decision process for acquiring complex erp solutions: the case of itcom

This article was downloaded by: [The University of Manchester Library]On: 27 November 2014, At: 04:40Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Information TechnologyCase and Application ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utca20

Decision Process for AcquiringComplex ERP Solutions: The Case ofITComJacques Vervillea & Alannah Halingtena

a College of Business Administration Texas A&M InternationalUniversityPublished online: 18 Sep 2014.

To cite this article: Jacques Verville & Alannah Halingten (2001) Decision Process forAcquiring Complex ERP Solutions: The Case of ITCom , Journal of Information TechnologyCase and Application Research, 3:2, 42-61, DOI: 10.1080/15228053.2001.10855975

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2001.10855975

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utca20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15228053.2001.10855975

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2001.10855975

Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Decision Process for Acquiring Complex ERP Solutions

DECISION PROCESS FOR ACQUIRING COMPLEX ERP SOLUTIONS:

THE CASE OF ITCOM ' Jacques Verville and Alannah Halingten

College of Business Administration Texas A& M International University

Email: jverville@,acm.org

ABSTRACT ITCom is an international telecommunications organization that began but did not complete the purchase of a proposed US$lO million packaged ERP solution (international billing system). Ten individuals participated on ITCom S Acquisition Team, the Jive principals of which were interviewed for this case. From its initiation to its cessation, the acquisition process took approximately 9 months. Data for this case was collected in August and September 1997, just week after the decision was made to halt the process owing to an impasse on issues of code ownership and cost. The ERP acquisition process that the organization went through was, nevertheless, quite rigorous and presents some interesting insights and lessons that would be of value to other organizations, among them, the influence of new management on the overall process.

Keywords: Acquisition, ERP, planning, information search, selection, evaluation, negotiations

INTRODUCTION

This paper will begin with a look at ITCom's corporate profile and be followed by a background description of the circumstances that led to the decision not to buy an ERP solution. Subsequent to that, an overview of the ERP acquisition process that ITCom partially compl.eted will be presented followed by a presentation of the influences that impacted both ITCom's process and Acquisition Team.

Research Methodology and Data Collection

Data for this case was obtained from semi-structured interviews with five team principals that lasted approximately 1 hour and 15 minutes each and from project-related documents. (The same interviewing protocol was observed with all of the informants.) It was collected as part of a multiple-case design of four organizations that had recently completed the acquisition of an ERP solution. The case study approach (1) provided the means for an in-depth analysis of the construct of the ERP acquisition process; and (2) unveiled a multitude of factors and dimensions that make the acquisition of ERP software such a complex process.

The data was categorized and coded according to a research tree that was developed to establish the study's boundaries. The tree outlined the themes relative to the acquisition process that could potentially have arisen during the data collection from the interviews and

-

' For reasons of confidentiality, 'ITCom' is a pseudonym for the international telecommunication organization to which reference is made in this text.

42

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


documents. The tree served only as a guide and while it allowed for the development of focused questions on particular themes that could have surfaced during the data collection process, it also accommodated unexpected themes that presented themselves in the informants responses. Although there was concern that the tree might influence the direction of the study, every necessary precaution was taken to minimize and control such occurrences.

Site selection for the study was made according to the following criteria: (1) the acquisition had a significant impact on the organization not only on a financial level (the cost of the technology varied from US$1 million to US$86 million), but also on a strategic level (this was one of the primary reasons that they were acquiring the software); (2) the acquisition was significant, totaling several hundred thousand dollars or more; (3) the type of packaged solution that was acquired was of a complex nature such as ERPs; (4) the acquisition was a new purchase; and (5) the acquisition of the software was recently completed.

Validation

The data from this study was validated using a triangulation method, first, within each individual case, and then for all four cases together. For this, a triangulation of sources (diverse range of individuals and organizations), methods (of data collection: interviews, archival information, documents) and theories (theoretical base [Oranizational Buying Behavior (OBB)]) was done. The results showed that while each of the cases is different with regard to the type of software solution that was being acquired, the same process was developed, similar tasks were performed, similar influences impacted the process and similar characteristics emerged.

ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE

ITCom NA* is a North American based overseas camer that operates facilities which allow domestic network operators and other service providers to exchange telecommunication traffic with 240 countries and temtories. ITCom NA, with its extensive telecommunication networks, owns and operates three earth stations in North America with a total complement of 37 satellite antennas, has interests (co-ownership) in both INTELSAT~.~ and IN MARS AT^ satellite systems, as well as access to satellites owned by panArnsatS, 1ntersputnik6 and

* 'ITCom NA' is a pseudonym for the parent company of 'ITCom Inc.' (also pseudonymously named), whose subsidiary is ITCom.

INTELSAT and INMARSAT are international organizations that own and operate multi- satellite systems. 4 INTELSAT was founded in 1964. It was the first organization to provide global satellite coverage and connectivity, and as of April 1997, was the communication provider with the broadest reach and most comprehensive range of services. It owns and operates a global satellite system that provides voiceldata and video services to users in more than 200 nations, territories, and dependencies on every continent.

PanAmSat, based in Greenwich, Connecticut, is a provider of global video and data broadcasting services via satellite. As of 2001, it operates the world's largest commercial yostationary satellite network with 21 orbiting satellites.

Intersputnik, established in 1971 when nine countries signed an agreement on the establishment of a global satellite communications system, is an open intergovernmental organization whose membership, as of 1999, is 24 countries. Its operational headquarters are

43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


~elesat', and approximately 100 submarine cables which operate, by means of fiber-optic links, facilities that are connected to ITCom's switching centers. It is through these facilities that ITCom Inc. offers intercontinental telecommunications services to camers, resellers, multinational corporations and consumers around the world.

