vendor consultant experiences developing erp proposals …30067357/chamberlain-vendor... · vendor...
TRANSCRIPT
Vendor Consultant Experiences Developing
ERP Proposals for SMEs
by
Jeffrey Chamberlain
BBus (Acc), G.Cert ECom, G.Cert Higher Ed., G. Dip ECom, CPA, MECom
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Deakin University
June 2014
AAcknowledgements
To Professor Tanya Castleman for her unwavering motivation, encouragement,
guidance, wisdom and calming influence throughout this project.
To Dr Craig Parker and his amazing talent for the research craft, his eagle eye, his
diligence, attentiveness and inspiration.
To Jess, Alex and Laura for your patience, encouragement and support throughout
this project. You can have your husband and dad back now!
To Max (Dad) for demonstrating a resolute passion for learning and research over the
decades. It truly has inspired this chip off the old block!
To SME ERP Vendor Consultants in Victoria. Your enthusiastic participation gave me
the drive and determination to see this project through. Your lot is not an easy one. I
salute you.
i
TTable of Contents
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... i
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... ii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................... vii
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ viii
Abstract ....................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 ERP Systems for SMEs .............................................................................................. 4
1.3 Benefits of ERP systems for SMEs ............................................................................ 6
1.4 SME adoption of ERP systems ................................................................................. 8
1.5 VC techniques for developing ERP proposals for SMEs ........................................... 9
1.6 Research Aim ......................................................................................................... 10
1.7 Thesis Outline ........................................................................................................ 12
Chapter 2: Literature Review ..................................................................................... 15
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 15
2.2 Large Firms and ERPs ............................................................................................. 15
2.3 SME Characteristics and ERPs/ICTs ........................................................................ 19
2.4 SMEs and alignment of strategy with ERP/ICT ...................................................... 22
2.4.1 SMEs and their strategic mindset ............................................................................... 23
2.4.2 SMEs and their ICT expertise ...................................................................................... 24
2.4.3 ERPs and alignment with business strategies ............................................................ 24
2.5 SMEs and alignment of business processes with ERP/ICT ..................................... 26
2.5.1 SMEs and business process change issues ................................................................. 26
2.5.2 SMEs and issues around tailoring ERP systems .......................................................... 27
2.5.2.1 Tailoring by ERP modules, business resources and capabilities ............................ 30
2.5.2.2 Tailoring by ERP module configuration .................................................................. 31
ii
2.5.2.3 Tailoring by ERP module customisation ................................................................. 32
2.6 Addressing SME ERP capability gaps...................................................................... 33
2.6.1 SMEs and ICT education ............................................................................................. 34
2.6.2 SMEs and the role of Vendor/Consultants (VCs) ........................................................ 35
2.7 Vendor-Consultant experiences developing ERP proposals for SMEs ................... 37
2.7.1 The importance of ERP proposal development .......................................................... 38
2.7.2 VC techniques/roles for dealing with heterogeneous SME clients ............................ 40
2.7.2.1 Relationship development ..................................................................................... 40
2.7.2.2 Client competency development ........................................................................... 41
2.7.2.3 Solving clients’ business problems ......................................................................... 41
2.7.3 VC experiences with proposal methodology .............................................................. 42
2.8 Summary ................................................................................................................ 43
Chapter 3: Conceptualising VC ERP Proposal Development for SMEs ....................... 45
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 45
3.2 Strategic theory and SMEs .......................................................................................... 45
3.2.1 The Industry Structure View .............................................................................................. 46
3.2.2 The Resource Based View .................................................................................................. 47
3.3 VRIO for conceptualising SME ERP proposals by VCs ............................................ 51
3.3.1 Identify valuable resources ........................................................................................ 52
3.3.2 Identify rare resources ............................................................................................... 54
3.3.3 Identify imperfectly imitable resources ..................................................................... 55
3.3.4 Organisation – ERPs enable processes aligned with VRI resources ........................... 57
3.3.5 Summarising the VRIO framework adapted for SME ERP proposals ......................... 59
3.4 Conceptual framework combining VRIO and BPM ................................................ 62
3.4.1 BPM methodology ...................................................................................................... 63
3.4.2 BPM tools ................................................................................................................... 65
3.5 Summary ................................................................................................................ 67
Chapter 4: Research Approach ................................................................................... 70
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 70
iii
4.2 Research Aims ........................................................................................................ 70
4.3 Research Perspective ............................................................................................. 71
4.4 Research Method ................................................................................................... 73
4.5 Research Design ..................................................................................................... 77
4.5.1 The Sample ................................................................................................................. 78
4.5.2 The Interview Schedule .............................................................................................. 80
4.5.3 Interactions during the interviews ............................................................................. 83
4.6 Data Transcription and Analysis ............................................................................ 84
4.7 Data Verification .................................................................................................... 87
4.8 Limitations of the research .................................................................................... 88
4.9 Summary ................................................................................................................ 89
Chapter 5: Findings ..................................................................................................... 90
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 90
5.2 The Complex Roles of VCs ...................................................................................... 90
5.2.1 Problem solving .......................................................................................................... 92
5.2.2 Time/Cost management ............................................................................................. 93
5.2.3 Relationship development ......................................................................................... 96
5.2.4 Education .................................................................................................................... 99
5.2.5 Client management .................................................................................................. 102
5.2.5.1 Dealing with the time constraints of SME clients ................................................ 102
5.2.5.2 Eliciting intellectual property and financial information ..................................... 104
5.2.5.3 Dealing with staff conflicts within SME prospects ............................................... 106
5.2.6 Competitive and influence management role .......................................................... 108
5.2.7 Summary of the VC role ........................................................................................... 109
5.3 Methodological Techniques of VCs...................................................................... 109
5.3.1 Proposal development scoping ........................................................................................ 110
5.3.1.1 The timing and effect of ERP system demonstrations ......................................... 111
5.3.1.2 The timing and effect of reference site visits ....................................................... 113
5.3.2 Proposal development analysis and redesign .................................................................. 114
iv
5.4 Dealing with clients’ business processes ............................................................. 116
5.4.1 VCs and adapting processes to ERPs ........................................................................ 117
5.4.2 Difficulties in eliciting unique business processes .................................................... 119
5.4.3 Tailoring ERPs for SMEs ............................................................................................ 121
5.5 Incorporating clients’ strategies .......................................................................... 123
5.6 Summary .............................................................................................................. 129
Chapter 6: Discussion ............................................................................................... 131
6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 131
6.2 What are the common VC experiences during proposal development? .................. 132
6.3 How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles? ....................................... 133
6.3.1 Extending the literature on VC roles ........................................................................ 134
6.3.2 New VC roles not found in the literature ................................................................. 138
6.4 What information do VCs elicit from SMEs and how? .............................................. 139
6.4.1 Extending the literature on eliciting information about client strategy .................. 140
6.4.2 Extending the literature on eliciting information about client processes ................ 142
6.5 What types of adjustments do VCs find effective when preparing proposals? ........ 145
6.6 Theorising VC proposal development techniques to tailor ERPs for SMEs ............... 146
6.6.1 Theorising VC proposal techniques to tailor ERPs to SME strategic resources ........ 148
6.6.2 Theorising VC proposal techniques to tailor ERPs to SME non-strategic resources 150
6.6.3 Techniques for developing proposals tailoring ERPs based on BPM principles ....... 151
6.6.4 Theorising future opportunities for VCs developing ERP proposals for SMEs ......... 152
6.7 Summary .................................................................................................................... 154
Chapter 7: Conclusion .............................................................................................. 155
7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 155
7.2 Contribution to knowledge .................................................................................. 157
7.2.1 The role and approaches of VCs during proposal development .............................. 157
7.2.2 The conceptual framework ...................................................................................... 160
7.2.3 The relationship between VCs and SMEs ................................................................. 161
v
7.3 Recommendations for VC practice ...................................................................... 162
7.3.1 Recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to SME strategies ....... 162
7.3.2 Recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to SME processes ....... 165
7.3.3 Recommendations for the VCs own business model ............................................... 168
7.4 Limitations of the research project ...................................................................... 170
7.5 Further Research Directions ................................................................................ 171
Appendices ............................................................................................................... 173
Appendix 1 – Interview Schedule ............................................................................. 174
Appendix 2 – Eight Step Methodological Framework .............................................. 179
Appendix 3 – Example NVivo Data Coding ............................................................... 185
References ................................................................................................................ 192
vi
LList of Tables
Table 2.1 Categorised examples of critical success factors of ERP implementation ............................ 18
Table 2.2 The dimensions of ERP tailoring ........................................................................................... 29
Table 3.1 Summary of VRIO concepts in the context of this study ...................................................... 61
Table 5.1 VC perspectives, following prompting, about dedicating time to understand strategies. . 125
vii
AAbbreviations
Acronym Meaning
APQC American Productivity and Quality Centre ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics BPA Business Process Architecture BPM Business Process Management BPMN Business Process Modeling and Notation BPMS Business Process Management Suite BPR Business Process Reengineering CDM Capabilities Development Model CEO Chief Executive Officer CRM Client/Customer Relationship Management CSM Competence Sort Model ERP Enterprise Resource Planning ICT Information and Communication Technology IP Intellectual Property IS Information System/s ISV Industry Structure View NDA Non-Disclosure Agreement ODBC Open Database Connectivity RBV Resource Based View RFI Request For Information RFP Request For Price RFQ Request For Quote SaaS Software as a Service SISP Strategic Information Systems Planning SME Small and Medium Enterprise SOA Service Oriented Architecture SQL Structured Query Language SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats TCO Total Cost of Ownership TCX Transformation, Coordination, Externality TQM Total Quality Management VC Vendor Consultant VRIO Value, Rarity, Imperfect Imitability, Organisation XML Extensible Mark-up Language
viii
AAbstract
An increasing number of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are moving beyond
simple forms of information and communications technologies (ICT) and adopting
enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, anticipating that this will assist the
running of their businesses. ERPs emerged as a realistic option for SMEs only over the
past few years as ERP manufacturers have developed and adapted their systems for
this sector. Information systems literature about ERPs has generally focused on large
organisations for which ERPs were originally intended (Davenport 2000; Srivastava &
Batra 2010) and has been mainly concerned with implementation benefits, costs and
success factors. Some seminal authors researching ERPs in an SME context have
provided valuable insights into ERP planning and implementation, but these are
mainly seen from the SME’s perspective (Argyropoulou et al. 2008; Malhotra &
Temponi 2010; Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila 2007) and the perspective
of the vendor consultants (VCs) who develop their systems has been largely
overlooked. The importance of acquiring vendor consultant assistance for ERP
implementations into SMEs is briefly addressed in the literature, and has generally
highlighted the paucity of SMEs’ ERP knowledge and capabilities (Doom et al. 2010;
Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007). Previous research has also tended to ignore
the ERP proposal development process which is a critical stage because it is at this
point that issues of the SMEs’ strategies and business processes must be dealt with
through ERP tailoring. This research therefore investigates the VCs’ experience of the
most effective techniques for developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for SMEs,
taking the SMEs’ issues into account.
Fifty ERP vendor consulting firms based in Melbourne, Australia, were identified using
ERP directories, Google search engine and Yellow Pages Online. Following analysis of
the web presences of all fifty vendor consulting firms, thirty one companies were
selected as suitable, because they provided solutions to small and/or medium firms,
and were invited to participate. Twenty one of the firms agreed. Semi-structured, in-
depth interviews were conducted with twenty three VCs from these firms to gain a
rich understanding of their proposal development techniques and their assessment
of the effectiveness of these techniques. Analysis of the interview transcripts enabled
ix
an understanding of the proposal development process, highlighting the VCs’
understanding of their role, methodologies and relationships with their clients during
this stage.
The analysis of the interviews revealed that:
The VCs’ role is more complex than is generally portrayed in the literature.
Detailed solutions must be formulated whilst managing SME heterogeneity,
their unique perspectives and varying capabilities. The VCs’ role includes a mix
of product sales and business solution consultancy. The short-term sales focus
used by many of the VCs has a tendency to detract from developing a long
term solution relationship with SMEs.
The VCs’ methodologies for proposal development are influenced by tensions
among variables such as time, cost and levels of system customisation. These
tensions can adversely impact the quality of the ERP proposal itself.
VCs rarely address issues of client strategy in their analysis and do not have a
formal or systematic understanding of business process management (BPM).
They instead focus on client business processes from technical ERP viewpoints
and the ways in which they can adapt these to the software. Thus, proposals
are unlikely to reflect strategically aligned business processes.
VCs typically do not formally distinguish business processes from client
strategies. The resource based view (RBV) of strategy with its Value, Rarity,
Imitability and Organisation (VRIO) framework (Barney & Hesterly 2012)
offers a useful conceptual framework for understanding the research findings
because it highlights connections between business processes and strategies.
This thesis argues that if VCs apply this framework it might result in more
successful SME ERP proposals and consequent implementation outcomes.
This research contributes to our understanding of how VCs approach and navigate
the proposal development process and, in particular, how they address strategic,
x
business process and technology factors. The findings suggest that if VCs recognise
the SME client’s strategies and incorporate a more explicit perspective informed by
the VRIO framework and BPM principles, they could produce more informed ERP
proposals. This has implications for practice. It is recommended that further research
attention be directed to the proposal development stage from both VC and SME
perspectives to address limitations of this research such as the focus on ERP VCs from
Australia.
xi
CChapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are types of Information Systems (IS)
which are now used widely by large organisations especially in developed economies
(Fulford 2013; Hsu 2013; Katerattanakul, Lee & Hong 2014; Schniederjans & Tadav
2013). ERPs manage data and processes across the different functions of business,
and thus reduce the need for an organisation to use disparate systems for such
business functions as accounting, purchasing and customer databases (Focus 2009).
Manufacturers or vendors of ERP systems have traditionally focused on the needs of
large organisations. However, the market for ERP systems aimed at large
organisations is now saturated (Deep et al. 2008) and, as a consequence, ERP vendors
are now manufacturing for, and promoting the benefits of, ERP systems to the small
and medium enterprise (SME) sector. Individual vendor consultants (VCs) play a key
role in the promotion and development of ERP systems for SMEs.
ERP VCs see SMEs as a lucrative market because of the sheer number of SMEs
compared to larger organisations (Dietze 2013). In Australia, for example, the
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) statistics from June 2011 indicated that of the
2,132,412 actively trading businesses in Australia, 99.72% are SMEs based on the
definition of employing fewer than 200 employees, while less than 1% of these are
large organisations employing 200 or more people (ABS 2012). Even if sole-traders
(61.2%) and businesses employing fewer than five staff (23.9%) are, arguably, not
considered as potential targets for ERP VCs, there are still 230,638 (10.82%) small
businesses in Australia employing 5-19 staff and 81,006 employing (3.8%) medium
businesses employing 20-199 staff which might include potential candidates for ERP
systems.
Targeting SMEs presents new challenges for VCs because SME clients, unlike larger
organisations, are characteristically time poor, have limited finances and often lack
skills and knowledge pertaining to information and communications technology (ICT)
1
and ERP systems (Christofi et al. 2013; Hustad & Olsen 2011; Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo,
Oliveira & Neto 2014; Walsh, Schubert & Jones 2010; Wymer & Regan 2011). This
means that VCs cannot assume SMEs have the resources and capabilities common in
large organisations, to lead ERP projects through the typical pre-implementation
(proposal development), implementation and post implementation phases because
of the SMEs’ scarcity of time available to commit to projects of this complexity and
their lack of understanding about ERP systems and how to actually administer such
projects. For example, for SMEs with little understanding about ERP systems, it would
be difficult to strike a balance between functionality needed from ERPs and the
affordability of this. Similarly, it is also likely to be equally difficult for SMEs to, for
example, prioritise ERP functionality needed when ERPs characteristically work
across functions and so require several functional modules at the same time to work
effectively.
A further challenge for ERP VCs is that the businesses within the SME sector are
heterogeneous across an array of attributes such as their number of employees, age
or lifecycle, industry sector, and even business goals (Dietze 2013; Parker, Chan &
Saundage 2007). These SME attributes add complexity to the VC’s task of tailoring
the design of ERP systems that are specific to the needs and circumstances of their
SME clients, a task that is completed before implementation of the system. SME
heterogeneity means, for example, that unlike large organisations where individuals
typically work exclusively in one organisational function, SME personnel can find
themselves working in several. This is likely to have implications for the ways in which
the SME ERP is designed by VCs. Some process steps might be consolidated for
example, or even removed if not necessary because the same individual is processing
the work resulting in uniqueness of business processes not seen in large businesses
operating to ERP standards. Such process nuances will impact the way VCs need to
consider the ERP proposal in terms of ERP system tailoring. This highlights the
importance of the proposal development process. If such nuances, resulting from
SME heterogeneity, are overlooked before the ERP system is implemented, then VCs
run the risk of recommending a system that cannot deliver what is promised during
2
proposal development, in other words, unique processes that help the SMEs to derive
competitive advantages, if lost upon system implementation, might damage the
SMEs.
Recent evidence from the academic and practitioner literature suggests that ERP VCs
in various countries are grappling with these problems. For example, Chewning
(2013) states that failure rates of ERP implementations in the SME sector have been
reported to be as high as 70%. The academic literature (Hsu 2013) and practitioner
reports (Chewning 2013; Dietze 2013; Jocumsen 2013; Krigsman 2011) suggest that
such failures are, in part, due to ERP systems not always delivering what SMEs initially
expected. For example, a 2011 survey on ERP projects involving small business
revealed substantial increases in late and over budget projects in relation to the
previous year’s survey as well as a significant (48%) failure to deliver anticipated
benefits. This suggests that VCs may not be tailoring ERP systems according to the
heterogeneous needs of their SME clients. Major issues faced, reported in the 2011
SME ERP survey, were that failed implementation times (i.e. longer than expected
roll outs) for ERPs increased from 35.5% in 2009 to 61.1% in 2010; whilst cases where
costs exceeded budgets increased from 51.4% in 2009 to 74.1% in 2010 (Krigsman
2011). Much of this failure was reported in the survey’s commentary as a failure by
managers and business owners to plan their ERP implementations realistically.
Overall, this indicates that it is important to explore the techniques that VCs find
effective for developing proposals that tailor their ERP systems for SME clients,
whereby these techniques would need to take into account SME-specific
characteristics and the heterogeneity of this sector. Proposals for ERP systems are
typically documents prepared by VCs and presented to clients. Proposals contain
details about the ERP system recommended for client businesses. Broadly, proposal
details typically include information about the business problems being addressed;
information about the ERP modules (software components) the VC believes will
address these problems; estimated costs associated with the implementation of the
modules; and estimated time frames involved in the implementation of the system.
3
By exploring the techniques that VCs use at the proposal stage, the extent of the VC’s
acknowledgement of the SMEs’ unique characteristics and heterogeneity will
become clear, reflecting the extent to which this acknowledgement is taken into
account as they make ERP recommendations for inclusion in their proposals. This will
bring to light opportunities for proposal development improvements in cases where
these are produced with little acknowledgement by VCs of such characteristics and
heterogeneity.
The following sections provide background to this research problem by describing the
types of ERP systems available for SMEs; the benefits ERP VCs expect that SMEs can
achieve from ERP systems; the adoption of SME systems by SMEs; and the techniques
that VCs use for developing ERP proposals for SMEs. This is followed by the research
aim and an outline of the chapters of the thesis.
11.2 ERP Systems for SMEs
ERPs often replace traditional, separate IS which automate and manage data and
processes within a single organisational function such as accounting or sales, with a
single ERP which supports cross-functional operations. An ERP system utilises a single
database, and each module of the ERP system that supports a functional area of the
business draws its data and application services from the system (Srivastava & Batra
2010, p. 2; Sumner 2005, p. 2).
ERP systems can consist of many modules which can be implemented to satisfy the
needs of SMEs. Some of these can be specific to particular business sectors, for
example, manufacturing modules are specific to SMEs in manufacturing industries
and help to manage process flows and resources pertaining to factory production
lines. Typical to most ERP systems designed for SMEs, however, are modules
pertaining to such business functions as finance (to manage processes such as
accounting and investments); human resources (to manage processes such as
payrolls; sales and distribution (to manage invoicing for products and services and
the delivery of these to customers); and production planning (to manage the flow of
raw materials into the firm and the efficient processing of these upon arrival in
4
accordance with customer needs and sales projections) (Srivastava and Batra 2011;
Sumner 2005).
There are many competing ERP providers offering ERP systems to the SME market.
Some providers are multinational companies such as Microsoft and SAP (Microsoft
2014; SAP 2014) which manufacture ERP systems. Others are local (Australian)
manufacturers such as MYOB, which do not offer direct vendor consulting services
with their software, and Pronto Software and Uniware which do offer direct vendor
consulting services. Providers of ERP systems also include VCs who do not
manufacture ERP software but who specialise in particular ERP systems (including
those offered by the aforementioned companies) and resell these to clients along
with ERP consulting expertise. This research project focused on these non-
manufacturing VCs, and those which manufactured ERP software and offered direct
vendor consulting services to SMEs.
The ERP systems that have been designed for SMEs are reported by their vendors to
be smaller, quicker to implement, less expensive and easier to use than those systems
designed for larger organisations (Microsoft 2014; SAP 2014). These systems are
typically abridged or smaller versions of the ERP systems designed for large
businesses, but because they are smaller they are more affordable. Some of these
systems include those which are installed on an SME’s own IT infrastructure. Some
ERP vendors even offer ‘cloud based’ ERP software so that SMEs simply log into the
vendor’s ERP system via a web browser to access and store their business data and
administer business processes and reports. ‘Cloud based’ systems help SMEs to
reduce costs associated with building IT infrastructure (such as hardware and system
servers) and alleviates the need for SMEs to perform ERP software upgrades (Bizowie
2014).
An essential aspect of ERP systems is their ability to be tailored to suit specific or
unique processes of a business (Srivastava & Batra 2010, pp. 35-6). Tailoring means
that the modules of a system can be specifically selected to suit the business needs
and then either configured (e.g. clicking check boxes and radio buttons, specifying
5
business rules such as percentages or amounts) to enable consistent flows of
business processes through the ERP system. Another form of tailoring includes
customising modules through a process of reprogramming the actual code in the
software.
11.3 Benefits of ERP systems for SMEs
ERP researchers report a range of benefits of ERP systems for SMEs to include, for
example, superior functionality to legacy systems; close integration with other
database systems such as client relationship management systems (CRM) and supply
chain management systems (SCM) (and often this type of system functionality is
included as modules built into ERPs but for the purposes of this research the focus is
ERP systems even if these additional modules are not included); and support for
future growth (Ramdani, Chevers & Williams 2013; Ramdani, Kawalek & Lorenzo
2009; Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira & Neto 2014; Teittinen, Pellinen & Jarvenpaa
2012). SMEs can therefore harness several strategic and operational benefits that are
not available in more functionally oriented software systems such as accounting or
customer relationship management systems. In this sense, ERPs are capable of linking
SMEs’ unique business strategies (e.g. growth) to uniquely orchestrated processes,
by tailoring them to transition smoothly from older, less efficient processes to newer,
more streamlined and cost reducing processes, and providing valuable (and in most
cases, real time) information about those processes as they move through the
system. In this way an ERP system can be tailored to suit a particular SME, helping to
ensure that its strategy informs its business processes which are performed by the
ERP system – an alignment of all three is enabled.
For example, unique business strategies to reduce costs of processing sales orders
for particular products selected every quarter in line with, say, seasonal conditions,
can be operationalised through the ERP system. This can be done by taking into
account unique business processes (driven by, for example, seasonal change)
performed by individuals in the business involving such functions as purchasing,
warehousing, sales, accounting and logistics and streamlining this whole process
6
through automation wherever possible. This is more effective than if the processes
from end-to-end were performed manually using paper forms or email
communications and spreadsheets, which can be a more common approach used by
SMEs (Christofi et al. 2013; Ramdani, Chevers & Williams 2013).
From a business process perspective, alignment of an SME’s ERP offers important
operational benefits, such as reducing data redundancy and increasing
data/information accuracy that typically occurs with disparate IS, each with their own
separate databases (AberdeenGroup 2010; Focus 2009). Disparately located
databases and business information is characteristic of SMEs. The resulting
inefficiencies reduce SMEs’ abilities to make decisions and respond rapidly to
changing market conditions. An ERP system can draw all of this information, plus the
SME’s unique processes, together, thus increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of
internal information and process flows. This can help to reverse these inefficiencies
(Christofi et al. 2013; Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira & Neto 2012; Teittinen,
Pellinen & Jarvenpaa 2012; Zach & Munkvold 2011).
From a business strategy perspective, alignment of a SME’s ERP can provide several
benefits such as enhancing the speed of products and services to market (thus
exploiting first mover advantages); capturing internal knowledge; and facilitating
capabilities for continued internal learning (Garg & Goyal 2012; Gratton & Ghoshal
2005; Uhlenbruck, Meyer & Hitt 2003). To survive, SMEs often need to integrate
systems with large suppliers. The ERP practitioner literature highlights that ERPs
enable the close integration of SMEs and larger organisations via Internet connected
ERP systems, including ‘Cloud based’ ERP systems (Deep et al. 2008; Dietze 2013).
This literature emphasises that for SMEs wanting to grow, ERPs tailored for them can
specifically assist by providing functionality that their legacy accounting software
packages cannot. For example, ERP systems can support new subsidiaries, offices,
branches or outlets in multiple states (or even countries), as well as administer
rapidly growing numbers of users and transactions (Focus 2009; Sage 2011).
7
With benefits that support SME characteristics and heterogeneity, as well as the
alignment of processes with strategies, it seems inevitable that more ERP
implementations will occur in the SME sector across developed economies.
