IT Consultants and

Packaged Software Selection

Debra HowcroftCRESC and MBS

University of Manchester, UKdebra.howcroft@mbs.ac.uk

Research Focus

• The process of selection and procurement of a software package within a small organization

• Analyses the case in the context of Markus and Bjorn-Anderson’s (1987) framework of power

Packaged software

• Increasing numbers of organizations shifting from custom to packaged software

• Sold as an ‘IT solution’ with a track record of success

• Delivers complex systems in short time-frame

• ‘Package paradox’ (Williams, 2005)

Product-oriented development

• Focus is on developing and ‘shipping’ a generic product

• Standardisation is pre-requisite for commodification (Fan et al. 2000)

• Developers (rather than users) needs are central

• IT consultants role is crucial as they position themselves between IT vendors and the client

Inscribed assumptions

• Packaged software is itself embedded or inscribed with assumptions, values and opinions – ‘frozen organizational discourse’ (Bowker and

Star, 1994)

• Software embodies scripts of particular behaviours (Akrich, 1992)– Organization may need to change itself or the

package

Guidelines on selection and procurement

DefineUser

Requirements

Package

EvaluationFinal selection

and purchase

(Lynch, 1987; Sharland, 1991; Bansler and Havn, 1994; Chau, 1995; Stefanou, 2001) (Martin and McClure, 1983; Nelson et al., 1996; KPMG, 1998) )

Power framework

• Markus and Bjorn-Anderson drawn on Lukes (1974) three-dimensional view of power– Considers covert power– Seeks to problematize consensus

• This framework is applied to custom systems development

Power framework

• Technical exercise of power– IS professionals select design features that users

object to

• Structural exercise of power– IS professionals create organizational structures and

routines that give them formal authority

• Conceptual exercise of power– IS professionals define the parameters of design

• Symbolic exercise of power– IS professionals shape users desires and values

Research Method

• Action research

• Our role as researchers’ ranged from that of detached observer to fully engaged participant

• Our primary responsibility was to the IT Manager

• Multiple techniques of data collection

Case study setting

• Owner-managed business• Established in 1990, three locations, with a

turnover of £1.1m• Around 20 internal staff and 20 external

consultants• MD had a strong organizational ‘vision’• IT systems established in an ad-hoc

manner, running independently of each other

The Client Tracking Process

Employed or Performance Improvement

Client(s) MentoringMentoring

The Research Department and External Consultants

Gathering Requirements

• We advised of the importance of discussing requirements with users

• A focus day was planned• Documentation hoped to appeal to

senior management

“to provide a business class service and grow effectively in the future whilst maintaining efficiency in all areas” (Board of Directors Document)

The Product Search

• Project team made use of marketing literature, internet, commercial product guides etc. to short-list products

• Negotiations set up with three CRM vendors.

Party A: Siebel

Vendor B: Sage

Party C and D: Goldmine

The ‘Beauty Parade’

• Party C’s ‘standard’ product– ‘Goldmine isn’t for us’– Wanted exploration of custom development

• Party D’s ‘personalised’ product– Vendor primed by project team– Marginally more expensive than Party C– Same Product– Budget Doubled– Scope extended

Implementation Process

• The package roll out order changed significantly

• Workflow day planned with end-users

• Signing off the workflow document

“This isn’t over, I expect the workflow document to be double the size it is now – you just see.”(Interview with IT Manager)

PS and the technical exercise of power

• Sociotechnical boundary is fluid

• Arguably, Goldmine is already fixed to a certain degree

• IT consultants position themselves as knowledgeable experts and define the sociotechnical boundary according to their audience

PS and the structural exercise of power

• Appointment of the IT Manager initiated a process of ‘IS professionalisation’ which saw the development of a number of policies

• Linked to the desire to provide greater control over the forthcoming project

• Externally, there are guidelines that govern how packages should be adopted

• Policies on new product releases, patches, and upgrades are also determined by vendor organizations

PS and the conceptual exercise of power

• At the market level, packaged software products are sold on the basis of realising an ‘ideal’

• System objectives were decided by the senior management team– improved profitability and enhanced market share

• Boundaries shift over time to fit the changing needs of senior management– ‘consultants do not so much target themselves at a

particular niche as seek to create a niche and persuade clients that they are within it’ (Bloomfield and Danieli, 1995 )

PS and the symbolic exercise of power

• The myths or fictional narratives of PS become increasingly pervasive as the benefits are evangelised

• Technology = progress– the CRM package would contribute towards

enhancing productivity and profitability via standardisation of activities

• The power of the Board of Directors is evident in the process of persuasion and enrolment surrounding the securing of the financial resources for the project

• Legitimizing devices of language, myth, ceremony, and rituals are all evident

Conclusion

• The categories of power should not be viewed separately, but are interwoven

• M&BA Framework has resonance in a packaged software environment

• Increasing market-orientation (Sawyer, 2001) has meant that power issues are operationalised both within the organization and in the marketplace, thus influencing the role of various parties– IT consultants play a primary role as third-party implementers,

liaising between vendors and the adopting organization– IT professionals are expected to negotiate a range of financial

and contractual issues with IT consultants– end-users involved in operational issues have minimal

participation and influence.

References

• Howcroft D and Light B (2002) A study of user involvement in packaged software selection, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Information Systems, (eds. Applegate, L, Galliers R D and DeGross J I), 69-77.

• Howcroft D and Light B (2006) Reflections on issues of power in packaged software selection, Information Systems Journal,16, 215-235.