ITCom was founded in 1995 and by April 1997, had 200 employees worldwide. Its headquarters are located in the Washington, DC area and it is the global carrier subsidiary of ITCom Inc. With offices established in the major cities of the US, Germany and the UK, South America, the Middle East, Asia and other areas of the world where the highest-density routes are found, ITCom has established its presence in the global market. It is one of the world's leading intercontinental telecommunication companies, offering other camers and businesses information services.

BACKGROUND

In December 1996, ITCom began looking for one or more software packages that would support its marketing and billing needs and integrate with its existing systems architecture. The package(s), while costly, would meet an important strategic hnction-billing. Since its existing billing systems could not accommodate all of the features that were required in a competitive global environment, ITCom was unable to accurately and timely bill for the telecommunication services provided to its various customers. The new billing software would have to be sufficiently flexible for ITCom to rapidly address the changes imposed by a telecommunications environment in constant evolution. It would also have to support the notion of multi-billing for the various ITCom NA subsidiary companies as well as all the services offered by these subsidiaries which included:

call record collection rating capabilities discounts and promotions multi-level customer hierarchy invoicing for a variety of services (e.g., International Direct Distance Dialing [IDDD], international toll-free service, international private lines, indirect access, country direct, inbound direct, broadcast services, card products, etc.) payment options taxes controls and error corrections, and international settlement

If no one solution met all the needs, then a combination of several software packages would be needed.

These software solutions would also need to integrate with ITCom's existing computing environment which included both operational systems (related to the management of ITCom's

located in Moscow, Russia, and it provides its customers in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Ocean regions with space segment capacity for a wide range of telecommunications services. 7 Telesat is a Canadian-based satellite communications and systems management organization founded in 1969 with offices throughout Canada, the US and Brazil. It operates a fleet of satellites for the provision of broadcast distribution and telecommunications services, and is a consultant and partner in satellite ventures around the world.

44

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


communications infrastructure) and administrative systems. The administrative systems were comprised of a local area network (LAN) connected to several UNIX servers. The email system was Beyond Mail (and Banyan Mail for remote access). In addition to the Banyan file and communication servers, the LAN was connected to a number of UNIX database servers (Sequent hardware) running Oracle database technology. The major database application was the Oracle Financials package that included General Ledger, Accounts Payable and Fixed Assets modules. The primary client workstations of the LAN were Pentium-based machines with 16 to 24 MB of RAM, running DOS 6.2lWindows 3 and common applications such as Wordperfect, Lotus 1-2-3 and Microsoft Office. A decision had also been made to migrate the desktop environment to Windows NT.

OVERVIEW O F ITCOM'S ERP ACQUISITION PROCESS

There were several phases to ITCom's acquisition process that included the formation of the acquisition team, planning for each phase of the acquisition process, searching and gathering information, evaluating both the vendors and their software, and negotiating business terms and conditions. What follows is a presentation of these phases from a high level perspective

Formation of an International Acquisition Team

In the initial phase, individuals from various areas of the organization were chosen to be part of the Acquisition Team. While acquisition activities occurred in Canada, the billing system was for the ITCom NA subsidiary located in Washington, DC. Therefore, not only did the team's composition include individuals from ITCom NA corporate headquarters, it also included members from the international division (ITCom) located in the US. From the corporate headquarters, team members were selected from the IT (the project manager), Procurement, Finance, and Products departments, whereas the members from ITCom were selected from the Marketing and Finance departments.

Each of these individuals was responsible for specific tasks in the initial phase. For example, the individuals representing Marketing and Finance were responsible for making certain that the Acquisition Team had access to key individuals in the organization on the user side. Another individual was responsible for finding out which software packages were available on the market. This person also served as the main contact with the various vendors. Yet another individual represented the legal side of the organization, and so on. In all, twelve individuals participated on the Acquisition Team.

Searching and Gathering Information

During the planning phase, the Acquisition Team engaged the services of a professional research group, TRI, to provide it with a detailed report of the various products from every major vendor on the market. This report was a very good source of information, providing information on each vendor's revenues, major customers, past activities (sales, product development, etc.), and their vision for the future. Additional information was provided by individual team members who went to various conventions and trade shows. Trade magazines, specialized documents, and the Internet were other sources of information. Based on the information gathered, the Acquisition Team was able to put together their long-list of vendors which comprised 40 companies.

From this point, the Team proceeded to formulate a request for information (RFI) that was sent to these vendors. The RFI was based on the information from the TRI report, information

45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


provided from interviews with key users, and information that its members had gathered. The RFI responses from the vendors were evaluated based on a set of established criteria and several vendors were rejected. A revised long-list of vendors was then created.

Evaluating Vendors and their Software

The Team subsequently contacted the vendors from this list and visited their sites. In conjunction with this, the Team also sent these vendors a request for proposal (RFP) which was more complex and detailed than the previously issued RFI. Within the RFP document, great detail was provided regarding ITCom's business needs and technical requirements. Upon receipt of the vendors' RFP responses, an evaluation was conducted individually by each team member using a grid. Following the individual evaluations, the Team, as a whole, completed an evaluation, scoring each of the responses using the same grid. From this grid, the Team was able to construct a short-list of 5 vendors, each of which was to be invited to give an in-house demonstration of its product. Prior to in-house demonstrations taking place, however, the Team established that its top short-listed vendor was Keanan based on the Team's scores from its evaluation of the RFP responses and its visits to the short-listed vendors' sites. While this 'choice' was not final and would yet require a final evaluation during an intensive in-house demonstration, business negotiations were begun with Keanan.

Negotiating Business Terms and Conditions

While ITCom was able to reach agreement with the primary vendor on several issues, an impasse was reached over the issue of 'code ownership' and cost halting the acquisition process. The cost of $10 million over 3 years was an issue of major concern. As to code ownership, ITCom's upper management felt very uncomfortable with the fact that ITCom would be bound to a single vendor and its' proprietary system for the next decade, thus relinquishing control over an area of strategic importance to the vendor. Hence, ITCom decided to break off negotiations with the vendor. The initial decision to purchase a packaged solution was reversed and the decision was made to develop a new system in-house.