11.4 SME adoption of ERP systems
Despite the potential benefits of ERP systems for SMEs, it has been widely reported
that adoption by SMEs in recent years has been relatively slow (Chewning 2013;
Dietze 2013; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011). Even when SMEs do adopt ERP
systems, there are often various problems such as budget and completion time frame
overruns, poor communications between VCs and SME clients, system customisation
failures, SME employee confusion with the system, insufficient training for system
use, and failure to achieve anticipated benefits (Chewning 2013).
A common view in the practitioner (Dietze 2013) and academic (Upadhyay, Jahanyan
& Dan 2011) literature is that the slow adoption represents failings on the part of
SMEs which should, for instance, be responsible for defining their own IT strategies
and seeking local support for technical ERP design. The typical approach (e.g. Dietze
2013; Krigsman 2011; NucleusResearch 2011; Raymond, Rivard & Jutras 2006;
Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila 2007) is to prescribe methodologies SMEs
can use, for instance, for ERP vendor selection. Examples include the vendor
independent Customer-Centred ERP Implementation method (C-CEI) which focuses
on user centeredness, not on the ERP application’s capabilities as is typically the case
(Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila 2007). Another example is the ‘3 Phase
evaluation model for ERP implementation in SMEs’ (Raymond, Rivard & Jutras 2006).
The recommended methodologies will be appropriate for SMEs which have a good
ICT knowledge and expertise or for those who are prepared to invest time and
resources into learning about ICT and ERP in particular. However, this approach to
the ERP adoption problem is unlikely to be applicable to SMEs which do not have the
skills/capabilities to apply these methodologies, and/or those which have little
understanding of ERP systems and ICT more generally (Argyropoulou, Ioannou &
8
Prastacos 2007) because they are not likely to employ or see the value in these
methodologies.
I found only one practitioner article that mentioned (although briefly) that VCs should
be responsible for failed ERP outcomes if they propose a sophisticated solution to
SMEs knowing that their clients are ill-prepared for such change to their businesses
(Chewning 2013). The importance of VC perspectives and their influence on SMEs has
been emphasised by some key academic researchers (Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam
2013; Carey 2008; Cragg, Caldeira & Ward 2011; Doom et al. 2010; Laukkanen,
Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011). Therefore it is
important to gain an in-depth knowledge into the techniques that VCs find effective
during ERP projects to assist SMEs with issues relating to their lack of time, finance
and ICT/ERP knowledge. This includes the techniques that increase the chances that
ERP systems are tailored for and aligned with SME client strategies and business
processes so that the projects are more likely to lead to successful outcomes.
11.5 VC techniques for developing ERP proposals for SMEs
Typically, VCs conduct one or several of three major phases of ERP work for their SME
clients including the proposal development phase; the implementation phase, and
finally the post-implementation phase (Focus 2009). It is at the proposal
development phase where VCs would promote their ERP system for, and specify how
it will be tailored to, each SME client; in other words, this phase produces the
‘blueprint’ of the proposed ERP system. To develop this ‘blueprint’ during the
proposal development phase, VCs need to acquire an understanding of their clients’
businesses so that they can recommend ERP systems that are tailored to solve
business problems and improve business processes. This understanding should be at
both strategic and business process levels so the ERP proposal aligns both with the
ERP system. If alignment is overlooked then the tailored ERP system might actually
work against the business by, for example, slowing down business processes,
speeding up poorly designed processes or completely overlooking processes and
potentially negatively impacting competitive advantages. This exemplifies the
9
importance of the proposal development stage. The research reported here was
designed to investigate this pivotal process.
Acquiring sufficient understanding of strategies and business processes in order to
tailor ERPs for SME clients requires techniques that enable VCs to accommodate the
characteristics of heterogeneous SMEs. As Ramdani, Kawalek and Lorenzo (2009, p.
10) report, ‘the adoption of information systems (IS) in SMEs cannot be a
miniaturised version of larger organisations.’ VCs aiming to assist SME clients
therefore need to look at the idiosyncrasies and nuances of their clients’ businesses
carefully to ensure that unique strategies and business processes are identified and
understood before developing proposals.
11.6 Research Aim
Ramdani and Kawalek (2007) are the only SME-ERP researchers I could find who
addressed issues pertaining to the techniques that VCs (can) use to develop proposals
that tailor their ERP systems to their SME clients. They offered broad
recommendations for VCs such as offering trial periods to SMEs to use the ERPs
before full implementation so that SMEs can see in practice the system functionality,
assess its effectiveness with existing business systems and determine the levels of
complexity they require. These authors also suggested that VCs should focus their
efforts on particular industries to gain a rich understanding of the needs of industry
specific SMEs. However, this prior work of Ramdani and Kawalek (2007) does not look
at what the VCs actually do with their SME clients during the ERP proposal
development stage to specify how it can be tailored to the nuances of their clients
and how it will align with their strategic intentions and with their business processes.
The aim of this research was therefore to:
Investigate what ERP VCs experience as the most effective techniques for
developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for SMEs.
Pursuing this aim involved exploring techniques (or actions, activities, methods)
which VCs consciously decided (not) to use to address a range of issues such as SME
10
clients’ lack of ICT/ERP knowledge, time constraints to spend with VCs during the
proposal development process, tailoring ERPs to suit tight budgets and obtaining
sensitive client information such as financial reports and intellectual property (IP) in
order to develop business process understanding. It also required examining the
techniques VCs used to elicit information about the client-specific strategies and
business processes, including determining how these were aligned, so VCs could
determine how their ERP systems might support their SME clients. This research aim
emphasises the importance of identifying the techniques VCs used to articulate in
their proposals how their ERP systems would be tailored to support (and align with)
client-specific strategies and business processes.
By consolidating their understanding of these techniques, VCs might be better
equipped to develop ERP proposals that will align more effectively with their SME
clients’ strategies and processes, thus enabling potentially greater competitive
advantages for both VCs and SME clients. It is possible that this research may aid in
that process.
To achieve my research aim, I addressed the following research question:
What do vendor consultants experience as the most effective techniques for
developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and what
conceptual approach is most appropriate for understanding this process?
To answer this question I sought the views and experiences of ERP VCs who served
the SME sector and operated in Australia. Australia was an appropriate choice
because of an increasing interest by ERP VCs in the SME sector, as exemplified by the
number of ERP VCs I identified which were serving (and in most cases focusing on)
the SME sector. The individual VCs (that is, the unit of analysis) in this study were
typically senior people in their respective organisations, such as CEOs, directors,
senior consultants and senior managers. I conducted semi-structured interviews
because this approach enable me to gather in-depth understanding of VC
experiences. This necessitated focusing on VCs who were located close to me to
11
enable face-to-face interviews. I specifically selected only VC firms offering ERP
systems to SME clients based on the types of systems outlined in section 1.2.
Despite the Australian focus of this study, I anticipate that the findings will also have
relevance to other developed countries. Researchers have reported the difficulties
that VCs from other countries are having with their SME clients (Liang & Xue 2004;
Mathrani & Viehland 2009). However, the relevance of the findings to other
developed countries is constrained to some extent because of the Australian focus of
the data used here. The techniques used by ERP VCs in other countries to understand
their clients’ characteristics and heterogeneity to develop ERP proposals for SME
clients, were not explored in this study. Nevertheless, the systems offered by these
VCs are available worldwide and offer generic business process functionalities suited
to SMEs globally. My hope therefore is that the conclusions of this research will
benefit ERP VCs and therefore SMEs around the world.
11.7 Thesis Outline
To assist the reader to understand my approach to this research project and to
provide an overall guide to the thesis, the following chapter summaries are
presented.
Chapter 2 provides an analysis of research literature on ERPs and their contribution
to business processes and strategy. It is supported by a consideration of the general
research literature about SMEs and the literature on ICT and ecommerce in SMEs
because many issues reported in this literature would also apply to ERPs. It explores
the limited SME ERP research to identify the need to focus on ERP vendor
consultants. It also explores the very limited literature dealing with ERP vendor
consultants, particularly those serving the SME sector and examines the VCs’
consideration of strategy and business processes during the ERP proposal
development stage.
Chapter 3 develops the conceptual framework underpinning the research. It presents
the internally focused theory of the resource based view (RBV) of strategic
12
management as a particularly suitable way of understanding the work of the VCs for
their SME clients. This conceptual model points to the resources and capabilities
controlled by a business as sources of competitive advantage. Supplementing the
RBV with the VRIO framework, I then consider how the VRIO can be linked to and
strengthened by some aspects of the Business Process Management (BPM) discipline
to understand the VCs’ experiences and methods during ERP proposal development.
Chapter 4 describes the rationale for my research method and details my interpretive
approach to capture detailed accounts of the VCs’ experiences during ERP proposal
development for SME clients and their insights about this process. It describes my
research design including interviewee selection, data collection and analysis
techniques, research stages and limitations of the research.
Chapter 5 outlines the findings of my research synthesised from the qualitative
analysis of vendor consultant interviews. It highlights a complex array of roles that
VCs fulfil and the techniques that they use to fulfil those roles, both consciously and
unconsciously, whilst navigating the characteristics and heterogeneity of their SME
clients. It presents findings about the ways in which VCs approach their client’s
business processes and strategic intentions and reports issues pertaining to ERP
tailoring and the impacts of BPM on proposal development.
Chapter 6 discusses the research findings and interprets these in light of previous
research and the major theoretical issues identified in earlier chapters. It also
considers the implications of my findings for the state of knowledge about ERP
proposal development for SMEs from the perspective of VCs and especially the
application of aspects of resource based strategy and the business process
management discipline. It answers my overarching research question using the
conceptual framework developed in Chapter 3 and finishes by identifying several
implications for VCs and IS scholars arising from the conceptual framework.
Chapter 7 considers the contribution of this research to knowledge, particularly our
understanding of how VCs approach and navigate the ERP proposal development
13
process and how they address strategic, process and technology factors. It also
considers the implications of the research for practice and provides several
recommendations based on the discussion in Chapter 6. This chapter also considers
limitations of this research project and areas in which further research might be
conducted to enhance and extend our understanding of the experiences of ERP
vendor consultants during the development of proposals for SME clients.
14
CChapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
In Chapter 1 I highlighted the value of ERP systems to businesses and the fact these
are now becoming available to assist firms in the economically significant SME sector
of Australia. I concluded by identifying ERP vendor consultants (VCs) as key enablers
to the attainment of successful ERP implementations by SMEs and emphasised that
the VCs’ primary focus to achieve this is likely to be better served at the ERP pre-
implementation (or proposal development) phase, more so than at the actual
implementation and post-implementation phases.
In this chapter I first synthesise the literature, which has mostly focused on large
organisations, pertaining to ERPs and their contributions to business operations and
strategy (section 2.2). I then review the IS literature, as well as ERP-specific research,
on SMEs to synthesise their characteristics (section 2.3) and to review the major
reasons why IS, and ERP systems in particular, often do not align with an SME’s
strategy (section 2.4) and business processes (section 2.5). I then synthesise the IS
literature that explores ways in which SMEs can resolve this problem (e.g. get
educated) and examines SME viewpoints on their needs, such as assistance from
vendor consultants (section 2.6). Finally, I argue that there has been limited research
which has explored the viewpoint of vendor consultants, and in particular the work
they undertake during the most critical stage of an ERP project; the development of
ERP proposals for SMEs which should include consideration of the SMEs’ strategies
and business processes.
2.2 Large Firms and ERPs
The literature has consistently reported over the last 10 years (de Burca, Fynes &
Marshall 2005; Focus 2009; Heredero & Heredero 2009; Hidalgo, Albors & Gomez
2011; Metaxiotis 2009; Sage 2011) that ERP systems offer various benefits to
organisations. These studies have found that ERP systems can store data about and
support the quick and efficient execution of business processes. They also confirm
these systems can provide summarised information that enable managers to solve
15
problems and make decisions pertaining to the planning of enterprise resources
which are linked to those business processes. By executing processes and providing
information to decision makers about these, ERPs can support the strategic intents
of businesses.
Research in the IS field conducted since the turn of the century has directed its focus
typically on the implementation and post-implementation costs and benefits of ERP
systems within businesses (Esteves & Bohorquez 2007; Moller et al. 2004). Much of
this research has focused on large organisations, for which ERP systems were
originally intended.
The literature has also explored ERP drivers and barriers. The drivers reported include
the delivery of change such as enhanced process improvements; cost reductions
through automation; reductions in head count; reduced stock holdings and out of
stock events; information flow and visibility improvements; improved customer
responsiveness; and streamlined distribution systems (Esteves 2009; Ramdani &
Kawalek 2007). Not surprisingly then, the IS literature often reports (Antlova 2009;
de Burca, Fynes & Marshall 2005; Hill et al. 2007; Hsu 2013; Ram, Wu & Tagg 2013;
Ramdani, Chevers & Williams 2013; Teittinen, Pellinen & Jarvenpaa 2012) that the
strategic benefits of implementing ERP systems are closely aligned with key pillars of
competitive advantage that are reported in strategic management literature
including efficiency, quality, innovation and customer responsiveness and thus
organisational growth (Hill et al. 2007). The barriers resulting in ERP implementation
problems identified in the literature, however, are just as pronounced as the drivers.
These centre around issues such as the attainment of ERP knowledge for informed
decision making; ERP system costs; operational matters, i.e. aligning the technical
ERP system with the needs of the business; change management concerns; complex
technical challenges; complicated system parameter settings; and external
organisational integration (Mathrani & Viehland 2009).
With such an array of reported drivers and barriers to ERP adoption and their
potential for impacts upon bottom line strategies and processes, it is not surprising
16
that several IS researchers have provided various insights into the types of
considerations that need to be taken into account before implementing ERP systems.
For clarity, I compartmentalised examples of these Critical Success Factors (CSFs) into
categories including strategy, people, business processes, technology, and
implementation methodology.
CSF Category Example CSFs Literature Support
Strategy need to acknowledge unique firm characteristics growth stages of the firm business planning with clear goals, objectives and scope developing a strong business case complete with clear objectives and critical success factors corporate and information technology governance costs (in both implementation time and money) top management involvement
Argyropoulou et al. (2008)
Argyropoulou et al. (2009)
Wymer and Regan (2011)
Kidd (2009)
Doom et al. (2010)
Upadhyay, Jahanyan and Dan (2011)
People influences from the business group business culture user involvement and participation (requirements elicitation) user training and education teamwork
Yi, Wu and Tung (2004)
Webster, Walker and Brown (2005)
Wymer and Regan (2011)
Doom et al. (2010)
Lee et al. (2010)
NucleusResearch (2011)
Malhotra and Temponi (2010)
17
Business Processes (including Operations)
alignment of internal control functions and information flows alignment of the ERP with business processes
de Burca, Fynes and Marshall (2005)
Newman and Zhao (2008)
Lee et al. (2010)
Technology IT infrastructure whether the ERP system considered is open source or commercial
Burgess (2002)
Kidd (2009)
Doom et al. (2010)
Implementation Methodology
the use of consultants vendor support, perspective, knowledge about the ERP and business processes and the product project composition, leadership, execution competency (project management) and project champion involvement communication and change readiness (effective change management) learning from mistakes and consciously revisiting these at each implementation stage to continuously improve. implementation approach (skeletal, pilot, single module (phased), parallel, process line or big bang)
Johansson and Sudzina (2008)
Chen (2009)
Mallach (2009)
Focus (2009)
Heredero and Heredero (2009)
Sternard et al. (2009)
Doom et al. (2010)
NucleusResearch (2011)
Srivastava and Batra (2010)
Table 2.1 Categorised examples of critical success factors of ERP implementation
The literature, as summarised in Table 2.1, emphasises the need for organisations, as
well as ERP vendor consultants (VCs), to align their ERP systems to an organisation’s
strategies, business processes, people capabilities and technology infrastructure. If
alignment with all these areas is achieved, then there is a greater chance that an ERP
18
system will help the business fulfil its strategic objectives. This will also increase the
likelihood that these objectives will, in turn, be correctly supported by business
processes, with many being operationalised by the ERP system. Table 2.1 also
highlights the importance of methodologies to explicitly account for this alignment.
Given that IS research has tended to focus on ERP systems in a large organisation
context, it is important also to consider, as in the next section, the applicability of ERP
systems to small and medium enterprises (SMEs).
22.3 SME Characteristics and ERPs/ICTs
ERP vendors have been targeting SMEs more recently due to the saturation of ERP
implementations in the large business sector. These vendors have produced a new
breed of ERP systems which have been ‘scaled down’ to suit SMEs in the hope of
tapping into a new market (SAP 2014), whilst others have elected to manufacture
ERP systems solely for the SME sector (Exact 2014).
SME-specific ERP research has emerged as a result, but IS scholars have pointed out
there have been few studies reporting about ERP proposal development, adoption,
implementation and use in the SME sector when compared to the research on large
organisations (Moon 2007). Further research on SMEs and ERP systems is needed
because scholars such as Mathrani and Viehland (2009) report that those SMEs
implementing ERP systems are installing larger numbers of integrated modules and
they are activating these systems in less time and with much less expense than has
been the case in the recent past. This means it is time to understand the SME
perspective, and the ERP VCs who support them, in more detail through further
studies.
An ongoing issue being faced by ERP vendors, however, is that the successful
implementation of ERPs by SMEs is not guaranteed and this is well documented in
the literature (Cotteleer, Austin & Nolan 1998; Dolmetsch et al. 1998; Rigby, Reicheld
& Schefter 2002; Shin 2006; Swan, Newell & Robertson 1999). This literature suggests
that many SMEs have difficulty achieving the CSFs in Table 2.1 and, more specifically,
19
aligning ERPs with their strategies, processes and people capabilities. For example,
Mathrani and Viehland (2009) report that a significant problem with SMEs is the lack
of clarity owner-operators develop around goal and objective setting before ERP
implementation, which is needed to align ERP systems with strategy. SMEs are also
reported to be unfamiliar with approaches such as structured methodologies,
business process reengineering and the management of change (Argyropoulou,
Ioannou & Prastacos 2007), which can assist them align ERP systems with business
processes.
Given the small but growing SME-ERP literature it is important to review this
research, together with the broader literature on SMEs and ICTs, to gain insights into
the reasons behind these challenges and into how ERP vendors might overcome
them. I review the SME-ICT literature too because there has been extensive research
over the last few decades into SMEs and their resistance to and adoption/use of ICTs
such as personal computers (Chatzoglou et al. 2010; Ongori & Migiro 2010),
accounting packages (e.g. Behery, Jabeen & Paradandi 2014; Razi & Madani 2013),
websites (Lin, Huang & Stockdale 2011; Thompson, Williams & Thomas 2013) and e-
commerce (Baxter & Connolly 2014; Maguire, Koh & Magrys 2007; Wymer & Regan
2011). This SME-ICT literature offers two broad insights into why SMEs resist ICTs or,
if they adopt, why they often have difficulty aligning ICT with their strategies,
processes and people capabilities: 1) SMEs are different to large organisations; and
2) the SME sector is heterogeneous. I will now explore each in more detail and explain
why the combination of SME-ERP and SME-ICT literature helps us to understand SME
problems with ERP systems.
The SME-ICT literature has consistently reported over decades that SMEs, compared
to large organisations, are less equipped to adopt and exploit ICT because they
possess characteristics such as few employees, scarce physical and financial
resources, low profit margins, lack of time, limited knowledge and understanding of
ICT, short term planning perspectives, high cessation rates and constant threats of
closure in light of their largely uncertain environments (Blili & Raymond 1993; Gable
20
1991; Jones, Beynon-Davies & Muir 2003; Wymer & Regan 2011). These
characteristics are consistent with those found in the SME-ERP literature such as the
lack of ICT knowledge of owner-managers and/or employees, and the prohibitive cost
and complexity of ERPs to SMEs (Buonanno et al. 2005; Chang et al. 2010; Haddara &
Zach 2011; Shiau, Hsu & Wang 2009; Steinfield, Adelaar & Liu 2005).
These differences between SMEs and large organisations are significant for ERPs
because these systems are inherently complex and assume commitments of
resources, skills and knowledge from the businesses which will implement them
(Huang et al. 2009). The SME characteristics identified in the SME-ICT literature
suggest this assumption will not hold for many SMEs. This means that many SME
owner-operators and/or their staff will not possess the knowledge or internal
capabilities to align ERPs to their strategies and processes (Ramdani, Chevers &
Williams 2013). A consequence of this is that SMEs may run the risk of forfeiting
potential competitive advantage in cases where some of their business processes are
unique compared to competitors in their industry and/or where ERP systems are
unable to support these unique processes (Christofi et al. 2013). Overall this means
that many SMEs may encounter difficulties with aligning ERP systems to their
strategies, processes and people capabilities.
The SME-ICT literature also emphasises the heterogeneity of this sector (Castleman
2004; Parker, Chan & Saundage 2007). For example, some SMEs are not growth
oriented and instead owner-operators pursue lifestyle and other business objectives
because they are embedded, for instance, in local communities and other social
formations (Castleman 2004; Parker, Chan & Saundage 2007). They are different in
terms of ‘size, age, sector, motivation, mode of organisation, ethnic background,
location, knowledge base, power and control of resources and innovative capacity’
(Taylor & Murphy 2004). They can be different in terms of their wide array of business
goals which are not necessarily influenced by entrepreneurial economic rationality
(Parker, Chan & Saundage 2007). This means that there might be a diverse range of
business strategies to which ICTs (including ERPs) may have to align in order for them
21
to be applicable, if at all, to many SMEs. Business lifecycles, for example, might be so
short term that ERP systems, which are designed for long term administration, would
be irrelevant to some SMEs (McQueen, Cataldo & Hardings 2012).
These characteristics which make SMEs different from large organisations and also
heterogeneous emphasise the importance of understanding in more detail the
nature of SME strategy, processes and issues surrounding their ICT and ERP
knowledge and capabilities. In the next section I examine the nature of SME strategy
to explore how their heterogeneity and their differences compared to large
organisations, influence SME adoption of, and successful alignment with, ERPs.
22.4 SMEs and alignment of strategy with ERP/ICT
Several researchers contend that SME owner-operators should take considerable
care, especially from strategic perspectives, when determining commitments to ICTs
because many do not necessarily lead to success (Cooper & Schendel 1976; Koellinger
2008; Tse & Soufani 2003). It is widely acknowledged in the literature on SMEs and
ICT/eCommerce (e.g. Cataldo, McQueen & Hardings 2012; Fink 1998; Jones, Beynon-
Davies & Muir 2003; Levy, Powell & Yetton 2001; Love et al. 2005; Maguire, Koh &
Magrys 2007; Ongori & Migiro 2010), and SMEs and ERP (e.g. Kidd 2009) that success
with any ICT depends on business strategies informing business processes and, in
turn, processes informing ICT requirements. Essentially there needs to be an
alignment between these aspects of a business for strategies, processes and ICT to
work effectively together.
However, successful alignment and attaining the associated benefits depends on a
number of conditions, and it can be problematic for many SMEs to satisfy these
conditions for reasons elaborated on next. Broadly speaking, these reasons relate to
the business behaviour, competencies, values and even culture of SMEs which have
been reported to directly influence SME owner-operator decision-making about ICT
(Chen et al. 2006; Fillis, Johansson & Wagner 2003; Fillis & Wagner 2005).
22
22.4.1 SMEs and their strategic mindset
The SME-ERP (Argyropoulou, Ioannou & Prastacos 2007; Chen 2009; Laukkanen,
Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007) and the SME-ICT literature (Mathrani & Viehland 2009;
Raymond & Uwizeyemungu 2007) emphasises that successful alignment of ERPs/ICTs
with business strategies (via business processes) relies upon SME owner-operators
understanding and articulating such things as the firm’s unique industrial
characteristics and growth stages; that is, their strategic objectives. This is consistent
with the strategic management literature highlighting that SMEs engaging in strategic
planning, such as clearly articulating goals pertaining to growth, have a greater
chance of success than those that do not (Ates et al. 2013; Garg & Goyal 2012; Porter
1996).
There is evidence in the SME-ERP literature (Doom et al. 2010) and SME-ICT literature
(Maguire, Koh & Magrys 2007) that some SMEs have this understanding and choose
to explore the potential benefits of ICTs, including ERP systems. However, the
heterogeneous nature of the SME sector (see section 2.3) also means many struggle
with this. For example, strategic management scholars report that SME owner-
operators often have a paucity of strategic management knowledge coupled with a
daily routine cognitive frame of reference (Brouthers, Andriessen & Nicolaes 1998;
Kargar 1994; McGregor & Gomes 1999; Peel & Bridge 1998; Smeltzer, Fann &
Nikolaisen 1988; Steiner & Solem 1988). In other words, many owner-operators do
not have the skills to understand fully, or articulate clearly, their business strategies,
or they are more focused on operational matters than their strategic positioning.
This view is consistent with the SME-ICT and SME-ERP literature. For example, some
authors in the SME-ICT field have stated that SME owner-operators often lack the
high levels of knowledge pertaining to customers and markets needed to exploit ICT
(Chen et al. 2006; Jones, Hecker & Holland 2003). Similarly, the SME-ERP literature
contends that ERPs are often used by SMEs in an ad hoc manner without strategic
underpinnings (Harrigan, Ramsey & Ibbotson 2009). These issues reported in the
SME-ICT and SME-ERP literature might be due to a lack of ICT expertise in SMEs, as
23
explored next, in addition to (or instead of) the limited strategic mindset of many
owner-operators.
22.4.2 SMEs and their ICT expertise
The SME-ERP literature (Argyropoulou et al. 2009; Mathrani & Viehland 2009;
Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011) reports that considerable investment should be
made by SMEs into the development of their business cases with clearly stated
benefits and goals. As noted in section 2.4.1, the willingness and ability of SME
owner-operators to do this will depend in part on how well they understand and can
articulate their strategies.
