Download
1 / 17
170 likes | 175 Views
This article discusses the management problems faced by Tektronix and explores how they should manage their ERP project as well as the use of IT to drive technological change. It highlights the company's unintegrated systems, old technology, and non-standard business processes. The article also delves into Tektronix's approach to their mega project, including their guiding vision, vendor selection, and project management methods.
E N D
Tektronics Ken PeffersUNLV November 2004
Management Problems • How should Tektronix manage its ERP project? • Should IT be used to force technological change?
Tektronix, Inc • Three very different businesses • Printers: made to stock high volume • Made to order: video processing • High product diversity: measurement instruments
Tektronic’s ProblemsUnintegrated systems • Problems • Decades of uncoordinated evolution of systems • No global standards or systems • Relics from a time when the company had 26 divisions
Business implications • No inventory visibility beyond Beaverton • Couldn’t ship immediately or on Saturday • Orders entered multiple times—lots of errors • manual expediting: “Five calls does it all.” • Takes weeks to close books • Lack of good info for decision making • Can’t tell which divisions or products are profitable • Difficult to manage customer accounts • Can’t tell customers their total cost at order time.
Old Technology • Problems • 1970’s vintage • proprietary • Mainframe based • Business implications • Not Internet ready • Expensive • Hard to interface with partners
Non standard business processes • Problems • Different all over the world • Business implications • Lost efficiencies
How did Tektronix manage its mega project? • Coherent guiding vision • Frankfurt is Orlando • 3 components • Waves approach • Learning from experience • Decentralized approach to implementation details—div. chose own partners • Single vendor • Rapid vendor selection • Neun as final arbiter of disputes
How did Tektronix manage its mega project? • Visible Sr Mgr support • Steering committee • Global bus model • Best practice changes • Use of code wrappers • Schedule more important than budget • Structure of the architecture • Derives from guiding vision • Common financials, separate order management • Best people
Coherent Guiding Vision • Separability of the businesses • Requirements of one div not drive the busi of the other • Businesses of the three divisions very different • Leveraged shared services • Need performance measure comparability • Consolidate common functions • Staying as plain vanilla as possible • Minimize changes in ERP software • Change the business process, not software, unless absolutely nec
Perceived Need To Customize • Distinguish between needs from practice and needs from regulation etc. • Use of code wrappers
Waves Approach vs the Big Bang • Pluses: opportunities to learn from experience, good fit with Tek’s complexity, problems contained when they occur • Minuses: Relatively slow, can become a never ending project.
Adaptive Project Management Methods • Iterative. Implementation occurs in increments that result from each iteration so that outcomes and interactions can be tested and understood as they appear. • Fast cycles and delivery of some value so that iterative doesn’t mean slow • Deliver functionality early so that feedback incorporated into learning and improving cycles • Highly skilled personnel capable of learning • Resist use of ROI that assume predictability of outcomes
Compare to 1998 revenue ofabout $ 2 billion. Tektronix sold two divisions.