ITCom's ERP Acquisition Process

Although aborted, six high-level processes (Figure 1) within the ERP acquisition process that ITCom partially completed were readily identifiable, and were supported by the data: planning, information search, selection, evaluation, choice, and negotiation.

FIGURE I: ITCOM'S ERP SOFTWARE ACQUISITION PROCESS

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


The structure of ITCom's ERP Acquisition process is as follows: (1) it begins with planning, (2) it ends with negotiations, (3) it is non-linear; (4) some of the processes are done concurrently (see Figure 2); (5) some of the processes are embedded, (6) all of the processes, with the exception of 'choice', are iterative; (7) all of the processes, with the exception of 'choice', are recursive; and (8) each process is causal and results in products (deliverables) that are used by another process. All the processes are interdependent, with some embedded in whole or in part in other processes. The dotted lines indicate the flow of information into the processes. The solid arrows between the processes indicate the ongoing and recursive nature of activity between them, affected by the inflow of information. Activity between the processes is highly iterative and for the most part, not sequential in a linear fashion. Indeed, much activity occurs concurrently. For these reasons, the process model is not depicted as a process flow chart. However, at certain points in the Acquisition Process, there is a sequential 'next process' progression that takes the Team from the Planning process to the Information Search, Selection, Evaluation, and Choice processes, ending finally with the Negotiations process.

FIGURE 2: TIMELINE SHOWING THE ITERATIVE AND CONCURRENT NATURE OF ITCOM'S ERP ACQUISSTION PROCESS

ITCom's ERP Acquisition Process

PLANNING

INFORMATION SEARCH

SELECTION

EVALUATION

Vendor

Functionality

Technical

CHOICE

NEGOTIATIONS

Business

Legal

Go Ahead for Project = Time 0 9

Legend: = Continuous process

+ - + = Iterative process; shows back and forth between one or more process that are occurring concurrently

Overlap = Concurrency of processes (viewing from top to bottom) 2-

A

............. 4-+.. 6 +............. ........................... ......... + + - + ......... + + ......... +

(Preliminary choice made, but final decision was not to buy. Therefore, no final choice of ERP.)

+..................I)

(Not begun)

Timeframe: 9 months (approx) b D

ownl

oade

d by

[T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

Lib

rary

] at

04:

40 2

7 N

ovem

ber

2014


DETAILED ACCOUNT OF ITCOM'S ERP ACQUISITION PROCESS

This section presents a detailed account of the high-level processes presented above and the activities that ITCom completed in its efforts to purchase an ERP software solution. Though unable to complete the acquisition process (with the purchase of an ERP packaged solution), this case lends further support to the importance of rigorous planning for the process. It also illustrates the influence of new management on the overall acquisition process.

Planning Process

For ITCom, planning marked the beginning of the acquisition process. 'Planning' encompassed all of the activities that ITCom deemed necessary to pursue this endeavor. While ITCom's 'planning' was not extensive, it was very aggressive. According to the Project Manager - Technical (hereafter referred to as PMT):

"...there was a global plan and at every phase, we reviewed it. We tried to follow it. It was very aggressive ... We also had some milestones in the plan and at every milestone, we reviewed our progress. Even before that, every week we had a little review, but at the milestone. we would review our progress and see g w e had to change our plan. Concerning the timeframe, we could say that it was like we had planned, although we did haw some adiustments to make, but overall. it was good. "

Their plan included meetings to determine schedules, priorities, participants, resources that would be required; activities and tasks that would need to be completed; types and sources of information to be sought; and so forth. Various tasks and activities needed to be accomplished such as the development of a list of requirements and meetings with internal customers who would be affected by the new systems. Additionally, studies were conducted to assess the strengths and weaknesses of their existing legacy system, of the RFI that they had created and sent out, and of the information that they had obtained from various sources:

"First of all. we analyzed the needs that we had within the company by meeting with key people who could give us information about our own requirements. We studied what we had already done. Since we already own some in-house legacy billing systems, we studied their weaknesses and their strengths. Briejly, we studied our own actual situation concerning the billing sofrware and our billirrg needs. Afrer that, we tried to get as much information as possible from specialized documentation, magazines, as well as key people and specialists, conventions. and so on. " (PMT)

Though the level of planning may not have been as extensive as it could have been, according to the CIO, "there was some planning" and "it was not random". The Planning process as completed by ITCom addressed the following issues:

8 Participants Acquisition Strategies Establishing Evaluation Criteria Establishing Requirements

Participants: Individuals responsible for the Planning process had to identify who would participate in the acquisition process. Individuals were recruited from within the organization. These individuals were from the departments that would be immediately affected by the new technology. Responsibility of the overall process was given to the CIO who had joined ITCom

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


after the decision had been made to purchase a software solution. The CIO, in turn, had to select the various managers, leaders and individuals that would participate in the process. A primary concern of the CIO was to select individuals that would be responsible for designing the architecture of the new system.

ITCom NA's Procurement department was also given a role in the acquisition process. Although they did not participate until near the end of the Planning process, they assisted in analyzing the RFI and preparing the RFPIrequest for quotation (RFQ). According to the Contract Administrator, ITCom NA's Procurement department customarily gets involved very early in an acquisition process. However, in this case, they were not able to.

"Initially, our internal architecture group prepared and issued an RFI. We, in Procurement, like to be involved in that process. We're not always successful in doing that because our internal customer will usually get the ball rolling initially. In this case, they did that. i%ey also prepared the RFI and tested the market to see ifthere were companies out there that were prepared and capable offuI/;Iling an eventual request for quote. " (Contract Administrator)

Unbeknownst to the Acquisition Team, earlier involvement in the acquisition process of Procurement would have enabled them to identify prospective vendors who did not meet some of ITCom's organizational requirements, that is, who were not IS0 9000 certified vendors.