The SME-ICT literature has found that some SMEs, such as those from the high-tech
sector, have the ICT expertise (Gray 2006) and strategic mindsets to develop such
business cases (Spinelli, Dyerson & Harindranath 2013). However, some authors
researching SMEs and ICT (Barry & Milner 2002; Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013;
Taylor & Murphy 2004) and ERP (Esteves 2009) argue that the heterogeneous nature
of SMEs means many owner-operators and/or their staff do not possess the ICT
knowledge or skills to develop business cases to exploit ICT. Taylor and Murphy
(2004) add that, even if SME owner-operators and/or their staff do understand a
particular technology, they may not see the applicability of it (strategic or otherwise)
to their business models or the products/services they sell.
In other words, an SME owner-operator’s decision to invest in developing a business
case for and then adopt an ERP system, depends on, among other things, perceiving
a relative advantage from such systems (Antlova 2009; Ramdani & Kawalek 2009).
However, the IS literature suggests they are unlikely to perceive benefits if they are
unfamiliar with ICT or ERPs. The implications of this issue are explored in more depth
in section 2.6.
2.4.3 ERPs and alignment with business strategies
Finally, the SME-ICT literature (Rivard, Raymond & Verreault 2006; Strong & Volkoff
2010) and the SME-ERP literature (Vayvay, Derman & Beceren 2009) emphasises that
24
the success of ICT/ERPs depends also on the ability of ICTs to support the strategies
pursued by a business, including differentiation, niche or low cost models. For
example, web sites have been shown to achieve low cost strategic models by
reducing the overheads associated with physical retail locations (Quinton & Khan
2009).
There is evidence in the SME-ERP literature that SMEs can also achieve such
alignment with ERPs. For example, Esteves (2009) applied the Shang and Seddon
(2000) benefits list in a study of SME owner-operators and confirmed that some
achieved strategic benefits such as supporting business growth and alliances, building
business innovations and cost leadership, generating product differentiation and
building external linkages. Similarly, other SME-ERP scholars claim that ERP systems
can support SMEs to adapt very quickly in changing environments so that their niche
markets can be better exploited (Doom et al. 2010; Koh & Simpson 2007). Sections
2.4.1 and 2.4.2 suggest, however, that this is more likely to occur with SMEs which
understand such links between ERP systems and their business strategies.
Laukkanen, Sarpola and Hallikainen (2007) report that the heterogeneity of SMEs
must be taken into account when ERP implementations are considered, in the sense
that ERPs might not be suited to every SME’s strategic directions or even achievable
by SMEs for reasons such as unsuitability of business size (i.e. the business might be
too small to accommodate an ERP system); internal expertise (i.e. the business may
lack the competence to manage an ERP system); and resource poverty (i.e. the lack
of resources preclude the business from acquiring an ERP). In this sense, ERP systems
are not suited to all SMEs and in some cases could actually harm them, for example,
in the event that a newly implemented and expensive ERP system fails to do what it
was expected to do.
As will be explored further in the next section, the literature attributes the ability to
align ERP systems with such a diverse range of SME business strategies, to the
tailoring of these systems to individual SMEs (Zach & Munkvold 2011). More
specifically, the main purpose of ERP systems is to automate business processes
25
across the functions of a business, whereby these processes enable SMEs to achieve
their business strategy.
22.5 SMEs and alignment of business processes with ERP/ICT
There are many reports in the literature about the benefits of ERPs for SMEs, which
include information flow and visibility improvements, cost reductions through
automation, reductions in head count, reduced stock holdings and out of stock events
(Federici 2007), enhanced internal process simplification, relatively easy information
retrieval, improved performance management, better information flows, and
manufacturing efficiency (Federici 2009). Section 2.4 emphasised that improvements
to these business processes must enable SMEs to achieve their strategic objectives.
Clemons and Row (1991, p. 289) and Rivard, Raymond and Verreault (2006) argue
that these types of process-related benefits emanating from ICT, including SMEs, are
more likely to result in a sustainable competitive advantage if the ICT aligns with the
resources of the firm that are necessary to make the ICT work, for example, the
human, technological and financial resources and capabilities. These resources
typically relate to the business processes and/or staff capabilities which need to be
understood before implementing an ERP system. In this sense the system needs to
be tailored to align with the resources and capabilities (business processes and
people capabilities) of an SME in order to be successful. An implication here is that
ERP systems should only automate processes in cases where alignment with
resources and capabilities exists. If alignment does not exist then there is a risk that
automated business processes could accelerate outcomes not sought by the firm.
The heterogeneous nature of SMEs suggests, however, that there will be challenges
for ERPs to achieve these benefits, as discussed in more detail next.
2.5.1 SMEs and business process change issues
The SME-ERP literature (Deep et al. 2008; Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila
2007) emphasises that the implementation of ERP systems inevitably results in major
changes to business processes, and that these changes take time. Studies have found
that some SMEs, such as those recognising the strategic benefits of these changes,
26
are prepared to go through these changes (Christofi et al. 2013). But the
preparedness of SMEs for enterprise wide change is reported as being often taken
for granted in the literature and studies show that insufficient preparedness is
actually an issue for ERP implementations in SMEs (Hughes, Golden & Powell 2003;
Raymond & Uwizeyemungu 2007; Warren & Fuller 2009). Key issues reported in this
literature about SME issues around business process change include the differences
in SME processes when compared with large firms; SME resistance to change; and
the SMEs desire for quick change with short term benefits.
An SME’s resistance to change is reflected in its lack of preparedness for it, which is
exacerbated by SME owner-operators who are unfamiliar with concepts such as
business process reengineering and the management of change (Argyropoulou,
Ioannou & Prastacos 2007). Research reports about ERP implementations by SMEs
have found that many SMEs focus on short term process improvements, and seeking
quick, tangible and quantifiable benefits (Chang et al. 2010; Mathrani & Viehland
2009; Metaxiotis 2009) rather than being prepared for time-consuming changes.
22.5.2 SMEs and issues around tailoring ERP systems
Adding to the business process change issues described in section 2.5.1 are problems
associated with the adaptation of an ERP system to the SME’s business. As Davenport
(2000) suggests, there is not an ERP system available that would support every unique
process in every organisation faultlessly, and thus it follows that any proposal for the
implementation of an ERP system should consider tailoring. This recognises that all
organisations, not just SMEs, are somewhat different, even if they are in the same
industry. But as Ondrej and Munkvold (2011) highlight, it is the heterogeneity of SMEs
that is the main reason that ‘tailoring’ of ERP systems occurs more in SMEs than in
larger organisations.
There is debate in the literature, however, about the degree to which ERP systems
should be tailored for SMEs, compared to SMEs using ERP systems with minimal
tailoring. A tailored ERP system is reported to enable the attainment of strategic
competitive advantages when it administers a firm’s uniquely designed business
27
processes (Doom et al. 2010). But as other authors highlight, not all SME business
processes require, or can be facilitated by, technological solutions (Schubert 2007),
and in many cases only a fraction of the functionality of standard ERP systems is
actually used by smaller firms (Olsen & Saetre 2007).
The SME-ERP literature (Federici 2009; Koh & Simpson 2007; Maguire, Koh & Magrys
2007; Robinson & Dilts 1999; Rothenberger & Srite 2009; Vayvay, Derman & Beceren
2009; Zach & Munkvold 2011) reports various types of ERP system tailoring, as
summarised in table 2.2 for clarity and for reference in other chapters. I then highlight
the implications of each type, particularly in relation to alignment and strategy and
the types of SMEs to which each tailoring type applies.
Type of Tailoring Description Locus of Control
None – ‘Off the Shelf’ without change to manufactured software
Manufactured ERP system is installed ‘as is’ or ‘off the shelf’ (i.e. no configuration or customisation) by an SME (possibly with manufacturer or VC assistance, or accessed as Cloud based software). The SME’s business must fit the ERP system ‘as is’.
SME; VC; Manufacturer or other third party if Cloud based model is used
ERP Module Selection Without Configuration
Modules are selected based on key problem areas identified and resources and capabilities available in the firm. But modules are not configured, i.e. proposed for implementation as is.
SME; VC
ERP Module Configuration
Modules are adopted but configured to suit the SME’s needs (e.g. invoice layout, business logo on forms, business rules configured to system, etc.)
SME; VC
28
ERP Module Customisation
Modules re-programmed or new modules programmed to match SMEs’ unique business processes
SME; VC
Build ERP SME builds ERP system by doing the complete software lifecycle (analysis, design, programming, testing, implementation, maintenance) themselves and/or contracting IT consultants
SME
Table 2.2 The dimensions of ERP tailoring
An ERP system purchased ‘off the shelf’ by an SME and installed as is, without any
change, is an ‘untailored’ system in the sense that it is not tailored to the specific
characteristics of the purchaser. It can, however, be described as tailored to the
extent that the manufacturer has designed the system for the SME sector, not the
large business sector. Some ERP scholars contend that ERP systems installed ‘off the
shelf’ (see table 2.2) confer little, if any, competitive advantages to SMEs because the
competition can install the same system and, thus, would have identical rather than
unique business processes (Federici 2009; Koh & Simpson 2007; Robinson & Dilts
1999).
It is rare for SMEs to purchase and install ERP systems directly ‘as is’ (i.e. off the shelf)
because they lack the knowledge to determine the system to select ‘off the shelf’ (see
section 2.6), and because some level of tailoring of the system to the firm is typically
required, from business and software configuration perspectives (see table 2.2).
Instead, most SMEs prefer to purchase their ERP systems with the help of an ERP VC
rather than attempt to buy off the shelf and install on their own, or design and build
their own (Maguire, Koh & Magrys 2007; Vayvay, Derman & Beceren 2009).
The key types of tailoring from table 2.2 that the SME-ERP literature suggests is most
relevant to SMEs include ERP VCs tailoring the overall design of the system to fit with
the business’ resources and capabilities; tailoring by configuration of modules within
29
the system; and tailoring by customising the modules (modules are the various
components that make up an ERP system and relate to various business functions
such as accounting, warehousing, sales and logistics). These are explored further
next.
22.5.2.1 Tailoring by ERP modules, business resources and capabilities
Much of the SME-ERP literature reports on the importance of tailoring the ERP so
that it aligns with the resources and capabilities of the SME. This is an important
consideration particularly in view of the heterogeneity of SMEs because, for example,
an ERP system designed for an SME is of no use to if their staff are not skilled enough
to use the ERP. So in tailoring the ERP to an SME, several authors report on the
importance of those involved, understanding the businesses resources to accomplish
this, such as clearly stated objectives and plans (Argyropoulou et al. 2009; Mathrani
& Viehland 2009; Ramayah et al. 2007); clear financial budgets (Newman & Zhao
2008); management staff allocating time and being involved (Raymond, Rivard &
Jutras 2006); and clearly documented business processes (Malhotra & Temponi
2010). They also report on the importance of capabilities of the businesses owners
and staff, such as skills in business process reengineering and change management
(Argyropoulou, Ioannou & Prastacos 2007); strategic analysis (Argyropoulou et al.
2009); project management (Federici 2009; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011); and
process flow diagramming (Deep et al. 2008).
While the literature clearly acknowledges how important it is that ERP systems align
with an SME’s capabilities, there is little mention of the role VCs should play in
achieving this alignment through tailoring. This is raised by only some authors
(Stackpole 1999; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011) who argue that successful ERP
implementations in SMEs are dependent on VCs being knowledgeable about the fit
between the SME’s resources and capabilities and the VC’s ERP system.
The SME-ERP literature also reports that ERP systems must be tailored according to
the technical resources in SMEs (Raymond, Rivard & Jutras 2006). For example,
tailoring might involve connecting an ERP system to other niche or ‘best practice’
30
application systems within SMEs, via methods for connecting databases such as open
database connectivity (ODBC) and common languages such as standard query
language (SQL); macro facilities within software; import and export functionalities;
and even ‘extensible mark-up language’ (XML) for structuring data for exchange. This
can be taken a step further by connecting organisational systems to external
organisations via Web Services (within, for example, a Service Oriented Architecture
(SOA) framework) (Balzert et al. 2010). In both cases, a single set of organisational
data can be maintained but this is integrated across various databases – often a prime
argument for ERP implementation (Olsen & Saetre 2007). Another example of the
technical tailoring of ERP systems is consideration of the SaaS (Software as a Service)
model of delivery of the ERP to SMEs (Frost&Sullivan 2008), which is essentially a
‘Cloud’ (web) based Internet software access model. This model reduces the ICT total
cost of ownership (TCO) for the SME and thus suits smaller or newer SMEs opting for
ERP systems.
22.5.2.2 Tailoring by ERP module configuration
The SME-ERP literature also reports that modules within ERP systems can be
‘configured’ by ERP VCs to suit particular process needs of SMEs (Lubke & Gomez
2009). This can include tailoring the information presented on sales invoices (e.g. for
example, business logos and contact details), and tailoring the ERP system to support
the SME’s business rules, such as sales over a certain price receive a percentage
discount. VCs activate ERP module configuration by, for example, manipulating radio
buttons or check boxes (Srivastava & Batra 2010; Van Der Hoeven 2009).
Configuration can be administered quickly and is considered in the SME-ERP
literature to be different to customisation because it doesn’t significantly change the
ERP system (Rothenberger & Srite 2009; Zach & Munkvold 2011). Customising ERP
systems entails far more complexity and there have been contrasting views about
ERP VCs doing this for SMEs, as I discuss next.
31
22.5.2.3 Tailoring by ERP module customisation
There is some debate in the literature about the relevance of customisation to SMEs.
Customisation of ERP modules pertains to the enhancement or addition to program
code of the software and is typically completed by ERP VCs upon the request of the
purchaser of the software (Srivastava & Batra 2010; Van Der Hoeven 2009). Many
researchers recommend that ERP customisation should be kept to a minimum in an
SME context for various reasons such as the costs involved and the additional work
that might be required every time the ERP software is upgraded by the manufacturer
(de Burca, Fynes & Marshall 2005; Raymond, Rivard & Jutras 2006; Raymond &
Uwizeyemungu 2007; Robinson & Dilts 1999). These authors state that, instead, it is
inevitable that SME businesses processes will, upon implementation of an ERP
system, be aligned to the best practice processes already built into ERP systems, not
vice versa (assuming the configuration is sufficient to tailor the ERP system to the
unique processes of the SME). Howcroft and Light (2008) argue even further and
state that SMEs need to understand that too much customisation can reduce the
economies of scale offered by an ERP system. These reports are consistent with those
of Mathrani and Viehland (2009) and Strong and Volkoff (2010) who’s studies indicate
that ERP implementations in SMEs should, and are, in fact, becoming more ‘vanilla’.
In other words, little or no customisation is administered at all (only configuration of
standard modules – see 2.5.2.2) and the rationale for this is essentially a recent
proliferation and availability of ERP modules as well as built in, preconfigured, generic
and best practice business processes.
These arguments are in contrast to some other authors. For example, Hidalgo, Albors
and Gomez (2011) contend that identifying which ERP processes fit the SME business
processes, and those which need to be customised, is a critical step in ERP
implementation preparation. Olsen and Saetre (2007a) suggest that SME owner-
operators could develop some ERP components themselves using modern
development tools. But this would still require a level of knowledge that would take
many SMEs some time to acquire (Caputo et al. 2002) which, as highlighted earlier,
the average SME would not have the knowledge and skills sets to achieve. Zach and
32
Munkvold (2011) report that customisation might be favoured by SMEs for several
reasons including resistance to change (i.e. wanting the system to adapt to
organisational needs); unique business processes (i.e. keeping their own processes);
functional misfit (i.e. ERP modules, even with configuration, do not match the firm’s
processes); ownership type (e.g. where a firm is fully influenced by the owner who
might insist on customisation); and project motivation (e.g. a technical rather than
strategic motivation thus customisation is a focus rather than business objectives).
Whilst comparisons of commercially available ERP systems are accessible online
(TechnologyEvaluation.com 2011), these are detailed and complex, and this suggests
VCs are probably better positioned than SMEs to customise ERP systems.
This section highlights that the tailoring of ERP systems can be technically complex
and thus probably beyond the capabilities and skills of average SME owner-operators.
This is consistent with recommendations from several ERP researchers that ERP VCs
should work very closely with SMEs during ERP proposal development (which
includes recommending tailoring options) and implementation exercises (Doom et al.
2010; Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011). The
problem, however, is that successful ERP implementation into SMEs is as much about
the SME owner-operator’s knowledge and understanding about ICT and ERP systems,
and the ways in which these systems can enable the efficient execution of
strategically aligned business processes. The next section of this chapter explores the
literature with regards to how these alignment issues can be addressed, including by
VCs.
22.6 Addressing SME ERP capability gaps
The previous sections highlight that ERP systems are not suited to all SMEs given their
heterogeneity and their different approaches to strategy and business processes. ERP
systems are more suited to SMEs that have growth intentions and plans, adequate
financial resources, and other resources such as time. Section 2.5.2 highlighted the
complex issues around ERP tailoring and concludes that it is probably essential that
any SME anticipating ERP adoption should utilise the services of ERP VCs to enable
33
greater chances for implementation success. Indeed, sections 2.3 to 2.5 in summary
suggest that ERP VCs are more likely to have satisfied SME clients and to have fewer
problems aligning their systems with SME strategies/processes if they target SME
owner-operators who can:
articulate their business strategies and identify their unique business
processes;
appreciate the value of process reengineering;
have ICT expertise or have staff with ICT expertise; and
develop a business case for ICT including ERP systems.
VCs can then propose an ERP system with appropriate tailoring. However, the reality
for VCs is that the heterogeneity of the SME sector, and the VCs’ desire to ensure a
sufficiently large marketplace for their ERP systems (e.g. Ramdani & Kawalek 2007),
means that alternative ways are required to address the needs of SMEs which do not
possess all or many of these various traits and capabilities. The next sections
summarise two common approaches which have been explored in the literature.
22.6.1 SMEs and ICT education
A dominant view in the literature is that SME owner-managers should develop,
through their own proactivity or external encouragement, capabilities relating to
strategic management and/or ICT. For example, some scholars contend that owner-
operators should develop strategic management expertise (O'Regan and Ghobadian
2002; Maranto-Vargas and Gomez-Tagel Rangel 2007) and ICT/eCommerce expertise
(Barry & Milner 2002; Chao & Chandra 2012) and ERP expertise (Federici 2009; Lee
et al. 2010).
Suggestions and initiatives permeating the literature, and intended to motivate SME
owner-operators to embrace ICT and develop expertise, include the provision of
tailored training courses, workshops and various help lines (Darch & Lucas 2002; de
Berranger, Tucker & Jones 2001; Gainey & Klaas 2003; Lin & Lee 2005; Martin &
Matlay 2001). Burke (2005) contends that SME owner-operators should seek ICT
34
training during the early stages of business growth and that education is the key to
positively engaging owner-operators in ICT integration in their businesses. But the
SME-ERP literature falls short on research about ways in which SMEs can acquire
detailed knowledge and understanding specifically about ERPs and has a tendency to
focus on the ERP training and development needed by users at the implementation
stage (Schniederjans & Tadav 2013).
The reality is that many SMEs are often reported to have little motivation to
participate in these educational initiatives when available (Levenburg 2005; Martin &
Halstead 2004). A range of reasons for this is reported such as lack of time to learn
about ICT, lack of awareness about where to obtain assistance, lack of skills and
awareness of what might be involved in these initiatives, prohibitive costs of
participation, and a perception that the initiatives lack relevance to their needs
(Darch & Lucas 2002; Fillis, Johansson & Wagner 2003; Jones, Beynon-Davies & Muir
2003; Martin & Halstead 2004; Moyi 2003). It is therefore not surprising that the SME-
ICT literature has long reported a tendency for SMEs to struggle with the acquisition
of knowledge and understanding pertaining to ICTs despite many initiatives that have
been developed to support SMEs and their learning and development, particularly by
governments (DCITA 2004; Maranto-Vargas & Gomez-Tagel Rangel 2007; Martin &
Matlay 2001; Meldrum & de Berranger 1999; OECD 2004).
An apparent paradox here is that whilst most of the literature recommends that SME
owner-operators develop strategic management and ICT expertise, it is the very traits
which often distinguish SMEs from large organisations (see section 2.3.1) which
suggest it is unlikely many will see value in developing these capabilities internally.
This emphasises that ERP VCs have a role to play as examined next.
22.6.2 SMEs and the role of Vendor/Consultants (VCs)
There is a growing body of IS research which has looked at the role of ICT/ERP VCs
from the SMEs’ perspective which can be categorised in three ways: the positive SME
views about the VC’s role; the concerns SMEs have about VCs; and the research
35
presenting frameworks and arguments about how SMEs should manage VCs. I now
summarise these three themes in the literature in more detail.
The SME-ICT (e.g. Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013; Carey 2008; Cragg, Caldeira &
Ward 2011; Gable 1991; Harindranath, Dyerson & Barnes 2008) and SME-ERP
literature (e.g. Doom et al. 2010; Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Upadhyay,
Jahanyan & Dan 2011) reports on the positive aspects of the roles of VCs when
reporting that SMEs often turn to VCs to compensate for their lack of internal
capabilities. In the context of ERP systems, the literature finds that some SMEs state
that VCs provide them with the help they need to offset the SMEs’ lack of ERP
knowledge. In other words, these SMEs prefer to delegate most ERP change
preparations and decision-making responsibilities to VCs (Doom et al. 2010;
Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007). This highlights the SMEs’ reliance upon VCs
and recognises the vital role that VCs play for SMEs in matters of ERP adoption and
implementation. These SMEs acknowledge the value of the VCs’ ERP experience and
knowledge that doesn’t exist in their own firms (Doom et al. 2010). These scholars
contend that, whilst positive ERP outcomes have much to do with a good alignment
with strategies and processes, these benefits would most likely be unattainable
without VC assistance (Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011).
Several authors in both the SME-ICT and SME-ERP literature have also reported that
SMEs often experience various risks and concerns in relation to VC engagement.
These include the belief that some VCs lack commitment to the success of ICT/ERP
implementations; lack of relevant experience in ERP tailoring and implementation;
lack of methodical approaches; use poor relationship development and
communication techniques; and have a tendency to delegate to junior consultants
once senior consultants achieve contractual arrangements (Argyropoulou et al. 2009;
Beckinsdale & Levy 2004; Doom et al. 2010; Gable 1991; Goode 2002; Kole 1983;
Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Soh, Yap & Raman 1992; Upadhyay, Jahanyan
& Dan 2011). Similarly, SME-ERP research from Howcroft and Light (2008) has found
that the use of VCs by SMEs does not necessarily guarantee the effectiveness of an
36
ERP implementation and can actually benefit VCs more than their clients, because
VCs are paid for implementation work whether or not the ERP system does what is
intended.
A common view in the IS literature, in light of these concerns, is that it should be the
SMEs’ duty to take overall responsibility for ICT implementations and to take the
leading role in engagements with VCs, whereby these authors develop frameworks
and methodologies to assist SMEs select suitable VCs and/or IS/ERP products (Deep
et al. 2008; Gable 1991; Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila 2007). As I have
noted previously in sections 2.4.2 and 2.6.1, this is not feasible for many SMEs
because they do not possess the necessary ICT skills and knowledge to do this nor do
they generally see any value in acquiring this understanding. It is therefore not
surprising that other scholars suggest that VCs should actually take the responsibility
for this on behalf of SMEs because VCs have the required skills and knowledge to do
this (Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013; Cragg, Caldeira & Ward 2011; Thong, Yap
& Raman 1996).
What is lacking in our understanding of the relationships between VCs and SMEs in
the context of ERP systems is the VCs’ experiences associated with engaging SME
clients. The VC perspective is also limited in the broader SME-ICT literature, but has
received more attention than for ERP systems. The next section reports on what is
known about this by reviewing prior studies which have focused on, or included
studies of, the ERP/ICT VCs’ perspective. It highlights that little is known about how
VCs experience engagements with SMEs, especially during the ERP proposal
development stage.
22.7 Vendor-Consultant experiences developing ERP proposals for SMEs
To attain a more balanced understanding about the interactions between SMEs and
VCs in relation to ERP systems, it is necessary to also explore how VCs experience
engagements with, and their views on, SMEs. Research on this topic is limited, with
only a few that have developed nuanced understandings pertaining to VCs’
37
experiences with SME heterogeneity, including their own roles, and their proposal
development techniques. These are explored in the following sections.
22.7.1 The importance of ERP proposal development
Proposal development by VCs is an important stage in any ERP project because it is
the blueprint for the proposed ERP implementation. It is essentially the vision for
change, highlighting for the business owner, a way forward in the business based on
deployment of an ERP system. The proposal for change is essentially the first element
sought by the SME in establishing contact with the VC as it provides the insight that
the SME could not develop alone. Several ERP researchers (Doom et al. 2010;
Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011) state that
VCs should work very closely with SMEs during ERP proposal development for this
reason. Other IS scholars have highlighted that the proposal development stage is
critical because problems that are overlooked in the early stages can amplify during
later stages (Hustad & Olsen 2011; Verville et al. 2007).
A few SME-ERP researchers, who highlight the importance of the proposal
development, report that this stage of an ERP project requires considerations such as
(Christofi et al. 2013; Doom et al. 2010; Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007;
Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011):
the adequacy of the expertise within the SME firm to cope with operating
an ERP system;
the impact of the external environment, such as the SME’s suppliers and
customers and their ICT/ERP systems and the connection of these to the
proposed ERP system;
the strategic visions, intents, goals and objectives of the SME owner-
operator, such as growth and profit plans, and the impacts of these on the
proposed ERP system;
38
the information recording and reporting needs of the SME, the types of
data required to be stored in the system and the associated configuration
and customisation required;
understanding the long terms costs of running an ERP system (that is, the
total costs of ownership) to ensure the ERP system’s sustainability;
the capacity of the SME’s ICT infrastructure to cope with the technical
demands that the ERP system imposes; and
an understanding of the business processes of the SME firm, including
where these are working inefficiently (e.g. producing delays in workflows).
