transformational potential. Insights into effective team-building strategies and knowledge management practices are provided.

thi
Download Presentation

Enhancing Knowledge Integration in ERP Project Teams: Lessons from Two Case Studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION IN ERP PROJECT TEAMS Sue Newell Bentley College, USA

  2. Introduction • Many IT projects do not meet cost, schedule & functionality targets • Many more do not create the radical change that was intended • Rather IT often reinforces the status quo (Orlikowski) • Focus on problems of sharing & integrating distributed knowledge

  3. ERP Projects • Standard software & ‘vanilla implementations’ • Change organization to fit software • Many organizations therefore start ERP implementation with a business process reengineering phase

  4. Project Team • Must map ‘as is’ processes, identify processes embedded in software, & define new organizational processes that ‘fit’ • Process analysis & redesign fundamental to achieving transformational potential

  5. Reality • Many firms do not achieve this transformational potential from their ERP implementations! • Critical success factors have been identified • Ability to integrate distributed knowledge not considered

  6. Knowledge Integration • The process whereby several individuals combine their information to create new knowledge (Okhuysen & Eisenhardt) • Oversimplifies complex process of sharing knowledge – knowledge is distributed & ambiguous

  7. Knowledge Integration - Distributed STRUCTURAL BARRIERS

  8. Knowledge Integration - Ambiguity We play football!! COGNTIVE BARRIERS

  9. Knowledge is hoarded RELATIONAL BARRIERS

  10. Knowledge Integration • Understanding knowledge as socially constructed & arising through interaction & dialogue means - • Teams will achieve greater or lesser success in their ability to integrate knowledge

  11. Different levels of knowledge integration • Mechanistic pooling • Generative knowledge integration

  12. Achieving High Levels of Knowledge Integration • Depends on project team • Intellectual and Social capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal) • Social capital/networking: ‘bridging’ (Burt) vs. ‘bonding’ (Coleman) views (Adler & Kwon)

  13. Social Capital - Bonding

  14. Social Capital - Bridging

  15. Research • Explore level of knowledge integration achieved in two project teams tasked with implementing a functional pillar of an ERP system in two companies • Specifically focus on networking of teams in pursuit of sharing & integrating knowledge

  16. Methodology • Case study methodology • 2 companies – QEL and IEL • First interviews (14/25) and follow-up interviews (7/12) • Informal interviews, observations, documentation

  17. Cases • Both large, multi-national, engineering companies • Both decided to implement ERP systems in 1998 • QEL • Project not completed • IEL • System implemented and well-received

  18. Differences between the two project teams • Emphasis on team building • The way the project was divided up • The allocation of specialists to workpackage areas • The inclusion of different opinions from the process mapping stage • The involvement of the IT consultants • The understanding of ERP functionality • The involvement of users

  19. Impact on Social Capital/Networking • Bonding • IEL – team bonding seen as crucial • QEL – team operated independently • Bridging • IEL – team spent considerable effort accessing distributed knowledge • QEL – team made very little effort to access distributed knowledge

  20. Successful Knowledge Integration

  21. Discussion and Conclusions • Knowledge integration is a central activity within an ERP implementation • Social networking (bonding and bridging) influences these processes of knowledge integration • Management and organization of project influences this social networking • Transformational potential of IT – requires generative knowledge integration (vs. mechanistic pooling)

  22. Managerial Implications • Team Building • Division of tasks • Allocation of team members • Encouraging wide information search during process mapping stage • Engaging hybrid IT consultants • Involving users

  23. Next Steps • Longitudinal study – to explore subsequent improvisation with system • Track differences between piecemeal (mechanistic) and concerted (generative) approaches (Robey et al)

More Related