Acquisition Strategies: One strategy that ITCom used was limited access of the Acquisition Team members to the vendors. All access to the Team was channeled through one or two specific individuals who acted as the primary contacts:

"We also had an individual who was a specialist in searching for soflware packages available on the market. This person was our main contact with the vendors. We have a protocol that we followed. We also had someone from the legal side involved. At the RFQ stage, we considered that we needed to be very formal. At the RFI stage also, but it was less formal than the RFQ. So, at the RFQ stage, we involved someonefrom the legal side and we made certain that they understood our requirements and also our planning. At this point (the RFQ stage), we asked all the vendors to only call that person ifthey had any questions or anything else that they wanted from us. " (Contract Administrator)

One reason that they chose to use this strategy was because of their past experience in which some vendors targeted specific team members involved in previous projects and sent them 'gifts'. According to the PMT:

"Some vendors called us and they askedfor the name ofthe team member to whom they wanted to send some gift, and so on. Myseyand [the Contract Administrator] decided that it was nor a good idea, and so we never gave the name ofthe team members. We also asked the vendors not to send gifis to anyone. that it would not help them and might in fact hinder them. "

Another of ITCom's strategies was to visit the vendors' sites. According to the PMT, visiting the various vendors would enable them to further reduce the list of potential vendors and thus eliminate incompatible vendors andlor technologies/solutions early in the process. As to the benefits of having 'face-to-face' meetings with the vendors, the Senior Adviser for Information Systems expressed the following about site visits to the vendors' locales:

"You get a very good feelface-to-face which you do not always get in an RFI. Some vendors are very. very good at responding, but face-to-face when you 're dealing with them, you may jind out that perhaps there are certain things you do not like about that vendor, not quite so much that you do not like, but that are not appropriate or makes them inappropriate for your particular need. "

49

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


The site visits also provided a means for ITCom to gather more information. As per the PMT:

"We decided to go and see the vendors even before they had time to respond to our RFP. In our case, it was a good way of doing things because we collected a lot of information at their site. But, we had to be very cautious because they asked a lot of questions and ifwe wanted to be honest, we could not answer all of these questions because it was important for us that each vendor receive the same information when they replied to the RFP.

So, we went to their site, but it was made very clear that we were not there to give them information, that we were there only to collect some information about theirpackage and about their company. They had the opportunity to show us many things. I think that we surprised them in the sense that they expected to receive some VP's or people from upper management.

In a sense, I think that we succeeded because they received more technical people and more end-users, people who knew exactly what our needs were and what they were looking for. We were not there to listen to their marketing speech. What we wanted to see was the concept behind theirpackage. "

Establishing Evaluation Criteria: This was very important to the acquisition process and much time and effort went into establishing the evaluation criteria for the software solution. ITCom established evaluation and selection criteria for three distinct areas: ( I ) functional, (2) technical, and (3) vendors.

Vendor evaluation criteria included, among others, size, financial stability, and reputation of the vendor. Functional criteria dealt with the features of the software and included functionalities specific to fiont-end interfaces and user-friendliness. Technical criteria dealt with the specifics of systems architecture, performance, and security. ITCom established all evaluation criteria (with very few exceptions) for the three areas early in the acquisition process because these were needed for incorporation into the RFP and RFQ targeted for vendors.

A relevant note about ITCom's evaluation criteria for vendors: since ITCom is ISO-certified, they have minimum standards in place that set forth minimum requirements when considering a vendor-supplier. However, because the Contract Administrator was not involved in the acquisition process until after the information search was completed and vendors were already contacted, the Acquisition Team was not aware of these minimum standards regarding the vendors.

Establishing Requirements: ITCom had to establish exactly what requirements would need to be met by the technology as well as what their own business requirements would be, both existing and future.

"We talked about what we wanted as our business processes; we talked about exactly what our requirements would be. The key people of our company were responsible to provide us with the information about what they were searching for, what they wanted in this package. It was the same thing with the vendors-we put the criteria that were important for us. We decided i f we wanted to deal with someone who was in Canada or in the USA or in Europe. " (PMT)

As part of their assessment, the Acquisition Team needed to consider the international context in which the software was to be used and the requirements that this would impose. They also looked at their existing resources-what they had and what they lacked. They looked at what they wanted that was not being met by their existing systems.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


Information Search Process

This process consisted of two main tasks: searching and gathering information. Both tasks were mitigated by selection and evaluation criteria, established a priori, to screen (an embedded activity of the Evaluation process) information. Further, these tasks were carried out using both internal and external sources of information.

For internal information sources, ITCom gathered information from various sources within the organization that included individual users and team members. These internal sources provided information primarily on the organization's existing requirements at all levels and in all areas that the technology would impact.

As for external sources, these were sought to provide information about software solutions that might best meet their needs. According to the PMT, ITCom engaged the services of a consultant~professional research group, TRI, to conduct a marketplace search:

"...we bought a study by a company called TRI. This company asked us to answer several questions about our billing--ourprocess, our systems, and so on, afrer which they put together a study of all the major telecommunication companies and about the way TRI works with their customers, their business processes, and their sofiare. We obtained a lot of information from that report. We did not, however, rely only on the information from this report. We also referred to other sources of information such as magazines and so on. "

In addition to TN's report, ITCom also gathered information from such varied sources as publications, trade shows, conferences, references and site visits, the Internet and other professional research services such as Gartner Group and Meta Group.