Despite recognition of the importance of these considerations during, and the overall
importance of, the proposal development stage, there has been no research which
has specifically explored what techniques VCs find effective for addressing these
considerations when developing proposals. Indeed, the SME-ERP literature has been
criticised for not exploring the ERP proposal development stage in enough depth, and
for focusing instead on implementation and post-implementation (Christofi et al.
2013; Hustad & Olsen 2011). This means there is a lack of research on ERP VCs’
experience with and techniques applied during proposal development. This lack of
attention to proposal development is also consistent with SME-ICT studies that have
tended to explore VC experiences after being commissioned by SMEs (e.g. Bradshaw,
Cragg & Pulakanam 2013; Carey 2008), rather than looking at their
experiences/techniques for engaging with SMEs prior to this stage.
The next sections will therefore review the literature on VC experiences and
techniques with SMEs more generally and highlight the importance of examining
these during proposal development.
39
22.7.2 VC techniques/roles for dealing with heterogeneous SME clients
The SME-ICT (e.g. Cragg, Caldeira & Ward 2011) and SME ERP literature
(Argyropoulou et al. 2009; Ramdani & Kawalek 2007) acknowledges that VCs should
see SME clients as heterogeneous because, for instance, SMEs have different levels
of resources and capabilities and unique operational processes, and because owner-
operators have widely varying experiences and perspectives in relation to issues
about ICT, operational management and strategies. However, there is very little
research about the VCs’ views on, experiences with, and techniques for dealing with
SME heterogeneity. The limited research in this area does, however, reveal that VC
techniques relate to three main roles: relationship development; client competency
development and education; and problem solving. I explore these further in the
following sub-sections.
2.7.2.1 Relationship development
Some SME-ICT scholars who have researched the VC perspective emphasise that
client relationship management and development should be part of the VCs’ core
business (e.g. Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013). Some researchers have found
that VCs can experience difficulty with this because VCs and SMEs can have different
expectations of each other, and because the heterogeneity of SMEs means that each
client can have different expectations (Ashurst, Cragg & Herring 2012; Carey 2008)
see also section 2.6.2). For example, SMEs can vary in the degree to which they want
VCs to lead an ICT project, help them to articulate strategies, etc. (Bradshaw, Cragg
& Pulakanam 2013). But the literature therefore offers limited insight into how VCs
experience this and the techniques they use to overcome these tensions. More
specifically, further research is needed to understand the VCs’ approaches to develop
trusting relationships with SMEs to enable them, for instance, to elicit detailed
information about the client. Such work is especially needed pertaining to the
proposal development stage, because the nature of this relationship development,
and subsequent detail of the information elicited, is likely to affect the quality of the
proposals and ultimately, the success of the ERP implementations.
40
22.7.2.2 Client competency development
Another important role for VCs identified in the SME-ICT (e.g. Bradshaw, Cragg &
Pulakanam 2013) and the SME-ERP literature (Doom et al. 2010; Upadhyay, Jahanyan
& Dan 2011) pertains to developing competencies or educating SME clients. This role
is critical because SMEs must understand ICT/ERPs before they can make decisions
about and commit to these systems (Argyropoulou et al. 2009; Deep et al. 2008;
Malhotra & Temponi 2010). Whilst there are several reports in the literature about
the paucity of SME skills and knowledge pertaining to ICT (see section 2.6.1), there is
very little about how VCs experience, and the techniques they use to deal with this.
For example, Bradshaw, Cragg and Pulakanam (2013) found in their study of VCs in
an accounting IS context that they were only able to improve a few of their SME
clients’ competencies, but the techniques VCs used to do this were not reported.
Similarly, Ashurst, Cragg and Herring (2012) reported that long-term VC and SME
relationships are a necessary foundation before VCs can educate SME clients about
ICT matters, but these authors do not report on the approaches VCs use to achieve
this. Further research is therefore needed to develop a more nuanced understanding
of VCs’ views on, and the techniques they find effective for, developing competencies
in or educating their SME clients about ERP systems during the proposal stage.
2.7.2.3 Solving clients’ business problems
A dominant view of SME-ERP researchers is that the VCs’ primary role is to solve the
business problems presented to them by their SME clients (Doom et al. 2010;
Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007; Stackpole 1999; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan
2011). The literature also emphasises that VCs need good communication skills to
solve client problems during ICT/ERP implementations (Bode & Burn 2002; Carey
2008), that they should use meticulous documentation, and that VCs should
communicate with clients on matters such as clear goals (Malhotra & Temponi 2010;
Mathrani & Viehland 2009; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011). There is little research,
however, pertaining to the techniques VCs use to communicate with SMEs to solve
their business problems, such as how they elicit details of the client’s strategies and
business processes. One exception is reported in a study by Howcroft and Light (2008)
41
who state that VCs can use ERP demonstrations as a method to obtain a sale,
particularly if these demonstrations are configured to the client’s specific needs, but
the effectiveness of this communication technique is not reported. This highlights the
need for further research that will determine what techniques VCs find effective
when communicating with SME clients to understand their business problems and to
achieve client acceptance of the proposal.
22.7.3 VC experiences with proposal methodology
Little is reported in the SME-ERP literature about the views and experiences of VCs in
relation to the methodological approaches that they take during proposal
development. One fundamental aspect of proposal development is to specify how
the ERP system will be tailored to clients’ business needs. The VCs’ experiences in
relation to this are highlighted only briefly in the literature with one study reporting
that VCs prefer to implement ERPs without customisation, preferring to simply
configure the ‘best practice’ standards built into the system (Mathrani & Viehland
2009) and another reporting that VCs experience tensions when SME end users see
a mismatch between the way they presently administer processes and the way the
VC’s proposed new ERP administers them (Howcroft & Light 2008). The techniques
used by VCs, if any, to manage these tensions are not reported in the available
literature.
In summary, it is clear from this review that there is limited IS knowledge concerning
the techniques VCs use and find effective for engaging with heterogeneous SMEs to
develop relationships, elicit information about client strategy and process problems,
and educate clients when developing proposals that tailor ERP systems to each
client’s needs. A better understanding of how VCs do this is likely to result in
documenting techniques which are effective, as well as identifying areas for
improvement, to enable them to produce higher quality ERP proposals and thus
greater chances for ERP implementation success.
42
22.8 Summary
In summary, the aim of this literature review was to determine the extent to which
IS researchers have explored the VC perspective of their engagement with SME
clients when developing ERP proposals. This required first, an understanding of the
background issues and contexts that might impact the proposal development stage.
These included an understanding of SMEs, such as their characteristics, because firms
in this sector are different to those in the large business sector and this can impact
the success levels of ERP implementations in a variety of ways. ERPs are strategic IS
and so issues of SMEs and strategies required exploration as to how such systems fit
or align to SME strategies and strategic intentions. ERPs also enable business process
efficiencies and thus issues of SMEs and business processes were also considered in
relation to ERP fit. The alignment of strategies with processes in SMEs and associated
issues were considered because without such alignment, ERPs are less likely to
deliver expected results. Finally, this chapter explored what we know about the role
of VCs in the development of ERP system implementations for their SME clients,
including their reported experiences with SMEs in relation to this.
There is a modest amount of research that has explored VCs’ experiences during ERP
implementation and post implementation stages with SMEs, but no specific research
directed at the experiences of VCs during the proposal development stage. I argued
this stage is critical in developing the relationship with the client, understanding their
business and ensuring the alignment of the ERP with the SME client’s strategic goals.
This chapter confirmed that it is important to determine the extent to which
fundamental issues, such as the heterogeneity of SMEs, their approach to strategising
and their understanding of ICT/ERPs, are acknowledged and dealt with by VCs,
because this will largely govern the ultimate success of ERP implementations. This
study concludes that further research needs to be conducted into the VCs’ ERP
proposal development to address gaps in our understanding about the techniques
applied by VCs at this stage.
43
The aim of this research was therefore to understand VCs’ experience of the proposal
development process and their views on what techniques are most effective for
developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for individual SME clients. By
consolidating and understanding this, VCs might be better equipped to develop ERP
proposals that will align more effectively with their SME client’s strategies and
processes, and thus reduce the degree to which ERP implementations fail to meet
SME expectations as stated in Chapter 1. To achieve this aim, this thesis answers the
following research question (as appeared in section 1.6):
What do vendor consultants experience as the most effective techniques for
developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and what
conceptual approach is most appropriate for understanding this process?
The research question highlights that a need exists for a conceptual framework that
makes sense of the context within which a VC works, links strategy and business
processes, and helps to understand the relationships VCs aim to establish with SME
clients. In the next chapter I draw upon aspects of strategic management theory and
the emerging BPM discipline to develop a framework suitable for conceptualising the
techniques VCs can use to develop proposals which tailor ERP systems for their
heterogeneous SME client base, taking into account the need to ensure alignment of
the ERP system with the clients’ strategies and business processes. Several sub
questions which support the overarching research question will also be presented at
the conclusion of Chapter 3.
44
CChapter 3: Conceptualising VC ERP Proposal Development for
SMEs
3.1 Introduction
The previous chapter argued that there is little research leading to an understanding
of the VC perspective when they develop ERP proposals for SMEs, and that this work
is important because such clients may not have the ICT and/or strategic management
skills to articulate how ERP systems should align with their processes and strategy. I
concluded in Chapter 2 that an important research aim pertained to investigating
what VCs experience as the most effective techniques for developing proposals which
tailor ERP systems for clients by taking into account SME heterogeneity with regards
to, and achieving alignment with, their strategy and business processes.
This chapter extends this research aim to consider what conceptual approach is most
appropriate for understanding the techniques VCs find effective for developing ERP
proposals for SMEs. It argues that the Resource Based View (RBV) of strategy, and
the VRIO (Valuable, Rarity, Inimitable, and Organisation) framework in particular,
presents the most appropriate overarching theoretical perspective for
conceptualising this work by ERP VCs. It also outlines how principles arising from the
Business Process Management (BPM) discipline complements our understanding of
the techniques VCs may use to develop ERP proposals. The chapter concludes by
proposing a conceptual framework which combines VRIO and BPM principles to
conceptualise the techniques VCs experience as the most effective when developing
proposals that tailor ERP systems for their SME clients.
3.2 Strategic theory and SMEs
The research aim suggested theory was needed that conceptualised the techniques
VCs found effective for developing proposals which take into account SME
heterogeneity (e.g. strategy and ICT skills) and which tailored the VC’s ERP system so
that it is aligned with the SME’s strategy/ies and processes. The two most common
45
types of theories used in the IS literature (and strategic management literature about
IS) pertaining to the alignment of strategy, processes and ICT in an SME context are
the industry structure view and the resource based view (Bharadwaj 2000; Caldeira
& Ward 2003; Hultman & Eriksson 2008; Porter 2001; Walsh, Schubert & Jones 2010).
This section argues why I used the resource based view as the overarching theoretical
lens for conceptualising SME heterogeneity and strategy-process-ERP alignment and
understanding the techniques VCs find effective for developing ERP proposals which
take this into account.
33.2.1 The Industry Structure View
The industry structure view (ISV) of strategy, theorised in the seminal work of Michael
Porter (Hill et al. 2007; Hitt, Freeman & Harrison 2001; Porter 1980), emphasises, in
essence, that strategy (e.g. Porter’s generic strategies) is or should be shaped by
externally driven forces (i.e. the five forces), and that aligning strategy with processes
and ICT can be achieved by looking internally at the firm’s internal structure and
processes (i.e. the value chain) (Barney 1991; Hill et al. 2007; Kidd 2009; Porter 1980).
The ISV has been used by strategic management scholars (Cragg, King & Huyssin
2002; Kidd 2009) undertaking SME research because it helps to conceptualise
differences between SMEs and large organisations in terms of strategy. For example,
this literature reports that larger organisations typically have the market power and
resources to shape (not just respond to) the five forces and to adopt generic
strategies such as cost leadership due to their ability to invoke economies of scale
(Burke & Jarrat 2004; Cragg, King & Huyssin 2002). It also emphasises that SMEs, by
contrast, mainly respond to the five forces and, due to their smaller size, are better
positioned to adapt to changing market circumstances using generic niche and
differentiation strategies (Reid 1993; Storey 1994).
The ISV conceptualises ICT/ERPs in terms of how they support SMEs’
niche/differentiation strategies, reduce costs/time in their value chain and react if
competitors use ERPs etc. (see section 2.3). In this way the ISV helps to address the
alignment of a firm’s strategy with its processes and ICT/ERP (Cragg, King & Huyssin
46
2002; Kidd 2009). It also offers some potential as a lens for conceptualising the
techniques VCs find effective during ERP proposal development. For example, the
Porter’s five forces and the generic strategies could be used as concepts for
understanding VC perceptions of the effectiveness of their proposal development
techniques, such as explaining why these techniques do (not) elicit sufficient details
about SME client strategies. Similarly, the value chain conceptualises the major types
of internal processes in organisations, including SMEs, which can be supported by
ICT/ERPs.
However, the ISV was not useful as an overarching theoretical lens for this study
because it doesn’t conceptualise all aspects of the research aim. First, it does not
conceptualise the heterogeneity of SME capabilities and resources relating to
strategy and the associated fit of these to the ICT/ERP, which are key rationales for
tailoring ERP systems for SMEs (Cataldo, McQueen & Hardings 2012; Strong & Volkoff
2010). Second, it does not conceptualise the types of techniques VCs can use whilst
developing ERP proposals such as those relating to communication and
methodologies.
33.2.2 The Resource Based View
The resource based view (RBV) of strategy, in contrast to ISV, places emphasis on the
firm’s internal, heterogeneous resources and how these inform strategic decision-
making, as well as taking into account the external view by considering how the firm
can use its resources to gain competitive advantage (Barney 1991; Hill et al. 2007;
Porter 1980). The RBV defines resources as tangible and property based (e.g.
equipment, finance) or intangible and knowledge based (e.g. skills, knowledge,
competencies and capabilities) (Hanson et al. 2005; Miller & Shamsie 1996).
Capabilities (sometimes referred to as core competencies) are combinations of
activity-based resources which are performed over time to the point that they are
done well (Grant 1991). The RBV therefore emphasises that a firm’s capabilities
evolve and should be managed dynamically, and that this requires learning and
knowledge accumulation (Hanson et al. 2005) and continuous improvement.
47
The RBV is underpinned by two assumptions pertaining to how they enable firms to
gain strategic advantage: 1) firms located in a particular industry do not necessarily
possess comparable, strategically relevant resources and capabilities, thus
recognising that firms acquire alternative resources and develop distinctive
capabilities over time; and 2) a firm’s resources are not necessarily mobile across
organisations, so that differences in resources can form strong bases for competitive
advantage (Barney 1991, 1996, 2001; Hanson et al. 2005). I therefore considered RBV
to be appropriate as an overarching theoretical lens for conceptualising the
techniques VCs may find effective when developing proposals that tailor ERP systems
to the strategies and processes of heterogeneous SMEs for the following three
reasons (which are elaborated on in later sections).
First, the RBV has been used specifically in the context of SMEs and ICTs in general
(Butler & Murphy 2008; Caldeira & Ward 2003; Cragg, Mills & Suraweera 2013;
Edwards, Sengupta & Tsai 2010; Hultman & Eriksson 2008; Qureshil, Kamal & P. 2009;
Thong 2001) and ERPs in particular (Hsu 2013; Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira &
Neto 2012, 2014). The literature highlights that ERPs can be a strategic resource for
SMEs for attaining competitive advantage only if these systems are supported by
other organisational resources and capabilities such as managerial skills, change
management and eBusiness technologies (Hsu 2013). I therefore concluded the RBV
offered concepts to help explain the techniques VCs find effective, in terms of how
these approaches lead to proposals that articulate, and convince SMEs of the need
for, changes to and development of resources to support the ERP systems.
Second, SME-ICT (Butler & Murphy 2008; Caldeira & Ward 2003; Cragg, Mills &
Suraweera 2013; Hultman & Eriksson 2008; Thong 2001) and SME-ERP scholars
(Coates & McDermott 2002; Hsu 2013; Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira & Neto 2012,
2014) have argued that RBV conceptualises SME heterogeneity by explaining that
they have unique combinations of (or lack of) resources (e.g. finance, strategic
management and ICT skills/capabilities). These in turn influence the degree to which
SMEs can formulate and articulate strategies, determine how ICT/ERP will align with
48
their strategies and/or select and manage the relationships with VCs (Berry, Sweeting
& Goto 2006; Bode & Burn 2001; Chang et al. 2012; Gable 1991; Howcroft & Light
2008; Lubke & Gomez 2009; Wang & He 2014; see also sections 2.4 and 2.6.2). This
suggested that the RBV offered concepts for explaining the techniques VCs perceive
to be effective, in terms of how these approaches lead to an understanding by VCs of
SME heterogeneity so that the VCs proposals can tailor their ERP systems to align
with their SME clients’ strategies and resources.
Finally, the RBV’s focus on a firm’s internal resources and capabilities also includes
inter-firm relationships with external consultants such as ERP VCs. The literature
describes external consultants as additional resources which can contribute to the
resource-based competitive advantage of the client firm (Bradshaw, Cragg &
Pulakanam 2013; Lavie 2006; Street & Cameron 2007). This is similar to the notion by
Penrose (1959) that resources, such as people, provide services and it is those
services that provide value for the firm. The advantages of these relationships are
reported by Street and Cameron (2007) to include such things as enhanced
competitive ability and a lower reliance or dependence on others, as well as
successful outcomes such as planned increases in organisational development and
even SME survival.
More specifically from the IS perspective, Bradshaw, Cragg and Pulakanam (2013)
found that accounting IS consultants enhanced the IS competencies of SMEs rather
than helped SMEs develop them. In this sense, the VCs’ skills and competencies are
directly contributing to the client firm’s value and competitive advantage by
compensating for the SMEs’ lack of ability. These findings are consistent with those
of other authors (e.g. Caldeira & Ward 2003; Thong 2001) who, using the RBV, found
external consultants were important for the success of IS in SMEs. This literature had
two important implications for my research project. First, it suggested the RBV
offered concepts for explaining what techniques VCs may find effective, such as how
the approaches facilitate client relationship development and how the methods lead
to ERP proposals that articulate the way in which VCs will compensate for SMEs’ lack
49
of resources. Second, the work of (Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013), which
involved exploring VC perspectives, highlighted that the RBV was an appropriate lens
when VCs are the unit of analysis.
In the next section I outline a specific RBV-based framework known as VRIO which
provided more specific overarching conceptual guidance for my analysis of what
techniques VCs found effective when developing proposals that tailor their ERP
systems to support the alignment of strategy and processes for their heterogeneous
SME clients. I looked at two other RBV related models and theories (theory of invisible
assets and competence theories of corporate diversification) but considered them to
be less applicable than the VRIO framework for the purposes of this research project
for the following reasons.
I looked at Itami’s (1987 p. 12-18) theory of invisible assets because it considers
information based resources such as ICT as sources of competitive advantage, but it
was too narrow compared to the VRIO framework because of its focus on invisible
assets. The VRIO on the other hand considers all organisational resources including
those that are visible (e.g. people) and invisible (e.g. people capabilities) and
therefore provided a more comprehensive framework for my research question.
Competence theories of corporate diversification (Prahalad & Bettis 1986; Prahalad
& Hamel 1990; Teese 1980) were considered for their commonality with RBV logic,
but these have a tendency to focus on intangible assets only. They do this with a focus
on corporate diversification. My research however, needed to consider all resources,
whether intangible (e.g. capabilities, processes, ICT) or tangible (e.g. people,
equipment, plant etc.), and the impact of these on the work of VCs during ERP
proposal development. For this reason, the RBV and the VRIO matched the broader
dimensions of my research and thus were preferable over competence theories of
corporate diversification.
50
33.3 VRIO for conceptualising SME ERP proposals by VCs
The VRIO (or Valuable, Rarity, Inimitable, Organisation) framework (Barney 1991,
1996, 2001; Barney & Hesterly 2012) is an RBV-based tool used for analysing a firm’s
resources and capabilities and the potential of these to generate competitive
advantages. The analysis involves asking four broad questions summarised by Barney
and Clark (2007, p. 70) as follows:
1. ‘The question of Value: Do a firm’s resources and capabilities enable the firm
to respond to environmental threats and opportunities?
2. The question of Rarity: Is a resource currently controlled by only a small
number of competing firms?
3. The question of Imitability: Do firms without a resource face a cost
disadvantage in obtaining or developing it?
4. The question of Organisation: Are a firm’s other policies and procedures
organised to support the exploitation of its valuable, rare, and costly to
imitate resources?’
The VRIO framework was particularly relevant to my research for a few reasons. First,
it assumes the heterogeneity and immobility of a firm’s resources and capabilities
and thus aligns with the characteristics of the SMEs (see section 2.3). Barney and
Clark (2007, p. 57) emphasise the relevance of the framework to heterogeneity when
describing the four attributes listed above as ‘indicators of how heterogeneous and
immobile a firm’s resources are, and thus how useful these resources are for
generating sustained competitive advantages.’ Second, the VRIO is a recognised RBV
framework in the SME-ICT literature (Caldeira & Ward 2003; Edwards, Sengupta &
Tsai 2010; Hultman & Eriksson 2008).
51
The third reason is that valuable, rare, inimitable and organisational resources can be
business processes, as explained in detail in the next sections. The work of the VC
during proposal development is to produce a set of recommendations for the
improvement of the client firm’s processes, via a suitably tailored ERP system. The
overarching conceptual framework for this research used all four concepts to
examine what techniques VCs find effective, such as understanding and eliciting
information about the resources, including themselves, that afford the SME client
competitive advantage. The VRIO framework explains that ERP systems can support
valuable, rare, inimitable and organisational processes.
The few studies relating to the VC perspective and the techniques they use to develop
ERP proposals and implement ERP systems for SMEs have not used the VRIO
framework. Nonetheless, the next sections synthesise the SME-ICT literature to argue
that each element of the VRIO framework offered useful concepts to guide my
analysis of the techniques VCs found effective to develop proposals that tailor ERP
systems for SME clients.
33.3.1 Identify valuable resources
In the VRIO framework, a firm’s resources are considered to be valuable when they
‘enable a firm to conceive or implement strategies that improve its efficiency or
effectiveness’ including the exploitation of opportunities and/or the neutralisation of
threats in its environment (Barney & Clark 2007). In other words, an important focus
here is to evaluate the value of a firm’s resources in terms of how they align with a
firm’s strategy and external environment.
The SME-ICT literature recognises the importance of the resource ‘value’ concept in
an SME context because authors who have applied the RBV argue that SMEs should
identify their current strategic intent or main capabilities, or those which they need
to develop, so they can exploit external opportunities and respond to competitive
threats (Caldeira & Ward 2003; Duhan 2007; Edwards, Sengupta & Tsai 2010;
Hultman & Eriksson 2008; Qureshil, Kamal & P. 2009; Rangone 1999). According to
Rangone (1999) SME strategic intent and capabilities (including unique, valuable
52
business processes) can relate, for instance, to manufacturing (e.g. at low cost, high
quality), product innovation and development, and/or marketing (e.g. high customer
loyalty). Butler and Murphy (2008) go further and highlight that capabilities such as
intangible technical knowledge and experience, that can include ICT/ERPs, can be the
most valuable (and rare and inimitable) resources held by SMEs. Cragg, Mills and
Suraweera (2013), with reference to the RBV, highlight that VCs can be resources
contributing to an SME’s technical knowledge and experience (capabilities) and can
therefore be considered a key determinant of IS success in SMEs.
The IS literature on ERPs recognises the ‘value’ concept of RBV but highlights that
ERPs can only provide firms with a sustained competitive advantage if they are
considered together with the firm’s other organisational resources and capabilities,
including business processes (Hsu 2013). This is reinforced by Ram, Wu and Tagg
(2013) who contend that value derived from ERPs rely upon the careful management
of such activities as training and systems integration. Researchers studying ERP use
by SMEs based on the RBV found that value is derived from the functionality and
capability of ERP systems to support processes related to system transactional
efficiency, business analytics and collaboration (Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira &
Neto 2014). Ruivo, Oliveira and Neto (2014) added that ERP value is also reflected in
ongoing system enhancements to SME business processes in the post
implementation timeframes and that benefits accrue over some years, not
immediately. Overall, ERPs are reported to provide value that can help SMEs to
exploit opportunities, detect and respond to threats and support strategic intent.
The ‘value’ concept was therefore important for this study because it emphasised
that VCs may find their techniques to be effective if the approaches elicit or help
SMEs articulate the valuable resources critical to achieving strategies, and if the
methods lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the tailored ERP
system will align with and support (rather than undermine) these valuable resources.
53
33.3.2 Identify rare resources
Barney and Clarke (2007) contend that a resource (or bundle of resources) will only
offer sustainable competitive advantage if it also rare. They state, ‘as long as the
number of firms that possess a particular valuable resource (or a bundle of valuable
resources) is less than the number of firms needed to generate perfect competition
dynamics in an industry, that resource has the potential of generating a competitive
advantage’ (Barney & Clark 2007, p. 59). Bundles of resources can constitute a mix,
for instance, of human, financial, organisational capital and physical resources. In
other words, the significant focus here is to evaluate the rarity of a firm’s resources
in terms of its current and potential competition.