"We dealt with Meta Group before and also the Gartner Group. In this case, we also used other sources. I, myself; have other contacts that I spoke with, for example. We also obtained information from articles in various business journals, jinance journals. Of course, the Internet was a big source of information, too. " (Senior Adviser for Information Systems)

One particularly interesting source of information that lTCom used was their competitors. Though somewhat difficult to do, ITCom found them to be a useful source:

"You can also call some of your competitors and speak with them, like we did with BT (Bell Telephone) or Sprint. It's nor always easy, for obvious reasons, because there are secrets between competitors, but IJound out that there is also a need to talk with competitors that everyone has and it is a good source of information. People from various companies who have experience came up with some good information." (PMT)

ITCom also used the RFI to obtain information from the vendors. Further to this, the RFI was a means of narrowing their list of vendors. Following the review of the RFI responses that they had received from approximately forty vendors, ITCom's Acquisition Team was able to eliminate many vendors from further consideration. More information was gathered during the Acquisition Team's visits to the vendor's offices.

In the Team's quest for information, the credibility of the source was important considering the amount of readily available and oftentimes, unreliable information that one has access to. As such, the consultant was considered to be a credible source of information.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


Selection Process

The Selection process, according to the Director of Billing Services and Outsourcing, was conducted in two phases-first, upon receipt of the responses to the RFI from the vendors and second, after receiving the proposals in response to the RFP. With the RFI and RFP responses in hand, ITCom proceeded with the paper evaluation of the vendors' packages.

For the RFI responses, an evaluation was done based on a set of high-level criteria that were established a priori in the Planning process. ITCom reviewed the responses from the 40 vendors that had been sent the RFI, then narrowed that list to considerably fewer vendors. From this smaller group of vendors, ITCom was able to single out the vendors whose software solutions could most likely meet ITCom's needs, and a short-list was formed. According to the PMT, these results were presented to ITCom's upper management for authorization to continue on to the RFP and RFQ stages. It was at this point that upper management requested the Acquisition Team to conduct site visits of the short-listed vendors.

The visits coincided with the sending of the RFP to the vendors. During the site visits, additional information was gathered on the short-listed vendors and their software solutions (functional and technical aspects). When the RFP responses were received from the vendors, they were evaluated against more refined criteria than those used for evaluating the RFI responses, some of which were established following the vendor site visits. The end result of the Selection process was a short-list of 5 vendors that were invited to give in-house demonstrations of their products.

Evaluation Process

There were three distinct types of evaluation conducted by ITCom: vendor, functionality and technical. Evaluation criteria for all three types were developed in the Planning phase of the acquisition process. Also developed during the Planning process were evaluation matrices with assigned weights and scores for each of the three areas.

Further, activities (i.e., screenings) for each evaluation type were embedded within the Information Search and Selection processes as well as in the Evaluation process proper. Several iterations and levels of screening were done by ITCom's Acquisition Team. For example, during the Information Search process, a high-level screening of information pertaining to all three areas was completed by the Team to arrive at a long-list of vendors. Table 1 below shows some examples of the general, high-level criteria used in the first stage of the Vendor evaluation. This table also shows the weight that this part of the evaluation carried in ITCom's overall Evaluation process.

In addition to these, each of the vendors was further evaluated for, among others, their financial stability and certification based on reports from Dunn & Bradstreet and TRI as well as other information.

While the evaluation of each vendor's financial stability rested with the Contract Administrator, other aspects of the Vendor evaluation rested with the team members who evaluated the RFI responses and who had met with some of the different vendors. In addition to the quantifiable factors (sales volume, the size of the company ["If you have some companies with two people and they've only been around a year, that has a part in it as well."], according to the Senior Adviser for Information Systems, consideration was also given to qualitative factors such as the "quality of the response, the appropriateness of the response to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


your particular requirements", as well as the impressions made during face-to-face meetings with the vendors:

"There were also visits from the vendors. You get a very good feel face-to-face which you do not always get in an RFI. Some vendors are very, very good at responding, but face-to-face when you 're dealing with them, you moyfind out that perhaps there are certain things you do nor like about that vendor, not quite so much that you do not like, but that are not appropriate or makes them inappropriate for your particular need. "

Table 1: Fast-track Grid4 (excerpt) for Vendor Evaluation VENDOR EVALUATION CRITERIA Rating Score Score as a Score as a

(Max. Score) % o f % ofTota l

presence in the region 3. The vendor would take responsibility for 16 12 75 10

modifications to adapt the package to TI form of billing I I I I

4. The vendor would carry out, according to 1 24 ( 24 1 100 1 20 the request of ITCom, modifications to the software

5. The vendor can deliver within the desired 40 32 80 26.7

2. The vendor offers technical support for : 2.1 Software installation 40 40 100 20

2.2 Conversion 40 40 100 20

3. The vendor ~rovides courses for : 13.1 user ~ersonnel I 40 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 3.2 Information technology (IT) personnel 40 40 100 20

TOTAL VENDOR WEIGHT 5% 320 272 85 85

Legend for Table 1': 1 Rating (Max. Score) : Maximum obtainable score 1

score': 'score as asskssed by a team member relative to the rating; based on the vendor's ability to meet a criterion

Score as a % of Rating: Score as a %age of the max obtainable rating for a set criterion Score as a % of Total Rating: Score as a percentage of the total max rating for the section

Although ITCom had planned to conduct extensive functional and technical evaluations of the software (during in-house product demonstrations), this stage of the acquisition process was never reached. However, ITCom did conduct progressively refined, albeit higher level, evaluations of the software packages in addition to the evaluations they conducted on the

Figures used as scores are hypothetical. ' Legend also applies to both Table 2 and the table in Appendix A.

53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


vendors themselves. ITCom developed a "fast-track grid" for evaluating the RFI and it was used during the Selection process to reduce the extensive long-list of vendors to a shorter long- list. This grid (Table 2) contained very high-level criteria for evaluating the vendors, and lower level, more refined criteria for evaluating the functional and technical aspects of the software packages.

Table 2: Fast-track Grid for Vendor, Functional, and Technical Evaluations

-

Score as a % ofTotal

Rating

STANDARD FUNCTIONALITY :

1. HIERARCHY 8%

2. CUSTOMER USAGE REPORT 4%

3. INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENT 2%

4. PAYMENT OPTION 7%

EVALUATION CATEGORIES & WEIGHTS FOR ITCOM'S BILLING SYSTEM

- - RATING (Calling, Billing. Banded, etc.) 12%

AGENT I RESELLER 8%

DISCOUNTS, PROMOTIONS & PENALTIES 11%

CUSTOMER BILLING WEIGHTED INDEX 10 %

TAXES 5%

420

200

1100

160

5. ACCOUNTING & INTERNAL REPORTING 5%

6. CALL RECORD COLLECTION 7%

TECIINICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA :

Score Rating (Max. Score)

- - 1680 (Total)

300

800

1280

100

620

180

7. CONTROL & ERROR CORRECTIONS 6%

8. INTRODUCTION OF NEW PRODUCTISERVICE 4%

9. USER FRIENDLY 4%

10. CUSTOMER SERVICE CAPABILITIES 7%

Score as a %of

Ratine

220

440

880

1460

I I I

3. TECHNICAL FILESIDATABASES 15% I 280 I I I I. TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE 25%

2. TECHNICAL PROGRAMS 10%

620

320

I I I

OTAL TECHNICAL WEIGHTING 35% I 3480 I 1 1

4. TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION 1O?h

5. TECHNICAL SECURITY 10%

6. TECHNICAL DATA INTEGRITY 15%

7. TECHNICAL DATA ACCESS 15%

I I I

I . VENDOR GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS 50% 120 I I I

400

460

520

880

1 2. VENDOR GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS 50% I I I I I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


For their evaluation of the RFP responses, also completed during the Selection process (an embedded part of the Evaluation process), the Acquisition Team further refmed the criteria and these were reflected in the functional and technical evaluation matrices (see Appendix A).

Coupled with the matrices to evaluate the RFP responses, ITCom used their site visits as another means for evaluating the vendors and their software. In accordance with a suggestion from ITCom's CIO, the Acquisition Team spent a full day with each of their short-listed vendors. The Team was accompanied by "three or four guys from IT, one specializing in hardware, another one in software, another one in architecture, and another one in databases or something similar" (CIO).

For the final RFQ, the criteria were even fiuther refined and the evaluation matrix reflected this as well. Other tools that ITCom developed to assist them in their Evaluation process were questionnaires and comparative lists.

As a last stage to the Evaluation process, the Acquisition Team planned to have the short-listed vendors conduct extensive in-house demonstrations that would allow for in-depth evaluation of the functional and technical dimensions of the software. However, an upper management decision aborted the process just prior to this stage.

Choice Process

Although ITCom did not complete the acquisition process, according to the PMT and the Director of Billing Services and Outsourcing, the Team had gotten to the point of knowing exactly who the best vendor/solution was and upper management was made aware of this 'preliminary choice'. Although in-house demonstrations by the Team's short-listed vendors had yet to be conducted to confirm this choice, informal (business) negotiations were begun between the Team and the top vendor. Unfortunately, though, the acquisition process was halted at this point. According to the CIO, the project was aborted because of issues related to source code ownership, software costs, and other contractual obligations that were not to ITCom's liking.

Negotiation Process

Although ITCom did not reach closure in the acquisition process, plans had been laih by the Team during the Planning process for negotiations.

"[The Contract Administrator] was our person responsible for that and we built a strategy together. We had a fav meetings, myselj; [the Contract Administrator], the [MIS Director], and we prepared ourselves for the negotiations. It was very important the way we were going to negotiate." (PMV

While two types of negotiations were planned for, only one type was entered into by the Team with the primary vendor-business.

"We had initiated talks with the top vendo+while their product did win out overall, we wanted to explore the areas where they did fall short, what type of customized development they could or would be willing to do for us, and we were working to get a cost and timeframe for that. Now this was not quite the contract negotiations, but rather, the pre-contract negotiations-we wanter to really understand ijthey were to implement what we needed, what were we talking in terms oftime and cost? I f the decision was positive and we moved forward,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


we would have entered into contract negotiations." (Director of Billing Services and Outsourcing)

ITCom used these less formal negotiations to discuss all issues of concern. It was during these informal business negotiations, however, that an impasse was reached. For issues that included cost and code ownership, among others, ITCom aborted the acquisition process and the purchase was never finalized.

INFLUENCES

Several influences were noted in the case of ITCom. They are categorized below according to their effects on the acquisition process and the Acquisition Team.

Influences on the Acquisition Process

The following items influenced ITCom's ERP acquisition process:

Geographically dispersed team members New management Economic factors Ownership of code Software support for geographically dispersed global operations

Geographically dispersed team members: The relatively new phenomenon of international teams or geographical separation between team members also had an impact on the process. As explained by ITCom's Contract Administrator:

"...another factor that played an influence is the fact that this relationship ([ITCom] - [ITCom Inc.]) is relatively new and working together is still on the learning curve. There are still some adjustments to be made. So, that also played a role. "

New management: New management, in the form of a new CIO, was another influence that affected ITCom's acquisition process. The CIO influenced upper management's decision not to proceed with the acquisition and consequently, the outcome of the process. This influence may be attributed to the CIO's extensive experience in developing similar systems for other organizations within the telecommunication industry:

"At Sprint, we designed and ... built for $6 million, a fully integrated network management system, ... "

Although the CIO was new to the organization, he allowed the Acquisition Team to continue with the process without impeding it. He did, however, guide the Team, offering suggestions at various stages of the process.