The SME-ICT literature recognises the strategic importance of the resource ‘rarity’
concept because authors who have applied RBV argue that SMEs should identify if
any of their resources (e.g. capabilities including unique business processes) are rare
or inaccessible to competitors because these will enable SMEs to secure a strategic
advantage (Caldeira & Ward 2003; Hultman & Eriksson 2008; Thong 2001). An SME’s
rare resources can include unique capabilities such as technical, ICT related
knowledge (Butler & Murphy 2008). If an SME does not have such internal IS
expertise, other authors using RBV (Cragg, Mills & Suraweera 2013; Qureshil, Kamal
& P. 2009; Thong, Yap & Raman 1996) have argued that relationships between an
SME and external expertise can be a bundle of resources that result in uniqueness or
rarity. This suggests that VCs and their techniques can be effective if they emphasise
during proposal development the uniqueness or rarity the VC’s relationship can
engender with the SME.
Much of the ERP literature is clear that ERPs generally do not provide a competitive
advantage if implemented as standard systems because standard ERP systems are
implemented by many firms (see section 2.5). The literature suggests that ERP
systems can result in rare resources in two ways: tailoring the ERP system to the
SME’s rare resources or processes (section 2.5.2); and/or SMEs changing their
resources or processes to adapt to the ERP system (Hsu 2013; Ram, Wu & Tagg 2013;
54
Ruivo, Oliveira & Neto 2012)(see also section 2.5.1). In the case of the latter, an ERP
system might be implemented with limited or no tailoring, but other SME resources
might be changed to suit the ERP system. For example, staff might be trained to use
the system effectively, or the system might be integrated with other systems to
enable, for instance, better collaboration or additional scope for business analysis
compared to competitors (Ruivo et al. 2012; Ruivo, Oliveira & Neto 2014). These
changes to resources around the ERP system represents the ‘bundling’ of resources
that can produce uniqueness or rarity that enables the ERP system and the other
resources to deliver a competitive advantage.
The ‘rarity’ concept is important for this study because it suggests VCs may find their techniques to be effective if these approaches:
1) elicit or help SMEs articulate which of their (bundle of) resources few
competitors have, and lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs
how the ERP system will be tailored to support these rare resources;
2) lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how a long-term
relationship with the VC could engender a rare resource unavailable to its
competitors; and/or
3) lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how changing their
resources to the ERP system will result in a rare bundle of resources relative
to their competitors.
33.3.3 Identify imperfectly imitable resources
In addition to being valuable and rare, resources should also be imperfectly imitable
(costly to imitate) to deliver sustained competitive advantages (Barney 1991, 1996,
2001; Barney & Hesterly 2012). In essence, this suggests that if a firm can directly
duplicate or substitute a resource then sustained competitive advantage cannot be
55
attained. Barney and Clark (2007) offer three reasons that a firm’s resource can be
imperfectly imitable and these include the presence of unique historical conditions;
causal ambiguity; and social complexity. I summarise the applicability of each to SMEs
and their ICT/ERP, and to VC ERP proposal development, separately next.
A firm’s resource may be imperfectly imitable if the firm’s competitors do not have
(or it would take them a long time to develop) the ‘unique historical conditions’
underpinning the resource (Barney and Clarke 2007). The IS literature recognises that
SMEs often have unique historical conditions (e.g. strong interpersonal client
relationships developed over decades and/or unique business processes that have
evolved through time) and that ICT/ERP systems can help SMEs deliver a competitive
advantage by, for example, improving client experiences and making unique (or
valuable and rare) business processes more efficient (Vayvay, Derman & Beceren
2009; Warren & Fuller 2009). Scholars, however, have also pointed out that ICT/ERPs
could adversely affect unique historical conditions by, for instance, automating and
reducing the interpersonal interactions SME clients may value (Strong & Volkoff
2010; Zach & Munkvold 2011). The ‘unique historical conditions’ concept suggested
that VCs may find their techniques to be effective if these approaches elicit or help
SMEs identify and articulate unique historical conditions, and if the methods lead to
proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the ERP system will be tailored to
form a bundle of imperfectly imitable resources that does not adversely affect the
client’s unique historical conditions.
Causal ambiguity is described by Barney and Clarke (2007) as a situation where the
relationship between a firm’s resources and its sustained competitive advantage is
not understood or somewhat misinterpreted by competitors and even the firm itself.
Ambiguity in the context of ERP systems and SMEs is clearly documented in the
literature in terms of ERP complexity resulting in combinations of tailoring (section
2.5.2) and the challenges many SMEs (i.e. the firm and its SME competitors) have
understanding and using them (section 2.4.2). This suggests VC and client
relationships can produce sustained competitive advantage if VCs compensate for
56
this ambiguity. So ‘causal ambiguity’ was a useful concept for this study because it
suggests VCs may find their techniques effective if the approaches lead to proposals
that articulate and convince clients how VCs will compensate for ERP ambiguity so
clients are more competitive relative to competitors.
A socially complex resource is described by Barney and Clarke (2007) as one that
cannot be managed or influenced by other firms. These resources are intangible and
examples can include relationships with customers and suppliers; organisational
culture; and relationships among the managers of a firm. The IS literature recognises
the impacts of these types of resources on the strategic effectiveness of ICT/ERPs that
SMEs implement. For example, ERP systems are reported to be more successful when
implemented by SMEs with a technical orientation (i.e. culture) or when the
management team overtly supports the implementation (see sections 2.4.1 and
2.4.2); that is, when the SME’s socially complex resources are conducive to ERP
implementation. But Chapter 2 also highlighted that these conditions do not hold for
all SMEs, so that VC techniques during proposal development may need to support
change management in SMEs (section 2.5.1). This concept warns, however, that ERP-
related changes should support, and not adversely affect, 'socially complex
resources’ that give SMEs competitive advantage. This concept suggested that VCs
may find their techniques to be effective if these approaches elicit or help SMEs
identify and articulate socially complex resources, and if the methods lead to
proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the tailored ERP system will support
(and not adversely affect) these socially complex resources.
33.3.4 Organisation – ERPs enable processes aligned with VRI resources
The fourth component of the VRIO framework, ‘Organisation’, underpins the first
three components (value, rarity and inimitability) because the latter components
‘can only be a source of sustained competitive advantage if the firm is organised to
exploit the potential offered by these resources’ (Barney & Clark 2007, p. 67).
‘Organised’ refers to non-strategic processes that are established in the business to
influence its ability to fully exploit its VRI resources (including strategically valuable,
57
rare and/or inimitable processes). Examples of such non-strategic processes include
management control systems, organisational structure and remuneration policies
which, in isolation, have limited ability to generate competitive advantage. However,
when they are combined with and support VRI resources they can become enablers
to the achievement of competitive advantage (Barney & Clark 2007; Barney &
Hesterly 2012).
Resources (including processes) that are valuable, rare or imperfectly imitable can be
held by an SME but they will only produce a sustainable competitive advantage if they
are organised, through non-strategic processes, in a way that exploits their potential.
The SME ICT/ERP literature highlights that ERP systems can provide support as
management control systems to VRI resources (Ramdani & Kawalek 2007; Walsh,
Schubert & Jones 2010). For example, ERP systems can, in combination with other
resources, support unique historical conditions such as a large client base developed
over decades can improve the experiences of those customers by, for instance,
automatically scanning customer product purchase histories in the ERP stock
modules to detect product expiry dates and trigger actions to advise the customer.
But this literature also warns that ERP systems can, if poorly implemented, adversely
impact these resources. For example, if non-strategic processes such as invoicing or
payment processing is inaccurately administered within the ERP, there is potential
for this to negatively impact strategic resources (unique historical conditions) such as
long term client relationships (Strong & Volkoff 2010; Vayvay, Derman & Beceren
2009; Zach & Munkvold 2011). VCs need to carefully identify those strategically
valuable, rare and inimitable resources and understand, in detail, the processes that
operationalise them, before implementing the ERP system.
Valuable, rare and imperfectly imitable resources can only be identified and exploited
if they are viewed holistically across the SME and also, in some circumstances, with
external parties such as suppliers and customers (Strong & Volkoff 2010; Zach &
Munkvold 2011). For example, rare resources, such as long term customer
relationships, are dependent upon the combined choreography of various non-
58
strategic SME functions working together such as sales (e.g. customer sales
processes), distribution (e.g. delivery processes) and accounting (e.g. invoicing and
payments administration). In other words, these non-strategic processes must be
aligned to support those strategic VRI resources. If these processes are aligned then
ERP systems can be tailored to support the VRI resources (including any strategically
valuable and rare processes) and associated non-strategic processes. But if only
specific problem areas of the business are focused upon, such as customer sales
processes only, then there will be potential for a misalignment of the ERP to the firm’s
VRI resources and capabilities, and thus negatively impacting the firm’s strategic
competitiveness.
The concept of ‘organisation’ was important to my study because it emphasised that:
1) VC techniques must elicit or help SMEs identify and articulate organisational
processes and the potential for these to negatively impact the firm’s
valuable, rare and imperfectly imitable resources and capabilities, as well as
organisational resources such as control systems, upon implementation of
the ERP system; and
2) VC proposals must tailor their ERP systems to support and/or ensure the ERP
system will not adversely affect these organisational processes.
It was therefore important that I looked for evidence of whether VCs did this and, if
so, how they did it.
33.3.5 Summarising the VRIO framework adapted for SME ERP proposals
Barney and Clarke’s (2007) VRIO framework therefore provides various concepts
which guided my analysis of the techniques VCs found useful for developing
proposals that tailor ERP systems for SME clients. More specifically, table 3.1
summarises how each concept was interpreted in the context of this study.
The RBV (as well as the ISV) literature offers various analytical tools that
operationalise the VRI components of table 3.1 and that can help SMEs and VCs
59
identify/articulate VRI resources, such as Porter’s five forces model and SWOT
(strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analyses. Similarly, I noted in
section 3.2.1 that Porter’s value chain is also a useful analytical tool in terms of
analysing strategic (VRI components) and operational (O component) processes
because it conceptualises the major types of processes that can be supported by
ERPs, and their interrelationships with each other. However, it is beyond the scope
of this thesis to examine these individually (see e.g. Hill et al. 2007; Hitt, Freeman &
Harrison 2001; Porter 1996; Porter 1980; Porter & Millar 1985 for more detail).
VRIO concept
Interpretation in the context of this study
Valuable VCs may find techniques effective if they elicit or help SMEs articulate the valuable resources critical to achieving strategies, and if they:
lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the tailored ERP system will align with and support (rather than undermine) these valuable resources.
Rarity VCs may find techniques effective if they elicit or help SMEs articulate which of their (bundle of) resources few competitors have, and
lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the ERP system will be tailored to support these rare resources; lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how a long-term relationship with the VC could engender a rare resource unavailable to its competitors; and/or lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how changing their resources to the ERP system will result in a rare bundle of resources relative to their competitors.
Imperfectly
imitable
VCs may find techniques effective if they elicit or help SMEs articulate:
unique historical conditions, and if their methods lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the ERP system will be tailored to form a bundle of imperfectly
60
imitable resources that does not adversely affect the client’s unique historical conditions; and lead to proposals that articulate and convince clients how VCs will compensate for ERP ambiguity so clients are more competitive relative to competitors; and identify and articulate socially complex resources, and if their methods lead to proposals that articulate and convince SMEs how the tailored ERP system will support (and not adversely affect) these socially complex resources
Organisation VCs may find techniques effective if they elicit or help SMEs articulate:
organisational processes and the potential for these to negatively impact the firm’s valuable, rare and imperfectly imitable resources and capabilities, as well as organisational resources such as control systems, upon implementation of the ERP system; and lead to proposals that articulate and convince clients how the ERP system will support and/or ensure the ERP system will not adversely affect these organisational processes
Table 3.1 Summary of VRIO concepts in the context of this study
This study was not concerned with the specific analytical tools, but rather the
techniques overall that VCs found effective when developing proposals that tailor
ERP systems for SMEs. This included whether they used analytical tools in general to
identify or help SMEs articulate strategic (VRI) resources and processes and, if so,
whether VCs found such tools effective when developing proposals and why.
The main problem with the VRIO framework as applied to this study (table 3.1) was
that it did not provide terminology regarding, for instance, the ERP VCs’ proposal
development processes or the nature of the tools they may find effective for
analysing SME processes in the level of detail needed to develop a proposal. In the
next section I therefore argue that Business Process Management (BPM) offers such
terminology and analytical tools.
61
33.4 Conceptual framework combining VRIO and BPM
Business Process Management (BPM) is defined as ‘a management discipline focused
on using business processes as a significant contributor to achieving an organisation’s
strategy and business objectives by significantly and sustainably improving
performance’ (Jeston & Nelis 2014, p. 4). BPM is suitable for augmenting the VRIO
framework to increase its relevance as a conceptual framework for this study for two
reasons. First, BPM is consistent with the three broad methodological stages involved
in business process analysis that I anticipated would form the basis of the techniques
VCs would use to develop ERP proposals (Harmon 2007; Jeston & Nelis 2008a, 2008b,
2014). Second, the BPM field offers various analytical tools as part of BPM
methodologies which could be used by VCs (Chang 2006; Harmon 2014; Jeston &
Nelis 2008b, 2014; Madison 2005; Mahal 2010; Ould 2005).
An objective of BPM is the achievement of process efficiencies by integrating and
improving a firm’s business processes and by aligning those processes with
organisational strategies and goals; thus ensuring the relevance and validity of
processes (Chang 2006; Harmon 2014). BPM subsumes some of the VRI analytical
tools such as SWOT and value chain analyses, in addition to offering methodologies
and analytical tools to align (changing) processes with VRI resources and strategy.
BPM is distinct as a discipline because it integrates various management concepts,
methods and tools such as business process reengineering (BPR), activity based
costing, six sigma, lean manufacturing, total quality management (TQM) and
operations management (Harmon 2014). Each of these methods and tools typically
focus on one or two specific aspects or functions of a business, such as quality in the
case of TQM and Six Sigma and efficiency in the case of lean manufacturing. Some of
these remain subsets of the BPM discipline, but BPM is distinctive because it takes an
holistic view of an organisation, considering all of its functions with a view to
improving processes across the organisation rather than focusing on specific
processes, or processes located in particular business silos or functional units
(Harmon 2014; Jeston & Nelis 2014). In doing this it considers the technical (ICT),
62
strategic, process and people dimensions of business processes in firms, not just one
or two of these (Harmon 2011). BPM is also dissimilar to the older BPR field because
BPR emphasised immediate and massive process change, while BPM focuses on more
gradual, continuous improvement of business processes over time (Hammer &
Champy 1994; Harmon 2014). BPM is therefore particularly suited to ERP
implementations because, once implemented, these also require process change
over time (Van Der Hoeven 2009).
Key aspects of BPM have been applied in the SME-ICT and SME-ERP literature
highlighting that BPM is appropriate for the SME context. Cragg, Tagliavini and Mills
(2007), for example, highlight in their study of SMEs that IT and business process
alignment was low in many firms and that many business processes could have been
better supported by IT. They highlighted though that VCs assisting SMEs can help to
improve this by drawing on BPM tools and frameworks such as the American
Productivity and Quality Centre’s (APQC) business process classification framework.
The SME-ERP literature has recently recognised the crucial connection between
business processes and alignment of these to ERP systems and the SMEs’ reliance
upon VCs to provide support for this (Hustad & Olsen 2011) and that business process
management tools applied during ERP proposal development is necessary to succeed
with this alignment (Christofi et al. 2013).
The next sections summarise the major aspects of the BPM discipline in terms of
methodology and analytical tools, and how they helped in my study of the techniques
VCs can use when developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for SMEs.
33.4.1 BPM methodology
There are many BPM methodologies available to practitioners evident in the
literature (ABPMP 2009; Ates et al. 2013; Burlton 2001, 2006; Chang 2006; Harmon
2014; IBM 2007; Jeston & Nelis 2008a, 2008b; Jurisch et al. 2014; Khan 2004; Mahal
2010; OMG 2011; Ould 2005; Towers & McGregor 2005). The three major phases
which comprise these methodologies are: 1) analysing the firm’s existing processes
(scoping); 2) identifying the problems with those processes (analysis); and 3)
63
formulating solutions to these problems that also support the strategic intentions of
the firm (redesign). I therefore anticipated that VCs may find some techniques to be
effective at different stages of the methodologies they used to develop proposals
that tailored their ERP systems for SME clients. I explain each stage in more detail
next.
The BPM scoping phase occurs at the commencement of any exercise involving
process change. It concentrates on defining the actual change proposed and
determining the boundaries within which it will operate, such as the functions of the
business that it will involve (e.g. sales, accounting) (Harmon 2014, pp. 334-7). BPM
scoping can therefore focus on processes at both strategic (VRI components) and
operational levels (O component) of the VRIO framework. In other words it ensures
that any process change that falls within the scope of the project will directly pertain
to the strategic intentions of the business. Processes established as a result of that
change will be designed to positively influence the firm’s ability to exploit its
resources to attain competitive advantages. This phase also establishes the budget
available, time frame requirements, resources (including capabilities) available, and
expectations pertaining to who will do what in terms of the project. If a BPM project's
scope is inaccurate or, worse, misinterpreted at the outset, then the other stages will
fail. This suggests VCs would also need to determine the scope of ERP-related change
needed by their SME clients firms and these various other constraints and
responsibilities, and to ensure this is documented in their proposals.
The BPM process analysis phase examines processes identified within the boundaries
formed in the scoping phase, beyond the rudimentary analysis conducted during the
scoping phase (Harmon 2014, pp. 337-42). For example, this phase develops a clear
understanding of the current state of the processes under scrutiny, known as the ’As
Is’ state (Madison 2005, p. 71). This includes an analysis of processes as they exist
presently (including their sub-processes, inputs, outputs and activities) to ensure that
all stakeholders are pivoting around the same processes for redesign. In the context
of the VCs developing proposals, this BPM phase is significant because VCs would
64
need to know what processes they are changing. This phase requires VCs to
understand these changes at strategic and operational levels before making ERP
recommendations in their proposals (Chang 2006, pp. 243-6).
BPM process redesign follows the scoping and analysis phases, but can be conducted
with the analysis phase, and involves designing new or improved processes that are
often referred to as the 'To-Be' state (Harmon 2014, pp. 342-5). Some of the activities
typically conducted in this phase include a thorough review of the 'As-Is' process(es)
and improvement goals; the brainstorming and formulation of ideas for change; the
actual design of the new or improved process(es); the design of a management
process to support the 'To-Be' process(es); and the creation of suitable measures for
the activities of the 'To-Be' process (Harmon 2014, pp. 228-38). This phase is also very
relevant to VCs because these are, potentially, the types of elements I anticipated
they might include in their proposals that tailor ERP systems for SME clients. The
emphasis in the previous phases on understanding strategic and operational
perspectives helps to ensure that any proposal for ERP process change will be
strategically aligned to the business. For example, ERP modules would be selected
and the whole proposed implementation tailored, to manage processes that deliver
on the strategic intentions of the SME.
33.4.2 BPM tools
BPM also offers a range of tools that can be used by practitioners throughout the
three major methodological stages to analyse processes, as well as to aid elicitation
of information from and communication with stakeholders (e.g. Harmon 2014, pp.
185-239; Jeston & Nelis 2014, pp. 95-566). These tools typically take the form of
diagrams, worksheets, models, charts, checklists and various other types of
documents to guide process analysis and information elicitation. I therefore
anticipated that VCs may use similar types of tools, even if not the specific BPM tools,
when developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for SME clients. I explain some of
the major types next.
65
Tools that provide high level overviews of a business and its significant problem areas
are typically used in the first instance in BPM. These tools range from facilitated
workshop events to value chain analysis (Harmon 2014, pp. 2-4). For example,
Porter’s value chain is advocated by BPM practitioners as a useful tool to draw
managerial focus inwardly to the business so that it can better prepare its resources
and capabilities to meet externally influenced change. This is a key initial tool in BPM
scoping for helping to place parameters around the project in question, for example,
the particular primary functions of the business that the change will address. Having
identified these, they are then considered in terms of their strategic impacts on the
business, such as the value that they add to the end product or service.
One major type of BPM tool are worksheets which can be used at each stage of the
BPM methodology (Jeston & Nelis 2008a, Appendix M). For example, during the
design phase BPM practitioners can use process analysis and improvement
worksheets and activity worksheets (which might include details such as business
rules and quality measures) to guide proposal development information elicitation
processes about the details pertaining to business process tasks and activities. In this
study I was therefore interested in whether the VCs used worksheets of any kind and
whether they found these effective for developing proposals.
Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN) is an example of the diagrammatical
tools that can be used by BPM practitioners to draw the ‘As Is’ and ‘To Be’ processes.
At the scoping stage BPMN would be used to depict the high-level processes to be
focused upon, and in later phases these processes will be analysed and drilled into or
‘broken down’ into more detail so they can be better understood (Harmon 2014, pp.
214-39). Another diagrammatic tool used in BPM can include organisational charts
and Process Scoping Diagrams (Harmon 2014, p. 196) that provide visual
representations of different types of process problems typically encountered in any
process analysis. These diagrammatic tools provide simple techniques to guide
information elicitation and communication with stakeholders. In this study I was
therefore interested in whether VCs used diagrammatic tools of any kind and, if so,
66
how VCs perceived the importance of these for communication and elicitation when
developing ERP proposals for SME clients.
33.5 Summary
In summary, this chapter has argued that the VRIO framework and BPM principles
(e.g. the methodological steps and associated tools such as worksheets and
diagrammatic techniques) appeared to provide a suitable overarching theoretical
perspective for conceptualising or understanding the techniques VCs find effective
for developing ERP proposals for SMEs. The problem, however, was that there were
no previous studies that combined the VRIO framework and BPM to explore
techniques that VCs experience as effective when developing proposals that tailor
ERP systems for individual SMEs. As a consequence, it was not clear from the
literature how the combination of the VRIO framework and BPM principles could be
used to conceptualise the techniques that VCs find effective for developing ERP
proposals for their SME clients. One of the contributions of this research, therefore,
was to explore this potential in more detail. For this reason, I revised the main
research question presented in Chapter 1 as follows to emphasise that a goal of this
study was to determine how this combination could help with such conceptualising:
What techniques do VCs experience as effective when developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and how can these be interpreted using the VRIO framework and BPM principles?
The conceptual framework includes strategic components represented by the RBV
and its VRIO framework, together with components from the BPM discipline.
This framework highlights how important it is for VCs, acting as agents for their SME
clients, to focus on the client’s internal resources and capabilities in order to
understand what is needed if the ERP is to deliver the strategic and operational
improvements sought. The VRIO components also provide concepts for explaining
and understanding the SME heterogeneity which VCs need to take into account when
developing proposals to tailor their ERP systems. Finally, the BPM discipline offered
67
terminology for describing the VCs’ ERP proposal development process, especially in
relation to the methodological stages and the types of analytical tools VCs might use.
The conceptual framework helps to incorporate the answers to the following sub-
questions into an answer for the overarching research question. The sub questions
are as follows:
1. What are the common experiences VCs have in dealings with their SME
clients during proposal development?
When a VC undertakes to develop a proposal, they do so on the basis of
preconceptions and experiences of the SME organisations and the people whom they
work with. Their understanding of such matters as the client’s internal resources such
as strategies, business processes, staff skills and technical capabilities, time, finances,
management arrangements, etc. inevitably will shape their approach. Few studies
have considered VCs’ views of, and experiences with, SMEs, especially pertaining to
the ERP context of this study and during the proposal development stage in
particular.
2. How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles in relation to their SME
clients?
Knowing how VCs saw their activities in relation to their clients revealed the degree
to which they undertook (or saw it as their duty) to help the SMEs develop their VRI-
related capabilities and resources in framing the ERP proposal. A VC’s interpretation
that takes into account a client’s strategies and business processes during proposal
development is more likely to deliver an ERP system that aligns the firm’s business
processes and other resources with the business’ strategies or strategic intents.
68
3. What information do VCs elicit from SME clients to develop the ERP proposal
and what techniques do they believe are effective?
It is important to understand what VCs perceived to be the fundamental information
required for the proposal development stage and the extent to which they sought
and used information about strategy, internal resources and business processes, and
what methodological steps and types of analytical tools they used to elicit this
information. By understanding what information VCs elicit and the ways in which they
did this, my research could identify whether their approaches were consistent with
the RBV view, the VRIO framework and in relation to the latter, as I have argued, BPM
principles.
4. What are the main kinds of adjustments VCs make to standard ERP packages
when they tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs?
In addressing this question the research examines the complex analytical and
interpretive aspect of the VCs’ work and examines how they incorporated clients’
needs into proposals by articulating how the VCs’ ERP systems would be tailored to
an individual client. This reflects the degree to which they made judgements based
on ideas consistent with the VRIO framework and/or the insights from BPM
principles.
The next chapter provides details about the research approach I employed to answer
these sub-questions and my overarching research question. This includes an
overview and justification of my research method, design, analysis and limitations.
69
CChapter 4: Research Approach
4.1 Introduction
The previous chapter presented a conceptual framework to guide the analysis of VCs’
perceptions of the techniques they find most effective for developing proposals to
tailor ERP systems for SMEs. The framework mainly comprised the resource based
view’s VRIO elements to contextualise and make sense of the proposal development
techniques used by the VCs. It also incorporated the tools and techniques from the
BPM discipline that are suited to ERP proposal development to operationalise the
VRIO-based framework. I highlighted in chapter 3 that there are no previous studies
that have combined the VRIO and BPM, and that this study was needed to determine
how they could be used in combination to conceptualise or interpret how VCs
experience the effectiveness of the techniques they use to develop their proposals.
This chapter provides a description of, and a rationale for, the research method that
I adopted for this research project including my research aims, perspective, method,
design, data collection, analysis and limitations.