"...Let S do a genuine, very sincere, non-biased study of the market [speaking to upper managemenl]. That was why I did not interfee with the Team. Ijust gave them some guidance so that they did not go completely astray and in the wrong direction, but I let them do it ... " fC10)

The final decision, however, came from upper management (ITCom's President) to put the project on hold and eventually, abort it.

5 6

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


Economic factors: The costs associated with the packaged software influenced this decision process.

Ownership of code: The issue of code ownership also influenced the process. According to the Director of Billing Services and Outsourcing:

"...the cost factor as well as having full control and ownership of the software. Had we purchased 'off-the-shelf, you do not have the control of the sofiware, you are dependent to some extent on an outside vendor. "

Also, according to the CIO:

"...when you buy a sojhvare from a vendor, ifyou are trying on this sofiare and you can own the code, wherever the sofiare comes from-India, Pakistan, Taiwan, France, who cares as long as you have the documentation, you understand what it is, and ...yo u own it. "

Given the importance of source code ownership to ITCom, the impasse that was reached during the negotiations on this issue played heavily in the decision to abort the process.

Software support for geographically dispersed global operations: It was of major importance to ITCom that the vendor be capable of supporting the software in ITCom's geographically dispersed global operations. As one of ITCom's criteria for evaluating vendors, this factor influenced their selection process.

Influences on the Acquisition Team

The following items influenced ITCom's Acquisition Team:

Acquisition Team composition New management Final authority outside the Acquisition Team

Acquisition Team composition: The composition of the Acquisition Team influenced the acquisition process. Many of the individuals involved on the Team had prior experience with different parts of the process and had also worked together before on projects. According to the Senior Adviser for Information Systems, these two factors influenced the process:

"...the team was very experienced in this area in terms ofthe whole RFIprocess. We had also worked together before, so we had that going for us as well ... "

New management: As previously mentioned, new management had an impact on ITCom's Acquisition Team.

Final authority outside the Acquisition Team: Another influencing factor was that the final authority rested outside the Acquisition Team. This was visible within the case and it was from this authority that the decision came not to proceed with the acquisition.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


SUMMARY

The acquisition process for a complex ERP solution of the magnitude required by ITCom was a new experience for this organization. Working with project management techniques and tools, ITCom's Acquisition Team created and structured a rigorous and formal process that could have led to the acquisition of a software solution.

One of the Team's objectives throughout the process was to set the foundation for a long-term relationship with the primary vendor. This relationship was considered by ITCom to be important to the long-term success of the acquisition.

In spite of the Team's best efforts and diligence, a successful conclusion to the acquisition process was not reached. Because of the outcome, or rather, the manner in which the process was terminated, an unpleasant feeling of dissatisfaction still remained with the Team members. This feeling can be attributed to the lack of closure they experienced as a result of the decision by ITCom's upper management to halt the process before the Team could submit their final recommendation. With little doubt, past experience will be an influencing factor for individuals involved in the next software acquisition process that is undertaken by ITCom.

REFERENCES

1. Verville, J., An Empirical Study of Organizational Buying Behavior: A Critical Investigation of the Acquisition of "ERP Software", Dissertation, Universite Laval, 2000.

2. Verville, J., and Halingten, A,, Acquiring Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at Their Own Game, Prentice-Hall (PTR), NJ, 2001.

Dr. Jacques Vewille is currently an Assistant Professor of IS in the College of Business Administration at Texas A&M International University. His current research focuses on organizational enterprise software buying behavior, decision-making, implementation and deployment.

Ms. Alannah Halingten, is a Research Associate and a Consultant. Her current research focuses on enterprise software implementation, marketing and deployment.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


APPENDIX A: Excerpts From ITCom's Evaluation Matrices

EVALUATION CATEGORIES & WEIGHTS FOR ITCOM'S BILLING SYSTEM

RATING 12% 1.1 Effective date (yearfmonthtday - hour optional) for all 1.1.1 Support of a rate approval process 1.1.2 Specific security required for rate verification by 1.1.3 Support rate upload or interface to external source 1.1.4 Rates in the rate table in different currencies 1.2 Ability to rate individual call records. 1.3 Ability to capture partial monthly traMic estimate 1.4 ... 1.8.9

INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENT 2% 8.1 With PTT and others emerging carriers 8.2 Processing of outgoing declarations based on : 8.2.1 - PTT declarations (declared traffic) 8.2.2 - Measured traffic 8.2.3 - Customer or vendor declaration 8.3 Processing of incoming declaration based on : 8.3.1 - PTT declaration (declared traffic) 8.3.2 - The production of simulated declaration andfor 8.3.3 ... 8.18

USER FRIENDLY 4% 14.1 Uses Window's standards as established by Ms- 14.2 On-line processes are simple and user-friendly 14.3 On-Line processes accessible using : 14.3.1 - menus (with mouse) 14.3.2 - icons (with mouse) 14.4 Direct access (tc short cut ))) for experienced users 14.4.1 On-line panels are documented (HELP) 14.4.2 Help text is customizable 14.4.3 Help is context sensitive 14.4.4 Existence of global index 14.4.5 Help uses a standard Windows like interface 14.5 Shows possible field values 14.5.1 Multiple fields search on each panel 14.5.2 Multiple sort available on each panel 14.6 Easy reading and understanding of screen elements 14.7 Consistency of panel formats throughout the 14.8 Panels, HELP and internal reports : 14.8.1 - English 14.8.2 - Multi-lingual 14.9 User reports : 14.9.1 - English 14.9.2 - Multi-lingual

Rating (Max. Score)