4.2 Research Aims
The purpose of my research was to answer the following overarching research
question and the more specific sub-questions:
What techniques do VCs experience as effective when developing proposals that
tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and how can these be interpreted using the
VRIO framework and BPM principles?
1. What are the common experiences VCs have in dealings with their SME clients
during proposal development?
2. How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles in relation to their
SME clients?
3. What information do VCs elicit from SME clients to develop the ERP proposal
and what techniques do they believe are effective?
70
4. What are the main kinds of adjustments VCs make to standard ERP packages
when they tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs?
To answer these questions I needed to get rich accounts from ERP VCs who were
experienced at developing ERP proposals for SMEs, such as delving into VC
perceptions, contexts and meanings in their accounts of how they traverse the
proposal development stage with SME clients. The lack of research on the VCs’
perspective with such work (see section 2.7) meant I needed descriptive data so I
could identify new themes pertaining to the techniques VCs use to deal with
heterogeneous SMEs and to elicit information about their strategies and processes.
Answering these questions thus required that VCs describe accounts in their own
words so I could capture candid experiences pertaining to techniques they found
(in)effective when, for instance, communicating and building relationships with
SMEs, and enacting methodologies to elicit information from their clients.
The next section explains why approaches or methods based on an interpretivist
research perspective enabled me to collect this type of data needed to answer my
research questions.
44.3 Research Perspective
Given that my research aim was to understand VC perceptions, experiences, meaning
and contexts, I needed a research approach to capture the complexity and richness
of the VC practices in their own words. Approaches from the positivist perspective
(e.g. surveys, structured/deterministic interviews) would have enabled me to identify
the techniques VCs used to develop proposals. However, they tend not to permit, for
instance, researcher interpretation of the meaning from the accounts of participants
(Kvale 2007, pp. 104-6), such as ambivalence by VCs about particular SME issues
which might be apparent during their accounts. Approaches from the interpretivist
perspective, by contrast, lend themselves to investigating these types of questions,
and are well established within the IS discipline (Klein & Myers 2001; Myers 1997;
Trauth 2001; Walsham 1995a, 1995b, 2006). Further, these approaches have been
71
used in studies that explore the accounts of VCs who implement ICT systems for SME
clients (e.g. Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013; Carey 2008).
Interpretive approaches are applied by researchers who wish to make sense of the
accounts of people who are the focus in the research project, or to understand the
‘complexity of human sense making’ (Klein & Myers 1999, p. 69). The strengths of
these approaches have been identified as providing the flexibility needed by the
researcher to seek meaning and to gain insight into the wider interrelationships
among the phenomena they are researching (Ticehurst & Veal 2000). To do this the
researcher relies on research participants to provide their own views and
explanations of their activities, enabling the researcher to draw meaning from their
accounts about the way they behave and why they behave that way (Ticehurst & Veal
2000). In this sense, IS research is interpretive when scholars assume that knowledge
of reality is attained through social constructions such as consciousness, language,
shared meanings and documents (Klein & Myers 1999). As Walsham (1993, pp. 4-5)
characterises interpretive IS research, it is “aimed at producing an understanding of
the context of the information system, and the process whereby the information
system influences and is influenced by the context.”
My project thus involved investigating a few VCs’ proposal development experiences
so I could collect ‘thick descriptive detail’, rather than approaching many informants
and obtaining accounts in less depth. The interpretive perspective enabled me to
explore the views of VCs whose experiences, perceptions and contexts were relevant
for answering my research questions. I was also able to delve beneath the surface of
VCs’ accounts to explore latent or poorly articulated views and other deeper
meanings, such as whether VCs understood and elicited information about SME
strategies and their distinctive characteristics.
The next section justifies why semi-structured interviews, which is an interpretivist-
related research method, was used in this study.
72
44.4 Research Method
Overall, I needed a research method that was flexible, interactive, responsive,
reflective and, therefore, necessarily small scale, to answer my research questions.
As I stated in section 4.3., the interpretive perspective supports these criteria as it
recognises the meaningful nature of human social actions, and therefore the
potential for differentiation among people borne out of their perceptions which are
driven by such dimensions as personal goals and experiences but also their cultures
and histories (Lee & Baskerville 2003).
To do this I determined that a structured interview approach, requiring identical and
sequential questions, was inappropriate for this research because this would not
provide the flexibility and interactivity that I needed to evoke the rich, nuanced and
contextually pertinent interviewee perceptions and viewpoints to inform the
research questions. Using open ended interview questions would have met the
criteria described above, however this approach would have made it particularly
difficult to compare responses between participants (Ticehurst & Veal 2000). To
answer my research question I needed to ensure that certain topics were covered
and asked of all participants, so I therefore chose semi-structured, personal
interviews to collect the data to answer my research questions. I selected this
approach because not only did it provide VCs with scope to describe, in detail, their
‘life world’ view, it also enabled VCs to uncover new meanings pertaining to their
proposal development experiences, during the course of the interviews, that they
had not previously considered (Kvale 2007). Interviews provided participants with the
flexibility needed to offer spontaneous input whilst enabling me to direct the
interview process so I could ensure all pertinent topics were explored (Kvale 2007).
They enabled me to ‘condense and interpret’ the informant’s descriptions (Kvale
2007) into emergent themes pertaining to techniques VCs find effective when
developing ERP proposals for SME clients. Finally, this data collection approach
meant I could confirm meaning (both during the interviews and later upon analysis
of data) in order to clarify and validate understanding (Kvale 2007).
73
Interviewing also gave me the opportunity to speak directly with VCs, to follow up or
clarify their responses where necessary, and to detect non-verbal or non-explicit
elements of their accounts (Kvale 2007). Thus, I was able to identify issues about
which they were confident and those where they were tentative; an opportunity
which would not have been afforded through written accounts, document analysis
or online surveys. The interview method is also well-suited to picking up the ways VCs
expressed their ideas and their choice of language.
Many of these benefits could be realised through group interviews or focus groups,
for example, which might have entailed some lively discussions amongst the
participants and highlighted other new insights (Kvale 2007, p. 72; Ticehurst & Veal
2000, p. 102). However, the one-to-one interview and the confidentiality of this
interchange encourage candour and self-revelation which even a small group setting
may have dampened (Kvale 2007, pp. 11-2). In addition, the flexibility of the one-to-
one interview and the ability to explore a participant’s comments further, were
advantages.
There were also a number of practical advantages to using interviews. They are
relatively easy to organise and schedule, people are familiar and often comfortable
with this form of interaction; and many people consider them more desirable
compared to mail questionnaires and web surveys (Neuman 2007, p. 188). This
method also enables the interviewer, in the case of face-to-face and on-site
interviews, to observe the actual surroundings of participants and non-verbal
communications, and for the interviewer and participants to use visual aids to enrich
contextual understanding (Neuman 2007).
In this research project I used the work of Klein and Myers (1999) to increase the
quality of my data collection, interview schedule design and data analysis. These
authors present a set of seven principles to guide the interpretive researchers in
matters of the ‘conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information
systems’ (p. 72). Their principles are derived from anthropology, phenomenology and
hermeneutics. The principles provide a framework against which I could acquire
74
insights into interpretivism, before the research design and data collection
commenced, and continuously cross check the rigor of my research. In the following
list I provide examples of the ways in which each of these principles guided me
throughout the project.
Principle One: ‘The fundamental principle of the hermeneutic circle’
This principle highlights the importance of developing understanding via
iteration between consideration of the interdependent meaning of parts and
the whole that they form. In this sense I was aware at the time of data
collection, and indeed analysis, that fragmented input from all interviewees
about particular phenomena pertaining to their contexts would come
together to be interpreted, ultimately, as rich insights otherwise unseen by
looking only at the component parts. This was particularly pertinent in this
research project because of the potential for the wide ranging views and
experiences of VCs dealing with contextual issues of SMEs such as their
heterogeneity and distinctive characteristics. The first principle is the
foundation for the other principles (Klein & Myers 1999) and I noted the
implications of the remaining six in the context of my research to reinforce
my approach as follows:
Principle Two: ‘The principle of contextualisation’
This principle emphasised that it was important for me to contextualise the
social and historical background of the research setting given that ERPs were
originally designed for, and emerged from, the large business sector, not the
SME sector, and that both sectors have contextual differences. It also
highlighted the importance of contextualising the individual VCs who held
various positions in their firms and the majority of whom worked in different
firms. Contextualising the interviews was also important as around half of
these were held in an array of business premises at different locations around
Melbourne and in different environments such as private offices, board
75
rooms and meeting rooms. The other half were conducted by telephone from
my university office.
Principle Three: ‘The principle of interaction between the researcher(s) and the subjects’
This principle reminded me that during the interview process the
interviewees were as much interpreters and analysts as myself. As I asked
questions and interacted with interviewees I created potential for them to
alter their perspectives on the issues being discussed. These altered
perspectives are in turn their analysis of the discussed issues which they then
articulated to me. This was particularly evident in instances where
interviewees hadn’t previously considered issues that I put to them.
Principle Four: ‘The principle of abstraction and generalisation’
This principle was a reminder to me, during my analysis work, of the
importance that any theoretical abstractions or generalisations that I derived
from my data needed to be developed carefully. This involved reflective
thought and frequent revisiting of the interview transcripts to ensure my
interpretations were well founded before I formulated abstractions and
generalisations about the experiences of VCs during the proposal
development phase.
Principle Five: ‘The principle of dialogical reasoning’
This principle was a guide for me to be clear in my reports to readers, and
indeed to myself, about the essential philosophical assumptions about the
research including the interpretivist design preference that I selected and the
identification of strengths and weaknesses associated with this. This clarity,
at the outset of the research project, was essential for me because the
philosophical assumptions (and approach) to my research design
underpinned the ways in which my data were consolidated, interpreted and
76
reported. This chapter provides details about my interpretivist preferences
and the design of the research project.
Principle Six: ‘The principle of multiple interpretations’
I was alert to this principle during the design of this research and during data
analysis and the reporting stage. More specifically, it heightened my
sensitivity to the potential for differences in interpretations of interviewees
in relation to the same questions put to them, and also to the potential for
biases or distortions in their narratives of events or circumstances. For
example, during the research design stage I considered issues of language that
I would use during interviews that might be misinterpreted and I addressed
this by getting senior academics to review my research instrument before
data collection.
Principle Seven: ‘The principle of suspicion’
In the case of principle seven I considered the potential influences of the
interviewees themselves, such as their positions in their firm, the power they
held, the resources available to them to manage their roles, vested interests
they might have held, and the types of SME clients for whom they worked. I
also considered that, should such influences be detected in my analysis, then
that would be highlighted in my findings because such influences still form
part of the social world in which the interviewees existed.
The next section provides more specific detail on how the interview schedule was
designed, how the interviews were carried out and how the data was analysed based
on these guiding principles.
44.5 Research Design
I approached the semi-structured interviews following Kvale’s (2007) seven stages
because they offered practical guidance on how to conduct interview-based
research. The first stage was to thematise the research project by clearly establishing
the purpose of the investigation (see section 4.2). Then I designed the interview study
77
so that I would obtain the intended knowledge. Then I conducted the interviews to
ensure a reflective approach. After transcriptions of the interviews were prepared, I
undertook an analysis of the interview data. Then I verified the data and the emerging
assumptions and reported the findings. The following sections provide further details
of this research design.
44.5.1 The Sample
The first objective with Kvale’s (2007) second design stage was to identify the sample
of interviewees. The population for the study consisted of individual VCs from ERP
vendor/consultancy firms across Melbourne servicing the SME sector. The VCs
targeted were the individuals who developed ERP proposals for, and implement ERP
systems into, SMEs.
Potential participants were identified via online ERP Directories, Google searches and
the Australian Yellow Pages online. For practical reasons I limited my search to those
VC firms located in, or having an office in, Melbourne. A total of fifty candidate firms
were identified. I examined the web presences of all fifty firms to establish the scope
of their services. Thirteen firms were found to be unsuitable because they serviced
only medium and large sized firms. I attempted contact with the remaining thirty
seven firms via email (or where an email address was unavailable, surface mail). In
cases where responses were not received, I telephoned firms where possible using
contact numbers on their web sites or the Yellow Pages Online. Four of these firms
were not contactable after several failed attempts. Two firms advised that they were
software manufacturers only (that is, they did not provide consulting services), but
expressed interest in the research nevertheless and referred me to their partner VCs
(all of which were already listed in my database).
Of the thirty one remaining firms, from which individuals would be suitable for
interview, ten (31%) declined to be interviewed mainly on the grounds of insufficient
time and resources to participate. Most expressed interest in the project and stated
that they would welcome involvement in the future when more time and resources
might be available. The remaining twenty one firms (69%) agreed to participate and
78
a total of twenty three interviews were conducted (including two interviews each in
two of the companies). This represents a satisfactory response rate. Following initial
contact with interviewees, arrangements for interviews were made via telephone
contact.
Twelve interviews were conducted face-to-face at interviewee’s office premises and
a further eleven were conducted via telephone, (i.e. 23 interviews). I highlighted the
advantages of conducting face-to-face interviews earlier in section 4.4. Telephone
interviews were conducted from my campus office. The telephone interviews
enabled the same level of probing as the face-to-face interviews, however they did
not enable visual observation or the use of visual aids. Additionally, telephone
interviews offered less contextual success with open-ended, complex and sensitive
questions than face-to-face interviews (Neuman 2007). I was conscious of this before
interview commencement and so, where necessary, asked additional questions for
clarification. All interviews were digitally recorded.
All twenty three participants had several years of experience working with ERPs and
SMEs. Over half of the interviewees had in excess of ten years’ experience in the ERP
and business consulting industry. All VCs had recent ‘hands on’ experience with ERP
proposal development with SME clients. Individual roles ranged from CEOs to senior
consultants. The industry is male dominated and this was reflected in my study
because only two interviewees were female. All interviewees were professional,
articulate and knowledgeable about ERP systems. Most VCs (96%) held tertiary
qualifications. Thus, all were suitable participants in the research project, understood
my questions and were able to provide appropriate responses. I have purposefully
not provided further breakdowns of or details about the participants to reduce the
chances of inadvertently revealing their identities, especially given the small Victorian
community of ERP VCs.
The ERP systems that VCs sold to their clients were all manufactured for the SME
sector. Some were scaled down versions of larger ERP systems that were originally
designed for larger organisations and these were typically produced by global ERP
79
manufacturers such as SAP and Microsoft. But others were manufactured exclusively
for the SME market by companies such as MYOB and Uniware. VCs advised that all of
their ERP systems were deployed to clients at least with modules for accounting, sales
and stock control, and that further modules could be added at later times if or when
needed. Other modules were also sometimes included in initial implementations and
this was dependent upon the type of SME clients being served. For example, ERPs for
manufacturing SMEs would typically include production and procurement modules,
whilst ERPs for retail and service oriented SMEs may include client relationship
modules. All VC ERP systems had vast arrays of modules suited to most of the
fundamental business process needs of SME clients.
The VCs’ clients were all SMEs. Whilst most of these were defined as medium sized
firms (that is, 20-190 employees), a few VCs stated that some clients had fewer than
20 employees and were considered to be small enterprises. The VCs’ SME clients
were located in a range of industries and business types such as retail, manufacturing,
trade services, hospitality, wholesale, importing, exporting and professional services.
44.5.2 The Interview Schedule
The second objective with Kvale’s (2007) second interview design stage was to design
the interview schedule to guide the semi-structured interviews (see appendix 1 for a
list of the interview questions). Each interview took, on average, 63 minutes, which
gave me sufficient time to develop rapport with the participants that was needed to
explore in detail the techniques VCs used to develop ERP proposals and their
experiences using these with SME clients. All of the 6 main sections in the schedule
were developed based on the literature and are outlined as follows:
1. VC role and SME heterogeneity. The schedule commenced with introductory
questions asking VCs to describe their positions, role and SMEs they work with.
This helped me establish a basic context about the authority and power held by
the VC which may have influenced the responses to my questions and the
meaning behind those responses. As highlighted in section 2.7.2, role confusion
between VCs and SMEs has been found, so it was important to ask VCs about
80
their role in developing ERP proposals for SME clients to determine the VCs’
overall perception of themselves in relation to this work. Finally, SME
heterogeneity is an important issue identified in the literature (as argued
throughout chapter 2) requiring consideration by VCs during proposal
development, so I needed to asked VCs to describe their SME clients to try to
determine if heterogeneity was found to be an issue from their perspective.
2. Methodology. In section 2.7.3 I explained there has been little research about
methodological approaches VCs use when developing ERP proposals for their
SME clients, so this section of the schedule had questions to explore this
further. Methodological techniques underpin the other major themes in the
research (e.g. how they communicate and develop relationships with clients),
so it was logical to gather information about the VCs’ methodologies. Questions
ranged from asking VCs about the techniques and issues involved in eliciting
information from clients, handling different SME skill levels, encouraging client
preparation and modifying their methodologies. These questions also helped
the thinking of VCs, in relation to these activities, to emerge, such as their level
of understanding and perceived importance of types of information (e.g.
whether they mentioned, unprompted, client strategy and unique business
processes) and of their role versus those they perceived to be the responsibility
of SME clients. These questions also gave VCs the opportunity to reveal BPM-
related methodologies or techniques that may have underpinned their
approach to proposal development.
3. Relationship development. The next section included several questions aimed
at understanding the relationships and interactions VCs have with SME clients
during proposal development. This was important because the literature
(section 2.7.2.1) reports these relationships between VCs and SMEs can be
complex and problematic, and because conceptually these relationships can be
(strategic) resources for SMEs (see chapter 3). Indeed, section 2.6.2 highlighted
that some SMEs engage VCs for implementation and then step back, delegating
81
all responsibility to the VCs, but little is known about if and how ERP VCs
experience and deal with this. Questions in this section of the schedule
therefore asked VCs about the levels of involvement they try to establish with
their clients during proposal development and also about the involvement that
clients pursue during this stage. I also asked questions about information VCs
found difficult to obtain and the frankness of their clients when providing
sensitive information, because I anticipated this would uncover issues
pertaining to, and techniques for gaining, trust which is essential to good
relationship development between VCs and SMEs (see section 2.7.2.1).
Relationship development is inherently connected to clarity of communications
and so the schedule then explored the VCs’ views and experiences about this.
4. Communication. This section included questions pertaining to the types of
communications VCs have with their clients, particularly to achieve clarity,
whilst developing proposals. I highlighted in section 2.7.2.1 that effective
communicative between VCs and SMEs was important but there has been little
research on the communication techniques VCs use. I therefore asked VCs
about the types of communication they have with clients to ensure that
techniques such as ERP demonstrations (as identified in section 2.7.2.3) could
emerge and VCs could then elaborate on their effectiveness. I also asked
whether VCs had preferences pertaining to meetings, presentations, written
material including documents, email etc. to allow BPM-related techniques to
emerge such as use of notations and worksheets. Communication also includes
VCs educating SME clients who have limited ICT/ERP competencies (as reported
in section 2.7.2.2), so I asked interviewees if this is considered during proposal
development to determine their views and experiences in this regard.
5. SME and VC resourcing. Resourcing ERP projects was a significant theme
throughout chapter 2 because SME resources (e.g. time, money, ICT skills) are
reported in the literature as limited. Conceptually (see chapter 3) and
practically, this meant that a challenge for VCs would be allocating their own
82
resources to navigate this issue during ERP proposal development. This section
of the schedule therefore included questions about the VC’s time and resources
allocated, resources SMEs make available and whether third-parties helped
during proposal development. These questions facilitated the emergence of VC
perceptions and techniques pertaining to using their resources to compensate
for a lack of SME resources. They also enabled me to determine if there were
any tensions between VCs’ perceptions of their own roles and those they
expected of SMEs during proposal development.
6. SME strategy and business processes. The last section of the schedule posed
general questions about proposal development (e.g. about ERP tailoring, key
success factors). In particular this section focused on the efforts and views of
VCs pertaining to understanding their SME clients’ strategies and unique
business processes, and to ensuring their ERP systems were tailored to and
aligned with these. The literature reports on the importance of this alignment
(sections 2.4 and 2.5) and I argued this also from a conceptual perspective
based on the VRIO framework (see chapter 3). I placed these questions at the
end of the schedule to determine if these issues were raised by VCs
unprompted earlier in the interview (thus implying their perception of the
importance of SME strategy and unique processes). It also meant that when I
asked VCs explicitly about these issues they had already provided a lot of
context against which to interpret their views and experiences pertaining to
client strategies and processes.
In the next section I summarise, overall, how I interacted with the participants during
the interviews when asking the questions from the interview schedule.
44.5.3 Interactions during the interviews
Kvale’s (2007) third stage of the interview investigation guidelines is to conduct the
interviews. The interviews averaged just over 63 minutes in length each and in total
they represented twenty four hours and 18 minutes of interview time. During the
interviews I remained cognisant, given the immersive nature of interpretive research,
83
to remain as neutral as possible during the interview process. This was important so
I could dispel any interviewee perceptions that I held preconceived views, opinions
or biases (Walsham 2006) towards any particular ERP systems or techniques they
used for proposal development, so I could instead encourage interviewees to express
themselves freely. I was conscious also not to unduly influence informants during the
interview process by overwhelming them with my enthusiasm for the research topic
and, instead, I deliberately adopted a weak constructionist stance, encouraging
interviewees to articulate their views and experiences in detail.
I also applied Whyte’s (1982) ‘Hierarchy of six interviewer responses’ as a guide
during the interviews to ensure that I was essentially drawing on what interviewees
had already stated and encouraging them to expand where possible. For example, I
used the expression, ‘that’s interesting’ in situations where I wanted the interviewee
to continue discussing a particular answer, or I would use ‘back tracking’ to invite
further information, such as ‘let’s revisit what you were saying about your SME client
relationship.’
All participants were able to answer all the questions during the interview. On only
one occasion a respondent appeared to be rushed but they still answered all
questions, and most of these in detail. Overall, the depth of detail obtained during
the interviews provided me with rich data for transcription and analysis. This depth
was aided by continuously following up on participant comments during the
interviews to explore their comments further and to ensure they understood the
concepts in the questions. For example, if participants stated that they did elicit
details of SME clients’ strategies, I probed further about this by asking for examples.
This enabled me to verify that my question was not misinterpreted by interviewees,
to check I understood the meaning of what the interviews said, and to ensure that
the data I was gathering was as accurate and detailed as possible.
44.6 Data Transcription and Analysis
The fourth and fifth stages of Kvale’s (2007) interview investigation guidelines is to
transcribe the interviews and analyse them (respectively). All interviews were
84
recorded digitally and professionally transcribed into Microsoft Word documents for
analysis. I checked the reliability of the transcriptions randomly against the digital
recordings. Where the transcriber could not determine a word or a phrase in a
recording this was also checked and adjusted by me on the respective transcript
before the analysis was conducted.
Whilst the interview transcripts were useful to me for inductive analysis facilitating
discovery, I was conscious of Kvale’s interpretation of transcribed interviews which
he states as follows, “the transcription of the interview conversation to a written form
involves a second abstraction [the first being the recorded form], where the tone of
the voice, the intonations and the breathing are lost. In short, transcripts are
impoverished decontextualised renderings of interview conversations” (Kvale 2007, p.
93). To address this I wrote brief notes during the interviews to, for example, record
instances where VCs emphasised a response through body language or intonation.
For example, if a question about SME clients invoked interviewee frustration for
some reason, represented by aggravated body language, I noted this so that later
during analysis, its meaning could be explored. These notes were also transcribed
digitally for the analysis.
One of the challenges facing the researcher in interpretive research is confronting
and managing hundreds of pages of transcripts within which meaning is sought (Kvale
2007). To address this I selected a mode of analysis that focuses upon ‘meaning’ and
I used Kvale’s (2007) descriptions of these techniques for guidance. Specifically, I
applied Kvale’s (2007) ‘Meaning Coding’ analysis which involved attaching keywords
to text segments from my interview transcripts so that later in my analysis I could
access groups of text segments by their particular codes and conduct further analysis
to discover meaning and additional themes. I compartmentalised these codes into
various categories representing the major topics I established from the literature
review as being pertinent to the work of VCs – including methodology, relationships
and communications (see section 4.5.2).
85
As I had adopted the interpretive approach, establishing such categories as an initial
view of research issues gathered from the literature, was necessary (Myers 1997).
This provided support to my understanding of the actions of VCs and provided to
some extent, the meanings that they associate with such actions (Neuman 2007). It
also assisted with the development of the research instrument, preparing me to
some extent to interpret responses during the interviews, effectively ‘pushing
forward’ parts of my analysis (Kvale 2007). This reflects to some extent, Kvale’s third
step in his ‘Six Steps of Analysis’ (Kvale 2007, p. 102) in which he suggests that ‘the
interviewer, during the interview, condenses and interprets the meaning of what the
interviewee describes, and ‘sends’ the meaning back.’ Kvale’s ‘Six Steps’ also
informed my analytical approach. By approaching my research analysis in the way
that I have described I was able to take my very lengthy transcripts, code them and
enable comparisons and insights.
The analysis of the interviews was conducted using the QSR NVivo Qualitative
Analysis software program. I had already prepared forty ‘nodes’ across four main
categories (described above) in the software and these were drawn from the
literature review work (see Chapter 2), theory work (see Chapter 3) and reflected the
interview schedule structure (see Appendix 1). A further 23 nodes (some of these
prepared as sub-nodes) emerged during coding (cycles of interpretive analysis) as
additional meaning evolved and further perspectives developed (Kvale 2007). I added
two more categories during the coding exercise to reflect SME client profiles and VC
profiles and to accommodate rich data in the transcripts about these. Together, these
were allocated an additional set of 15 nodes. At the completion of coding, my analysis
included a total of 78 nodes. In cases where particular recordings or transcribed
interview documents were unclear, I contacted interviewees by telephone or email
to seek further clarification or validate aspects of the interview transcriptions, but
this was rare. Upon clarification, I corrected transcriptions, for example,
misunderstood words, and, if necessary, added my own notes to contextually
enhance understanding of the respective interviews. An example of NVivo data
coding can be seen at Appendix 3.
86
Following the coding work each node was explored. In some cases previously
reported experiences were confirmed by the analysis whilst in others, tensions or
conflicts were uncovered. These were reported in my findings chapter (Chapter 5)
and later highlighted in considerations throughout the discussion chapter (Chapter
6).
44.7 Data Verification
The sixth stage of Kvale’s (2007) interview investigation guidelines is ‘Verifying’. This
stage pertains to determining the validity and reliability of the interview findings.
Kvale states that ‘reliability refers to how consistent the results are, and validity
means whether an interview study investigates what is intended to be investigated’
(2007, p. 36). I have described Klein and Myer’s (1999) principles of interpretive
research (section 4.4) for increasing the quality and rigour of approaches such as
interviews, and that I was conscious of these at the outset of the research. I also
explained some of the ways in which I attempted to address these principles in my
research. This was my foundation for attempting to increase the reliability and
validity of the research results. I also explained in section 4.5.3 how I maintained a
degree of neutrality during the interviews so I did not unduly influence the views and
voice of the VCs, and so there was consistency between the interviews.
Further, I attempted to increase the reliability of my research findings through other
means. First, being the sole interviewer in the project meant that all interviewees
were asked the same scheduled questions in the same way. This helped me to
achieve a degree of consistency between the interviews. Second, I cross checked the
transcribed interviews for accuracy and selected a mode of analysis suited to the
derivation of meaning from transcribed interview data (see section 4.6). Taking these
considerations into account it is probable that my findings would be reproducible by
other interpretive researchers at other times.
I was conscious of issues pertaining to research validity by following Kvale’s (2007)
advice about validation as it pertains to checking, questioning and theorising
throughout the seven stages of my research project (see section 4.5 for the stages).
87
For example, questioning whether the research project investigated what was
intended was assured to some extent by developing a clear purpose of the study
before addressing the questions of methodology. As Kvale (2007, p.124) states, ‘the
questions of ‘what’ and ‘why’ need to be answered before the question of ‘how’ to
validate.’ Checks for biases that might impact the validity of the findings and analysis
was also increased by following many of Klein and Myer’s (1999) principles (section
4.4). I also used the techniques prescribed by Miles and Huberman (1994) such as
checking for researcher effects (for example, interviewees who may have been
anticipating my expectations) and obtaining feedback from interviewees for
clarification, assisted the checking process (see section 4.5.3).
44.8 Limitations of the research
There are a number of limitations of this research. The first relates to the small
sample size and limiting the data collection to a single Australian state which can
reduce the generalisability of the findings. I addressed this to some extent by
attempting to contact every business in Melbourne, in which I identified that ERP VCs
work with the SME sector to develop proposals for, and implement, ERP systems.
Nonetheless, it means that the findings and conclusions may be more indicative of
Victorian or Australian VCs (and perhaps other countries with similar ERP
marketplaces).
The second limitation relates to the potential for interviewer influence and on
interviewee responses. Whilst I personally conducted all of the interviews, which
engendered consistency, I acknowledge that there is an increased risk of bias
accompanying this. I was conscious that my own subjectivity, based on my own
research biases, could negatively impact the strength of my findings. This is a
recognised weakness in interpretive research (Galliers 1992) and therefore my
awareness of this was important during data collection and interpretation stages of
the project. I have outlined in the sections above how I sought to minimise this risk.
The third set of limitations is associated with the general limitations of interpretive
research and working with qualitative data, for example, smaller sample sizes and
88
researcher misinterpretation of data during analysis. I have avoided generalising
about the findings and rather, focused on meaning, experience, interpretation and
understanding the VCs’ processes and practices. I have explained in the earlier
sections how I tried to reduce the potential for misinterpretations. The research was
also constrained by the time that interviewees could make available (Galliers 1992;
Ticehurst & Veal 2000; Walsham 2006), but I mitigated this to some extent by being
flexible about where the interviews took place (e.g. VCs’ premises or via phone).
44.9 Summary
In summary, this chapter provided details about my methodological approach to this
research project. It highlighted the research aims; research design; details about data
collection; interview transcription details; data analysis; and data verification. In
particular, I explained how I followed Kvale’s (2007) seven stages of conducting
interview studies.
Kvale’s (2000) seventh stage is ‘Reporting’ and is defined as ‘communicating the
findings of the study and the methods applied in a form that lives up to scientific
criteria, takes the ethical aspects of the investigation into consideration and that
results in a readable product’ (Kvale 2007, p. 36). This chapter has already outlined
the methods applied, and the next chapter communicates the findings.
89
CChapter 5: Findings
5.1 Introduction
The previous chapter outlined my rationale for using semi-structured interviews to
collect data for analysis to answer my research questions about the techniques VCs
find effective for developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for SME clients and
described the research process. This chapter presents the findings. It first reveals the
complex array of roles VCs fulfil and the techniques they used to serve those roles.
The chapter then looks at the key stages of their methods to develop the proposals
and associated issues. It then reports the ways in which VCs deal with their SME
clients’ business processes and issues such as the ERP tailoring considerations and
the impacts of BPM on their proposal development. Finally, the chapter presents
findings about the extent to which VCs take SME client strategies into account during
the development of proposals that tailor ERP systems. In instances where I
considered the ‘voice’ or ‘expression’ of the VCs to be pertinent to the interpretation
of aspects of the findings, I include direct quotes from the interview transcripts.
5.2 The Complex Roles of VCs
It was clear from the literature that VCs (and SMEs) can have different interpretations
of the roles VCs should perform during IS projects (see sections 2.6 and 2.7). This
section therefore reports on the findings concerning how VCs interpreted their roles.
ERP systems, manufactured for SMEs, are complex IS because they can consist of
dozens of modules, spanning the many functions of heterogeneous SMEs from
various sectors, from which VCs can select to tailor their ERP systems to a particular
SME. It therefore follows that developing ERP proposals for SMEs is also a complex
task. For this reason, the following interview questions were asked to understand the
various roles VCs undertook during proposal development:
Can you please tell me your title and describe your current position?
What is your role in developing ERP proposals for SME clients?
90
The position titles of the VCs included sales (or business development or pre-sales)
managers, engagement managers, business consultants and analysts, solution
architects, project managers, technical managers and in some cases CEOs (Chief
Executive Officers). Despite these disparate titles, however, all the VCs stated that
their central role was resolving SME business problems which could be solved using
the ERP systems they sell. However, it became clear when analysing VC responses to
other interview questions (pertaining to areas such as the proposal development
methodologies they use) that other related roles were apparent. These included
relationship development, time/cost management, competitive positioning, client
education and client management. This reveals a complex mix of roles that go far
beyond the pragmatics of developing ERP proposals.
There were also tensions between these roles. For example, VCs focused on
time/cost management because the majority did not charge SMEs for preparing ERP
proposals. This meant that other roles such as education was limited to providing
SMEs with just enough information about ERP systems so that they understood how
and why the VCs’ ERP systems could solve identified business problems. Similarly, the
findings pertaining to VC roles highlighted divergent perceptions and expectations
between VCs and their SME clients regarding each other’s roles and responsibilities.
For example, VCs explained that SMEs had limited understanding of ERP systems, so
VCs found that SMEs expected VCs to provide more detailed information/education
about ERP systems than VCs were prepared to, or even able to, deliver during
proposal development. Many VCs did not believe that detailed education about ERP
systems was their role during proposal development and rather, that more
rudimentary overviews of the software via techniques such as demonstrations was
the extent of information necessary for proposal development.
The next sub-sections explore these roles in more detail, including the delicate
balancing of, and tensions between roles, and some of the techniques VCs use when
fulfilling these roles.
91
55.2.1 Problem solving
SMEs seek the guidance of VCs to help to solve their business problems (see Appendix
2, section 1). I determined what VCs perceived to be their central role during ERP
proposal development by asking:
What is your role in developing ERP proposals for SME clients?
The majority of VCs characterised their role as responding to the SMEs’ calls for help,
identifying an SME’s business problems and proposing their ERP system as a solution.
That is, VCs described their problem solving role from a sales oriented or “business-
fit-to-software” perspective, whereby they communicated with SME clients to
identify problems being experienced that could be removed or fixed with their ERP
system, and then recommended in the proposal how their ERP system could solve
these problems. This quote from a VC typified the view that they held of their role,
“Given my experience I guess, my experience is with ERP and has been for
almost, probably around the 20 year mark so my main role here is when a
client comes in and says, “We need a new solution, we want to change
something”, it’s getting involved in that and trying to determine for that client
what the best [software] solution is for them.”
This quote highlights the way in which the sales oriented, business-fit-to-software
approach of the VCs underpins their problem solving approach to proposal
development. Typical SME problems identified by the VCs included slow processing
of customer invoices, redundant data management, and confusion pertaining to the
state of their financial situations.
Most VCs saw their central role as business problem solvers rather than as
implementers of technical IT systems. This was reflected firstly in the position titles
of the VCs because none of the titles were technical in nature and instead were
management titles such as ‘Business Development Manager’ and ‘Consulting
Manager’. There was also evidence of this non-technical perspective in the responses
92
to one of my interview questions about how they developed proposals for their SME
clients:
What is the most important information that you need?
The most frequent responses were management issues such as confirming that an
SME’s top management was committed to the ERP project (12 responses), seeking
clarity on what SMEs aimed to achieve (7 responses), and understanding the SME’s
key business processes and “pain points” (8 responses). The latter two types of
information also reinforced the problem solving perspective because of the reference
to SME objectives and pain points. Rarely (2 respondents) was technical information
(such as the number of end users, the extent of the client’s commitment to training
staff in using the new system and knowledge about the client’s IT infrastructure (e.g.
hardware, network servers, connectivity, databases)) emphasised as important.
Despite the importance of selling ERP systems as part of their problem solving role,
VCs maintained that they would terminate the proposal process if they believed their
system or its modules were not capable of solving the SME client’s problems. This
was consistent with my overall impression that many VCs seemed to view themselves
as ethical ‘saviours’ of their clients’ business problems. This contrasts with the
“cowboys” of the industry who, as some VCs highlighted, attempted to maximise
their returns in the shortest possible time by proposing ERP modules which clients do
not really need. This approach by “cowboys”, these VCs stated, not only reduces the
chances for longer term relationship success as a result of inadequate
implementations, but results in SMEs having negative perceptions of the ERP industry
generally.
55.2.2 Time/Cost management
The main reason why the VCs’ problem solving role focused on sales or business-fit-
to-software became apparent when they answered interview questions relating to
proposal development methodology and resourcing such as:
93
Can you walk me through how you engaged with a client on a recent
project?
How much time does it usually take to develop a proposal?
The recurring theme was they had little time available during ERP proposal
development, as seen in the next quote from a company director when talking about
how much time it takes to develop a proposal:
“You want to get to the point where they sign the contract as soon as possible
so you can get into the paid work, because a lot of our work upfront you can’t
really charge for.”
The quote highlights the prevailing sense of urgency the VCs face during proposal
development because this stage of their work is not billable. The paid work which the
VCs want to get to as soon as possible is the implementation of the system, which
follows client agreement to the proposal and official, billable engagement of the VC
by the SME. This means that an important role for VCs is managing their time and
costs, because ERP proposal development constitutes sunk costs until SMEs become
paying clients. The criticality of this role was further emphasised by one VC who
described a monitoring system used for time/cost management based on timesheets
which could be analysed later to determine sunk costs and commitment to the client
if necessary.
The need for VCs to focus on time/cost management is clear for two reasons. First,
all the VCs were limited to one (in most cases) or two (in only a couple of cases) ERP
products in their portfolios. This meant that if their ERP system was not suitable for,
or wanted by an SME client, most VCs had no alternative ERP systems to offer and
the sale would be lost. Second, the complexity of the proposals they prepare for SME
clients meant that this took a lot of time. Proposals, which were typically documents,
consisted of various components including:
the ERP module selections applicable to the client and the rationales for
these
94
the costs pertaining to the system including the selected modules and any
associated tailoring of these modules such as configuration or even
customisation
the proposed time frames for implementation, or summary project plans,
and the associated implementation consultancy costs
training projections based on SME staff capabilities and
maintenance costs/plans, if considered during proposal development.
All VCs except one prepared these complex proposal documents without charge for
SME clients, during which the most accurate calculations possible for costs and time
for ERP implementation were written into the proposal. The VC which approached
proposal development differently instead made it clear to SME clients that the initial
proposal document was an estimate. This entailed a very simple estimate of possible
costs based on impressions formed at a first meeting with the client. Then if the client
accepted the estimate, this VC proceeded with a billable scoping exercise that
formalised the previously predicted estimates by analysing client requirements in line
with the bullet points listed above, which the other VCs provided without charge in
their proposals. This VC pointed out that trust with the SME had to be established
first before they would agree to pay for the scoping exercise. But in this case the
time/cost burden for the scoping exercise was borne by the client, while for the other
VCs, they took on the cost burden when developing the full proposal.
The VCs’ time constraints also affected aspects of their communication with SME
clients, which was most evident when they discussed their use of tailored versus
generic software demonstrations. Tailored demonstrations typically included the use
of clients’ data and were seen by some VCs as highly effective because clients could
relate to the demonstrations and because they helped clients understand more
quickly the value of the ERP system (e.g. the efficiency impacts of proposed
implementations) and the proposed business changes. However, this required a
higher level of client interaction and more time initially to acquire the relevant data
for the demonstrations. The time constraints faced by VCs means that most generally
95
only used generic demonstrations and that, consequently, tailored demonstrations
to suit the specific needs of clients were rare.
It was apparent that the dominant sense of urgency to deliver finished proposals
conflicts with their need for substantial amounts of time to engage in comprehensive
interactions with clients so VCs fully understood their client’s problems and produced
accurate, quality proposals. VCs tried to address the tension between time/cost
constraints and developing quality proposals by:
using templates and checklists during proposal development to speed up
information elicitation and proposal preparation
relying upon best practice standards built into their ERP systems to guide
recommendations
using their previous experiences with similar clients to guide and expedite
quality proposal development
55.2.3 Relationship development
VCs stated that they needed to develop an intimate understanding of their clients’
key processes and problems to prepare quality proposals to solve these problems. To
enable this intimacy, developing good client relationships was an important role for
the VCs. This became apparent when I asked questions about the interactions VCs
had with their clients whilst developing proposals:
Does any particular type of communication stand out as more effective than
the others?
How involved do you get your clients in the proposal development process?
Is there any kind of information that you find difficult to obtain from clients?
How frank do you think your clients are with you when providing
information about their business?
Two main themes emerged from the VCs’ answers to these questions. First, VCs
highlighted the importance of developing good relationships to engender trust.
Second, VCs considered that good relationships with their clients were necessary to
96
build the potential needed for long term contracts after the proposal stage. The
following quote from one VC highlighted typical VC perspectives about the
importance of their relationships with SME clients.
“It’s the trust and communication is actually what makes us our money. If we
didn’t have that trust and the communication of the customers we wouldn’t
be able to retain them for ten, eleven, fifteen years.”
This quote exemplifies these relationship themes and is consistent with the views
held by all VCs interviewed. I explore these in more detail below and then highlight
some of the difficulties that VCs experience whilst trying to develop relationships with
their clients.
When I asked VCs about communicative techniques, most stated that face-to-face
communication was the most effective. The main reason for this was that it enabled
a more rapid development of trust between the VCs and their clients than was
possible with other forms such as email and telephone. Developing trust was thus a
major element of the VCs’ relationship development role. Trust was needed because
VCs required sensitive client information to assist their problem solving role. For
example, SME clients’ financial information and status needed to be understood by
VCs so that affordable solutions could be proposed that would solve the clients’
problems. Another reason for trust was because VCs needed to understand SME
business processes in detail to tailor their ERP systems to their clients’ needs. Some
processes were reported by VCs as being somewhat unique and were considered by
their clients to be valuable intellectual property (IP) which, if leaked to competitors,
could damage competitive advantages and thus profitability.
VCs highlighted that whilst the pragmatic objective of proposal development was to
develop proposals to which clients would agree, the underpinning objective was to
develop relationships with clients to secure long terms contracts. VCs aimed to be
associated with their SME clients for years, not just during the proposal phase or the
implementation phase, and this meant developing good relationships during the
97
proposal stage was crucial. Long term contracts were common with VCs and their
clients, with some reporting relationships of over ten years with some clients. This
happened because ERPs were often updated by their manufacturers and VCs assisted
their clients with these updates, as well as enhancing the systems as needed by
clients due to such reasons as businesses growth. Some VCs reported they knew their
clients’ businesses intimately and that this was because of the very strong
relationships forged from the time of the initial engagement, i.e. during proposal
development. The VCs also explained that a major commitment would be required
from their clients at implementation, and so VCs attempted to develop positive
relationships during proposal development that would last for the long-term. If a
relationship was not positive (i.e. not underpinned by trust and clear understanding
about what is trying to be accomplished) then VCs emphasised that there was a risk
that the whole implementation stage could fail.
The VCs acknowledged, however, that the relationship development role was difficult
for several reasons and this was most apparent in response to the question, ‘How
involved do you get your clients in the proposal development process?’ All VCs
replied that they tried to obtain as much involvement as possible but that this was
hampered by the day-to-day time pressures faced by their clients. That is, clients put
their business commitments ahead of communication with the VCs. VCs expressed
frustrations that days could pass by and important information elicitation meetings
cancelled, and that this delayed proposal progress and hindered ongoing relations.
VCs also reported that it was most often the case that clients preferred not to take
the initiative and, rather, leave as much of the proposal stage as possible to the VCs.
In this sense, SME clients did not see it as their role to control or manage the proposal
development process, and preferred to step back and defer this responsibility to the
VCs. For VCs this was cause for some tension in cases where some clients stepped so
far back that the clients became inaccessible.
VCs also attributed this detachment by their clients to SMEs seeing the proposal
development stage as a software purchase that would end when the software was
98
installed. The findings in section 5.2.1 suggest that this perspective by SME clients
could be due, in part, to VCs viewing their problem solving role with a sales or
‘business-fit-to-software’ perspective. This VC perspective is not surprising because
most VCs were limited to one ERP system in their portfolio. Further, the modular
nature of ERPs means these systems can be sold in component parts rather than as
entire packages based on which components best fit or solve particular SME
problems VCs identify and select.
Another difficulty for VCs in fulfilling their relationship development role became
apparent when I asked them if there was any type of information they found difficult
to obtain from clients. VCs advised that financial information and IP were typically
difficult to obtain initially but were easier to obtain when trust had been established
with their clients. VCs expressed frustration with the notion that their clients
contacted them to help solve business problems but then withheld some vital
information until trust was engendered. Most VCs confirmed though that when trust
was established, it was much easier to obtain the information needed to make ERP
recommendations.
55.2.4 Education
The tensions experienced by VCs in problem solving and relationship development
can be attributed somewhat to a clash of expectations between VCs and SMEs, in
addition to VCs’ time/cost management pressures. This became apparent when I
asked VCs the following interview question:
“In your experience, what are the most important skills and knowledge needed
by clients for proposal development to work effectively?”
All VCs explained that most of their clients had poor levels of skills and knowledge
about ERPs generally. This helps to explain why VCs reported that SMEs wanted the
VCs to control the proposal development stage (see section 5.2.3). Most VCs
contended that greater understanding by SMEs about ERPs would help to speed up
proposal development. The reality experienced by the VCs, however, was that SMEs’
99
poor understanding meant the VCs had little choice but to engage in discussions with
clients about their ERP system’s capabilities. My analysis in the previous sections
suggests that this creates a tension with the VCs’ problem solving role because the
need to discuss the fundamentals of ERP systems, together with the pressures of
time/cost management to secure a sale, would most likely reduce the time available
for VCs to gain more detailed insights into the client’s business problems and
capabilities to administer ERP systems.
There were some varied views from VCs regarding how they managed this
educational role when I asked them the interview question:
Do you provide any training to your client during the proposal
development process?
Three viewpoints emerged from the VCs’ responses. A few considered that the
education role was important by openly stating this. The most common response was
that most believed that providing software demonstrations was enough to satisfy
client understanding of ERP. A few were quite negative about the additional effort
needed to convey understanding. These are elaborated on next.
The few VCs suggesting that the client educational role was important believed that
clients needed to understand the ERP system and the extent of influence that these
systems would have on their clients’ businesses. These VCs suggested this role could
only be achieved informally during proposal development because of time
constraints, and thus formal classroom education was not considered. The following
quote is typical of the VCs who considered the client educational role in this light:
“Taking them through and coaching them and helping them get to where they
need to be is an important part of the process. I think with each meeting you’ve
got to know that you’ve progressed and educated [the SME clients] that little
bit more.”
This quote emphasises the willingness by these VCs to spend time helping clients to
understand ERP systems beyond simply presenting ERP demonstrations and taking
100
into account where the business needs to be. The quote exemplifies a consciousness
by these VCs that ‘educating’ clients about ERP systems is actually a VC role.
Most VCs, by contrast, did not consider educating clients to be their role during the
proposal development stage. Instead, the VCs who expressed this view believed that
providing generic ERP software demonstrations and conducting meetings during
proposal development was sufficient (and a cost effective option) for providing
clients with a basic understanding of their ERP systems. Demonstrations typically
involved VCs showing clients their ERP software in action on a laptop computer, or
projected onto a screen. In some cases these VCs offered clients access to secured
web demonstration versions of their software which could be accessed at any time
by clients during proposal development. Helping their clients to understand the wider
business ramifications of ERP implementations was less important to these VCs
because they did not see this as their role during proposal development. They
preferred to take a business-fit-to-software approach, by visually demonstrating the
effects of their ERP system on the client’s business, in order to proceed rapidly
through proposal development. Several of these VCs used the expression ‘a picture
paints a thousand words’, which highlighted that they adopted techniques that
enabled rapid, albeit rudimentary, client understanding and completion of the
proposal development process.
A minority of VCs expressed a level of cynicism about any expectation that they
should help educate clients during proposal development as in the following quote:
“I tell the client, hey, use me as much as you can, get as much out of me as
you possibly can before the clock gets turned on and I can... I’ll say to them,
sometimes, that includes what do you know about this, or how can I help you
understand, those sorts of things.”
This quote highlights these VCs’ view that they are not being paid during this time
and their focus was on trying to balance client expectations (interpreted by these VCs
101
as ‘free consulting’) with an urgency to understand client needs and turn these into
an ERP proposal.
In all three views taken by VCs about educating their clients, their key tension is
constrained time. This places VCs and SMEs into diametrically opposite positions of
where they want each other to be. VCs expect their clients to be more educated
about ERP systems before proposal development begins so that those clients can
better inform the proposal process. Their clients expect VCs to drive the whole
proposal process and educate them about ERPs during that process. Further, the
quality of the proposals may be more likely to be impacted negatively with those VCs
expressing the view that education was highly important because, compared to the
other VCs, they allocated more time to educating clients about ERPs and potentially
less on problem solving.
These different expectations give rise to a further aspect of the VC role which is to
manage their SME clients, as reported in the next section.
55.2.5 Client management
All the VCs identified additional challenges which I grouped under the role of
managing SME clients. These challenges adversely affected the VCs’ ability to elicit
information needed to fulfil their problem solving and relationship development
roles. These difficulties are examined in more detail in the next sections, along with
the techniques used to address them.
5.2.5.1 Dealing with the time constraints of SME clients
When I asked VCs what they found to be most challenging about working with SMEs,
all stated that a major impediment to their problem solving role was that SME clients
were time constrained and that this inhibited the VCs’ ability to have rich discussions
with and fully engage clients during proposal development.
When I asked VCs about their proposal development methodologies there was
consensus that because proposal development required extensive information
elicitation from SME staff, VCs had little choice but to conduct meetings and
102
discussions with those staff to gather details pertaining to the work the staff do, such
as their day-to-day processes. Managing access to staff to engage with them in this
way was difficult according to most VCs because those staff were busy with the work
of the business. This was highlighted in the following quote which was characteristic
of the VCs’ views about gaining access to SME staff,
“It’s time, dragging that guy out of the warehouse, shutting down the
warehouse because no-one else can do it except that one person, that’s where
you have the problems.”
This quote highlights the difficulties that VCs experience when some of the
information they need to develop ERP proposals fully is exclusively held by busy staff
members of their clients’ firms. VCs complained of last minute meeting cancellations,
interruptions to proposal development meetings in progress and getting access to
particular people such as subject matter experts when needed. This hindered their
information elicitation processes. VCs highlighted that this was significant to them
because detailed information (e.g. about processes crossing several business
functions) required significant time to understand, especially in cases where
information about these was only tacitly held by staff of client firms.
VCs stated there wasn’t any other way they could access tacit information, and yet
they emphasised how crucial this information was in order for them to gain a
thorough understanding about the processes of the business. When discussing the
kinds of information that they needed to elicit from clients, most VCs highlighted that
many SME processes were undocumented and administered by staff who had been
managing such processes, often manually, for years. So a key role of the VC was to
try to manage fitting around the constrained schedules and work needs of SME
owner-operators and their staff to gather and document the information needed,
whilst managing their own urgent proposal development methodologies. VC’s did not
articulate the use of any specific time management techniques to overcome these
difficulties but stated that constant communications via email and telephone was
103
typically needed to maintain, confirm, adjust and update appointment schedules
with their SME clients during the proposal development stage.