1690 40 40 24 24 40 40 40

1100 24

40 40 40

40 40

870 40 40

40 40 16 24 24 24 24 40 40 40 40 40 40

40 8

40 8

Score Score a s a %

of Rating

Score a s a % of Total Rating

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


FOR ACQUIRING COMPLEX ERP SOLUTIONS: THE CASE OF ITCOM~

Research Note

A review of the literature from the field of Management Information Systems (hereafter referred to as MIS) indicates that little research has been done in the area of ERP acquisitions (Verville, 2000; Bingi et al., 1999; Boudreau & Robey, 1999; Brown & Vessey, 1999; Caglio & Newrnan, 1999; Verville, 1998). Several studies (Koh, Soh, and Markus, 2000; Bingi et al., 1999; Boudreau & Robey, 1999; Brown and Vessey, 1999; Hill, 1999; Miranda, 1999; Riper & Durham, 1999; Sieber T. et al, 1997), however, have focused on other areas that relate to the topic of ERPs, and these include the implementation of ERP systems, user buy-in, commitment, leadership, organizational culture, stakeholders, organizational learning, and communications, to name but a few. The objective with this research on the process for acquiring ERP software was to understand how organizations such as ITCom buy sophisticated and complex packaged sofhvare solutions such as ERPs. Further, the results of the study revealed some theoretically interesting as well as practical implications for, among others, ERP implementations. While the intention was not to address those implications herein, they are reserved for future studies.

A review of the literature from the field of industrial marketing in the area of Organizational Buying Behavior (OBB) shows that, in the past thirty years, conceptual models such as Webster and Wind's (1972) "General Model of Organizational Buying Behavior" and Sheth's (1973) "Model of Industrial Buyer Behavior" have been developed to understand organizational buying. Webster and Wind's (1972) model is based on four classes of buying behavior determinants (individual, interpersonal, organizational and environmental) and incorporates the concept of the buying center whose response to purchase (i.e., buying behavior) is analyzed as a function of these determinants. Sheth's (1973) model attempts to describe and explain all types of industrial buying decisions, and is characterized by three main elements: (I) the psychological characteristics of the individuals involved; (2) the conditions that precipitate joint decision making; and (3) the conflict resolution procedures affecting joint decision making. Both the Webster and Wind and the Sheth models identify factors that influence the buying process. Both models also include a distinction as to whether the buying decision is a groupljoint or individuaVautonomous decision. Neither model, however, provides any hint as to the construct of even a general buying process that is used by organizations. Studies that ensued from these OBB models were conducted primarily on the patterns of behavior and influences across a variety of buying situations. Current research focus continues in the same vein.

Neither field (MIS nor industrial marketing [OBB]) has adequately considered the acquisition of ERP software and its associated process(es). Little insight has therefore been provided on this area.

6 A detailed teaching note is available directly from the publisher for the instructors adopting this case for classroom discussion.

60

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14


Given the lack of literature on this specific subject, the case study approach was selected as the best means to gain the maximum knowledge and understanding about packaged software acquisition activities, issues, dynamics and complexities. The case study herein was part of a multiple-case design of four organizations that had recently completed ERP software acquisition projects. The primary focus of the study was the acquisition process and neither the outcomes nor the products were considered significant to the study. Data was collected by means of interviews with key participants and from documents generated during the acquisition projects. Individual and cross-case analyses were conducted with each case.

REFERENCES:

1. Appleton, E.L., How to Serve ERP. Datamation, March, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 50-53, 1997. 2. Bingi, P., Sharma, M.K., and Godla, J.K., Critical Issues Affecting an ERP

Implementation. Information Systems Management, Summer 1999, pp. 7 -14. 3. Boudreau, M.C., and Robey, D., Organizational Transition to Enterprise Resource

Planning Systems: Theoretical Choices for Process Research. Proceeding ICIS, Charlotte NC, pp. 291 - 299,1999.

4. Brown, C., and Vessey, I., ERP Implementation Approaches: Toward a Contingency Framework. Proceeding ICIS, Charlotte NC, pp. 4 1 1 - 4 16, 1999.

5. Caglio, A., and Newman, M., Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning Systems: Implications for Management Accountants. Proceeding ICIS, Charlotte NC, pp. 405- 4 10, 1999.

6. Hill, S., Jr., It Just Takes Work. Manufacturing Systems, Selecting and Implementing Solutions Supplement, pp. A2-A 10, 1999.

7. Koh, C., Soh, C., and Markus, L., A Process Theory Approach to Analyzing ERP Implementation and Impacts: The Case of Revel Asia. Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 4-23,2000.

8. Miranda, R., The Rise of ERP Technology in the Public Sector. Government Finance Review, August, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 9-17, 1999.

9. Riper, K., and Durham, M.J., Phased ERP Implementation: The City of Des Moines Experience. Government Finance Review, August, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 37-42,1999.

10. Sieber, T., Siau, K., Nah, F., and Sieber, M., SAP Implementation at the University of Nebrask. Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 4 1- 69,2000.

11. Sheth, J.N., A Model of Industrial Buyer Behavior. Joumal of Marketing, vol. 37, October 1973, pp. 50-56.

12. Verville, J., and Halingten, A., Acquiring Enterprise Sofhvare: Beating the Vendors at Their Own Game, Prentice-Hall (PTR), NJ, 2001.

13. Verville, J.C., An Empirical Study of Organizational Buying Behavior: A Critical Investigation of the Acquisition of "ERP Software". Dissertation, UniversitC Laval, Quebec, 2000.

14. Verville, J.C., An Exploratory Study of How Organizations Buy "Packaged" SofMare, in Effective Utilization and Management of Emerging Information Technologies, M. Khosrowpour (ed.), 1998 Information Resources Management Association (IRMA) International Conference, Boston, MA, May 1998.

15. Webster, F.E., and Wind, Y., Organizational Buying Behavior. Prentice-Hall, 1972.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

4:40

27

Nov

embe

r 20

14

decision process for acquiring complex erp solutions: the case of itcom

Documents