55.2.5.2 Eliciting intellectual property and financial information
Most VCs revealed that in many instances SME clients were guarded when disclosing
what clients considered to be ‘sensitive’ business information, including financial and
intellectual property (IP) information, during proposal development for reasons of
privacy and security. This represented a serious tension because VCs stated that they
needed such information to prepare accurate proposals which addressed the SME’s
business problems within an acceptable budget.
This issue also exemplified the significance of the VCs’ relationship development role
to building trust during proposal development to enable such information to be
elicited (see section 5.2.3). One interviewee noted that IP issues could be ‘tricky’
because SME prospects were conscious of the potential for IP to inadvertently leak
to competitors via the VCs in cases where competitors were also clients of the VCs.
This could engender issues of conflict of interest, but several VCs stated they were
prepared to sign formal non-disclosure agreements (NDA) to overcome such issues.
Building trust with the SMEs was reported by VCs as the best way to manage this
aspect of client information elicitation which, as highlighted in sections 5.2.2 and
5.2.3, presented difficulties for the VCs. Several VCs said that with the smaller
organisations, once trust had been established, information was easier to obtain than
with larger organisations. The main explanation for this was that interaction was
mainly with owners-operators who understood all aspects of the business, far more
than “the guy at the big business...who just knows what people tell him.”
VCs also stated that there were differences in the types of difficulty experienced
when eliciting sensitive information from small firms and medium sized firms. VCs
stated that obtaining financial information from smaller sized SMEs was particularly
difficult, in the initial stages, with family owned and operated concerns. In these cases
clients were reported by VCs to be very reluctant to share any financial information
104
until trust had been established. VCs highlighted that this would slow proposal
development because they would not submit a proposal until they were aware of the
SME’s ability to pay for the proposed work. VCs also expressed frustrations with
sensitive information elicitation with medium sized firms. The VCs experienced what
they called a ‘disconnect’ between middle managers of the medium sized firm, who
were working with the VCs, and the senior executives and/or business owners who
controlled the budgets for the ERP projects. VCs found this difficult to manage
because the information they needed had to be negotiated by the middle manager
‘intermediary’, causing time delays and potential for misinterpretations of questions
and answers flowing between all three individuals. This was one of the reasons why
VCs preferred to select and interview people with whom they needed to speak, such
as business owners. This became apparent when I asked VCs about the resources
SME clients made available.
An alternative approach to reduce the need for direct collection of sensitive
information by VCs was to ask SME clients to conduct analyses and report summary
information back to the VC, or similarly to encourage clients to prepare request for
information (RFI), request for price (RFP) or request for quote (RFQ) documentation.
But when I asked VCs specifically about these approaches they stated that these were
rare and actually avoided because in many cases ERP systems involved some tailoring
which required contextual understanding of the ERP system to be accurately
depicted. All VCs stated that SME clients rarely had such contextual understanding
and could seldom attain it in the limited time frames available during proposal
development. When I asked VCs about their clients’ previous experiences with ERP
systems, typical responses were “little” to “none” as reflected in this quote by one
VC,
“The majority of our clients are first time ERP users. We are in that SME space.
We get a lot of companies that are upgrading, for example from MYOB
[accounting software package only].”
105
This quote highlighted that many VCs’ clients upgraded from basic accounting
packages with little idea of the actual scope and broad functionality of ERP systems.
Several VCs stated that it was common for clients to be operating from Microsoft
Excel spreadsheets and Access databases. Some of these clients were reported as
having several dozens of staff and multi-million dollar annual turnovers.
In some instances VCs did suggest they would ask clients to gather data for proposal
development, but in these cases the VCs would always analyse the data to resolve
business problems with their ERP solutions. This emphasised the VCs’ preference to
manage their clients during information elicitation processes.
This contrasts with the VCs’ frustrations pertaining to the management and control
of other aspects of proposal development such as managing client engagements,
meetings, and presentations and trying to navigate the SMEs’ day to day focus of
attention. Whilst managing data collection and analysis is consistent with the VCs’
sales oriented, business fit to software approach, this emphasis gives rise to
questions as to whether this actually encourages SMEs further (in addition to their
time constraints) to expect VCs to manage everything during proposal development,
allowing the SME to ‘step back’ from the process.
55.2.5.3 Dealing with staff conflicts within SME prospects
The complexity of the SME client management role was also emphasised when VCs
explained how they sometimes needed to balance politics or conflicts among staff
within an SME client when VCs gathered information during proposal development.
This theme emerged when I asked VCs to ‘walk me’ through how they engaged with
clients on recent projects and also during discussions about relationship
development. Some VCs even went to such lengths as to seek private discussions with
individual staff from a single SME client to obtain information to avoid such internal
politics and conflicts. This was because these VCs recognised that some SME staff
would not give accurate details about processes that crossed into multiple
departments (or functional areas of the business such as sales and accounting)
because of conflicts between managers or staff of those departments. VCs stated that
106
trying to draw information from such people when they were sitting in on the same
meeting was therefore counterproductive. The consequence of not going to these
lengths was that the VCs would not gain a clear or accurate understanding about the
client’s business and problems.
Some VCs added that when the client’s owner or CEO was present among its other
managers at a meeting with VCs, there were occasions when group think would
ensue. These VCs explained that this wasted time because some facts about business
processes, such as who might be responsible for what and the time it might take to
complete a task, were often not uncovered. VCs stated that forceful, charismatic or
dynamic leaders, even if they were not the CEO, could influence groups in meetings,
even to the point where other group members remained completely silent and yet
would have alternative views when interviewed on their own.
The VCs varied in terms of the approaches they used to address such conflicts
between the staff of a client firm. Many VCs said their approach was to leave staff of
the SME client to sort out their internal problems and then return later as highlighted
by this characteristic quote from one VC,
“The more people you get involved the longer the process takes to get a
consensus, and there are more ideas and sometimes you ask them questions
and they give competing answers. And you sort of smile and say, ‘we’ll come
back tomorrow, you guys go away and sort it out’.”
This quote not only highlights the reluctance of some VCs to avoid internal client
conflict where possible, but it also gives rise to the issue of constrained timeframes
impacting the proposal development process. To address this constraint and move
the proposal development process along, some other VCs, by contrast, were
prepared to take a more active role in assisting SME clients with overcoming these
internal conflicts by suggesting that:
other options might be available to resolve their business problems using
their existing software, or
107
the issue driving the conflict could be resolved by the ERP systems, which
suggested that these VCs saw the conflict as an opportunity to promote the
benefits of their ERP systems, and further highlighted these VCs’
sales/business-fit-to-software orientation.
55.2.6 Competitive and influence management role
In some cases the VCs’ sales and business-fit-to-software approach to their problem
solving and relationship development roles was driven by competitive pressures and
third party influences external to the relationship between the VC and SME clients.
This became apparent when I asked VCs about the methodological approaches they
used and how they developed relationships with third parties during the proposal
development process.
Some VCs stated that parties external to the VC/SME relationship included:
competing ERP software vendors who pose a constant market place
(competitive) threat;
the SME’s suppliers who might have influence pertaining to the types of
processes that an ERP should administer from a supplier perspective, for
example, issues of integration and compatibility of the proposed SME ERP
system with the supplier’s systems;
third party advisers to the SME such as the SME’s accountants and IT
consultants who already had relationships with the SME and influence over
the client’s ICT decisions.
This adds yet another layer of complexity for VCs, emphasising a competitive role
during proposal development. The VCs’ typical reaction to this competition is to
divert time and effort during proposal development to attain as much understanding
as possible about the influence of such competitors. The tension for VCs here is in
striking a balance in their resource allocation to understanding competitors versus
understanding the client’s business problems and resisting the temptation to develop
a proposal to get a quick sale with heavily reduced margins.
108
55.2.7 Summary of the VC role
The work of the VCs clearly spans several complex roles, all with several tensions and
constraints that VCs try to balance. Clarity of communications; understanding the
different perceptions and perspectives between themselves and clients, as well as
staff within an SME client; good organisational skills; and exerting control over the
proposal development process are issues that impact significantly on the
management of the various roles identified.
All of the identified roles combine to underpin the actual methodological techniques
of the VCs as they pragmatically develop their ERP proposals for their clients. The
next section explores my findings about this aspect of the VCs’ work.
5.3 Methodological Techniques of VCs
VCs described various pragmatic techniques they used to build an understanding of
their clients businesses to develop proposals. These techniques were administered
via methodologies that VCs used to make their proposal development processes as
efficient as possible. When I asked the following questions it became apparent that
VCs used a common methodological approach:
How do you usually start when you undertake a project with an SME client?
Can you walk me through how you engaged with a client on a recent
project?
In response to these questions, VCs spent considerable time, during my interviews
with them, describing the various stages of their proposal development processes.
When I analysed these details I found a general consistency in their methodologies
(see Appendix 2). Their methodologies can be broadly compartmentalised into
integral and sequential phases involving meetings and analytical work, akin to the
BPM phases that I described in Chapter 3 (section 3.4.1). The phases can be
summarised as follows:
1. Scoping – gathering information and identifying the business problems
2. Analysis – analysing the information gathered
109
3. Redesign – developing ERP solutions based on the analysis
Most VCs developed their own ‘in house’ methodologies based on these broad
phases, whilst a few borrowed and adapted methodologies from ERP manufacturers
such as the ‘ASAP Methodology’ and ‘Focus’. Despite all these different
methodologies, the approaches all followed the three broad phases listed above. This
is probably attributed to the short time frames available during proposal
development which limits the number of phases feasible for such methodologies.
When I asked VCs if they adjust their proposal development methods to suit
circumstances specific to the client, such as budgetary/affordability consideration,
about half responded that they never do this as they prefer to follow the methods
that they have learned to trust over time as capable of producing thorough proposals
that succeed (i.e. gain acceptance by the SME). But the other half stated that they do
adjust proposal development methods to suit client circumstances such as time
constraints and unavailability of staff for information elicitation purposes. In some
instances VCs reduce proposal development steps when they realise that client
budgets are so restricted that ERP affordability only extends to one or two modules
for the initial implementation. The VCs thus hone their focus on those modules
leaving processes in other functions of the business for address post implementation.
Each of the methodological phases consisted of specific sets of techniques that are
applied to develop proposals, some of which gave rise to various tensions for VCs. I
briefly describe these below.
55.3.1 Proposal development scoping
The scoping stage essentially involved communications between VCs and the SME
client. This stage typically involved at least two face-to-face meetings and possibly
several other communications via telephone or email. The VCs’ emphasis during this
stage was initially on determining the suitability of the client to the VCs’ capabilities;
trying to understand the clients’ main business problems; and presenting high level
conceptual designs of solutions to the business problems, typically via ERP
110
demonstrations and sometimes visits to reference sites. Informal notes were taken
during this stage and, on rare occasions, basic pencilled flow charts representing
process “pain points” were drawn. Check lists were often used to help to streamline
and scope the system requirements.
This work required detailed discussions with, at least, key staff of the SME client such
as owners and managers, but also, where possible, staff who were involved in
working on business processes that were likely to be improved or altered upon
implementation of an ERP system. Even though this was intense work, a sense of
urgency prevailed for the VCs because of time and cost constraints (see section 5.2.2)
and they placed an emphasis on moving through this phase as rapidly as possible.
Several VCs highlighted the dangers in attempting to analyse too many of the SMEs’
functional areas during proposal development due to the relative complexities
involved in doing this, with the risk being that VCs could potentially propose a
solution that would ‘never take off.’ The VCs’ solution to this was to narrow the scope
of their proposals, and therefore their information elicitation exercises, which meant
that not all of the clients’ functional areas were necessarily considered for inclusion
in the ERP system. Whilst VCs did this to provide their clients with a clear
understanding about the proposed systems, this finding suggests that the VCs did not
consider the risk of missing key process steps or tasks for particular processes that
might involve functional areas that had been ignored (scoped out).
It is this narrowing of scope and sense of urgency that compels most VCs to deliver
demonstrations of their software and even conduct reference site visits with clients
during the scoping phase, rather than later in the proposal development stage when
client needs are better understood. These techniques revealed some tensions for VCs
which I highlight in the next sub-sections.
55.3.1.1 The timing and effect of ERP system demonstrations
One issue which emerged when VCs responded to the interview questions regarding
the methodological techniques they used concerned when to present (tailored or
111
generic) ERP demonstrations. The importance of demonstrations were identified in
section 5.2.4 to counter the lack of knowledge most SME clients had about ERP
capabilities. Many VCs said they demonstrated their ERP system at the initial meeting
because they had found SME clients were keen to see the system in operation. As I
highlight in section 5.2.4, most VCs agreed with the adage that ‘a picture paints a
thousand words’ and confirmed that demonstrations not only exhibited process
automation, but they also acted as a cross-check with clients to confirm the fit of the
ERP system with the client’s business problems. The VCs also stated that visual
presentations assisted in countering the client’s lack of IT skills by revealing the ‘look
and feel’ of, and dispelling preconceived fears pertaining to, their ERP systems.
Some VCs, by contrast, were of the view that demonstrating the ERP software at the
initial proposal development meeting could confuse SME clients rather than enhance
their understanding of the system’s capabilities. These VCs explained that this could
occur particularly in cases where various business process problems were still being
analysed and defined by the VC, at which point appropriate solutions had not yet
been considered. These VCs also stated that, in cases where they had not yet
established a client’s available budget for an ERP system, there was a risk that they
could be presenting ERP capabilities that were beyond that which clients could afford.
In this sense there was the potential to mislead clients, which these VCs believed
could be ruinous to relationships at later stages of the engagement, such as ERP
implementation.
Further, a few VCs stated that in some instances the proposed changes to the SME
client’s business processes might not be capable of being demonstrated due to the
uniqueness of the SME’s processes and/or the inability of the processes to fit their
ERP system. In these cases VCs explained that they needed to consider later, in detail,
if and how their system would be tailored through configuration, or even
customisation, to suit the client. The VCs stated that presenting demonstrations too
early could lead clients to perceive that the ERP system had limitations and, thus, to
form negative views early in the relationship.
112
55.3.1.2 The timing and effect of reference site visits
Some VCs referred or accompanied clients to one or several reference sites with past
or current clients for whom they had implemented an ERP system. These VCs
explained that reference sites had the advantage of enhancing the new SME client’s
understanding about the potential of the ERP software. Most VCs who did this also
stated that reference sites enabled them to demonstrate both the capabilities of their
ERP solutions and the strength of their relationships with existing clients, which
supported their problem solving and relationship development roles respectively.
The VCs explained that in some cases the ERP implementations seen at reference
sites became blueprints for the new client’s proposal, and thus enabled the VCs to
expedite the proposal development. One interviewee even went as far as saying that
reference sites could make or break a proposal because they had found that some
clients would not sign off unless there was a local reference from another client
supporting the VC’s work.
Some VCs highlighted a tension between the use of reference sites during proposal
development and their inability to take prospective clients to the SME competitor
reference sites due to conflicts of interest and industry based competition. The only
other options available to VCs was to take clients to sites that were from similar but
not directly competitive industries or sites possessing similar business problems or
process requirements sets. But the VCs pointed out that this could constrain the
effectiveness of the use of reference sites by potentially causing client confusion, and
possibly frustration, because those clients would not be seeing products or services
that pertain to their own particular industries. For example, a bicycle manufacturer
may find it difficult to relate to a personal computer manufacturer. Whilst they are
both manufacturers, they are receiving materials from different suppliers, selling to
customers with specific sets of interests and requirements, have different storage
needs, possess potentially different after sales service requirements and so on.
113
55.3.2 Proposal development analysis and redesign
Having scoped the project the VCs then turned to the next phases of their
methodologies including analysis and redesign. VCs highlighted that these were
essentially completed in parallel due to time constraints and associated costs.
Material gathered during the scoping phase was analysed in greater depth at this
stage, and processes were considered for their fit to the ERP system, that is, redesign.
When VCs described examples of recent proposal development exercises, all
discussed business process analysis and redesign in detail – this was their clear focus.
This was reflected in the common methodological framework (see Appendix 2, steps
5 and 6). Most VCs stated that understanding key business processes (some VCs also
referred to these as ‘core’ business processes), whether these were unique to the
SME client or not, was considered by them to be one of the most important types of
information needed during ERP proposal development.
In chapter 3 I explained that BPM offers methodological toolsets which could assist
VCs to develop ERP proposals that ensured alignment of their clients’ business
processes to business strategies, and alignment of the ERP systems with the clients’
business processes. I was therefore interested to determine if and how VCs were
using any BPM-related tools. During the interviews, when discussing their proposal
development methodologies, I initially let the VCs describe their techniques without
prompting them specifically about BPM-related toolsets to determine if these were
mentioned. Later in the interview I prompted VCs specifically to gain more insights
into whether/how they were using BPM tools by asking the following question and
some supporting, BPM specific questions:
How much time do you devote to understanding your client’s unique
business processes during proposal development?
Unprompted the VCs demonstrated little awareness about BPM. Whilst responses
about their methodologies were central to business processes, their understanding
of this was mainly in reference to their ERP systems. In other words, VCs saw business
process management essentially in light of what their ERP systems do. None of their
114
discussions directly addressed the connection of strategy to process – a key premise
of the BPM discipline (see section 3.4.1). Only one VC mentioned BPM unprompted,
but they were describing a ‘business process management’ module in a client’s ERP
implementation and not a methodical BPM approach to process analysis and
redesign in proposal development.
Also unprompted, some VCs revealed that they used rudimentary process diagrams,
mainly described as basic pencilled diagrams on pieces of paper without formal
notation such as Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN). These VCs said
that these diagrams were typically prepared during meetings with clients and then
later used for analysis and redesign. These VCs did not mention the use of techniques
vis-a-vis BPM such as diagrammatic tools or worksheets (see section 3.4.2). None of
the VCs at any stage in my interviews mentioned anything about BPMN diagramming
software tools (see section 3.4.2).
Most VCs stated that they took notes about processes during meetings with clients
and that these were used for the analysis and redesign aspects of proposal
development. These VCs also talked about the use of checklists during meetings with
clients which helped guide them through meetings, as well as the analysis and
redesign phases of proposal development. None of the VCs however went beyond
this to mention any use of such BPM techniques as process hierarchy analysis
(analysing levels of particular processes, for example, from high level (value chain
level), through sub levels, to activity and procedural levels) or the associated tools for
this such as process worksheets.
Later in the interview when I prompted the VCs specifically with BPM related
questions, most conveyed their understanding of BPM as processes administered in
ERP systems and in this sense that BPM is something that is purchased. A few stated
that they were not familiar with BPM at all. When I clarified what it is, including the
types of analysis that it involves (such as process and strategic connectedness) and
the tools that it applies (such as BPMN and resource/capability gap analysis), they
expressed an interest in learning more about it for their future work because they
115
could see that these techniques would be likely to improve the way they currently
scope, analyse and redesign during proposal development. The VCs’ descriptions
about the ways in which they dealt with their client’s business processes highlighted
that the tools and techniques they used were rudimentary, relying mainly on
communications through meetings and little formal documentation.
My findings about the ways in which VCs dealt with their client’s business processes
is presented in greater detail in the next section.
55.4 Dealing with clients’ business processes
When VCs had determined the scope of the client’s needs they turned quickly to the
analysis and redesign phases of their proposal development methodologies. All VCs
stated that analysis work concentrated on their client’s business processes and the
ways in which these would be dealt with by their ERP systems. This became clear
when I asked the following questions:
What is the most important information that you need?
Is there any kind of information that you find difficult to obtain from clients?
What degree of customisation of the final ERP solution do you generally find
is necessary as a result of the proposal?
How much time do you devote to understanding your client’s unique
business processes during proposal development?
ERP systems automate and support business processes and so it is important to
understand any issues and challenges faced by the VCs, and the techniques that they
used to address them. In particular, the following sub-sections explore in more detail
how VCs analysed client processes and redesigned these for ERP systems in terms of
adapting client business processes to ERPs, how they elicited information about the
clients’ unique business processes, and the considerations they made regarding
tailoring ERPs for SMEs. I report these in the following sub sections.
116
55.4.1 VCs and adapting processes to ERPs
It is clear that a key feature of the ERP proposal is the SME’s business processes. Many
VCs highlighted that their SME clients had, over time, found themselves having to
adapt their business processes to different IS such as spreadsheets, accounting
systems and customer databases. For example, manual, paper-based sales
transactions would be adapted to an accounting software system and customer
records would be transcribed from paper records to a customer database. Many VCs
reported that during the scoping phase of proposal development they found
themselves trying to understand the details about these different systems, such as
how large they were, what they recorded, what processes they actually performed
and any areas of redundancy. VCs stated that they needed to understand all of this
to determine whether and how this information and associated processes could be
adapted to their ERP systems and that this understanding was essential to their
analytical and redesign work.
Many VCs stated that the system fragmentation of their clients meant that many of
their business processes were also fragmented. VCs reported instances of processes
being conducted for no apparent reason, such as data being recorded in triplicate.
Several VCs reported that sales and purchasing spreadsheets were updated by
passing files around on memory sticks, and customer records being located in several
different email systems. The VCs stated that many of their clients’ processes were far
from best practice and somewhat inefficient. One VC even described an aspect of a
client’s processes as ‘bizarre’. VCs pointed out that these were the reasons that they
were contacted in the first instance by the SMEs, because the clients had begun to
realise that problems were emerging with their business processes.
Most VCs stated that their analysis of information, once gathered, first focused on
ways that their clients’ processes could be automated using standard best practices
built into the VCs’ ERP systems. For example, manual sales processes were analysed
to ascertain their adaptability to the ERP’s sales module; customer data and the
processes that used this were analysed for their suitability for the customer module;
117
and the client’s accounting processes were analysed for their fit with the ERP’s
accounting modules.
VCs stated that such analysis and redesign work consumed the majority of the time
they spent on developing proposals for their clients. Other than the tensions that this
caused in terms of time and cost (see section 5.2.2), VCs reported that conflict often
emerged between them and their clients when VCs recommended business process
changes to suit best practice standards that were built into their ERP systems, whilst
SMEs preferred system tailoring to suit existing processes. This was reported by the
VCs as ‘the clients’ threat of change’ and VCs stated that they needed to spend
additional time with clients to explain the benefits of changing business processes to
the best practice standards of their ERPs. I have already explained in section 5.2.5.3
that VCs also reported having to deal with tensions between staff within the one SME
client, which added yet another layer of complexity to this analysis and redesign
work.
Some VCs collectively identified four reasons why SME clients, or individual staff,
resisted changing their processes and these included where a threat of change was:
job related (i.e. job security)
process related (i.e. efficiency/inefficiency perceptions)
political/power related (reduction of tasks within functions through
automation, thus reducing authority, responsibility, staff requirements,
control etc.)
profit/competition related opinions (e.g. customise the system to an existing
process to maintain competitive advantage)
These VCs stated that they needed to be mindful of each of these as they elicited
information, and needed to communicate with their clients before making
recommendations in their proposals.
118
55.4.2 Difficulties in eliciting unique business processes
In contrast to the adaptation of SME business processes to the ERP system, described
in section 5.4.1, some business processes are unique and unable to be adapted. Three
views emerged from the responses by VCs in relation to this. The first was VCs who
believed their clients did not have any unique business processes; the second was
VCs who believed that consideration of unique processes should be left until the
implementation stage; and the third believed that eliciting information about unique
processes was crucial during the proposal development stage. I describe each of
these views in more detail below.
The first viewpoint was from VCs who did not believe their SME clients had any
unique processes at all. In their experience, every business process of the client was
capable of being directly administered by these VCs’ ERP systems. These VCs stated
that SMEs all followed similar process patterns for functions such as sales, purchasing
and accounting and that, in most cases, standard ERP systems helped them to
improve processes and gain efficiencies because of the best industry practices built
into those systems. These VCs highlighted that proposal development for them was
to establish their client’s process “pain points”, which they said could still take a lot
of time, and then when these were identified, rapidly match these to their ERP’s
standard modules and then develop a proposal based on this business process
redesign.
The second perspective came from VCs who preferred to defer consideration of
unique businesses processes to the implementation stage, which highlighted that
SME processes could be complex, especially if they were unique processes. For
example, the SME might have had a way of doing something that had been developed
over time and which did not reflect any particular process standard in business or the
particular industry of the client. These VCs stated that a process might contain many
steps and ‘sign offs’ by layers of people. VC said that they often found themselves
struggling to elicit details about these processes in order to incorporate them into
the proposal because of issues of time and cost (see section 5.2.2). Several of these
119
VCs suggested that, whilst unique business processes are sought for analysis during
proposal development, it is more likely that they would be detected at the
implementation stage due to these time and cost constraints at the proposal stage.
Other VCs reinforced this by stating that any process documentation, such as detailed
lists of process steps, was developed at the post-sale or implementation phase when
consulting time was chargeable. This emphasised therefore that the proposal
development stage for these VCs did not cover all processes in-depth, which gives
rise to the potential that some process related issues that are directly relevant to the
ERP modules being recommended in the proposal might be overlooked by these VCs.
The third theme was VCs who expressed the view that eliciting unique business
processes was a crucial activity during proposal development and thus considered it
to be a priority. They stated that this was because a lack of understanding about
unique processes at the implementation stage could render the project worthless
due to the resulting misalignments of processes. They also reported that
compounding this problem was that in some cases SMEs did not even realise they
had unique business processes and thus did not know to articulate these during
proposal development. VCs stated that if they missed these during proposal
development they might be found later during the implementation stage and then
adapted to the ERP system. However, they also pointed out that tensions between
themselves and their clients could ensue because the costs and timeframes of such
adaptations would not have been previously accounted for in the ERP proposal. Some
VCs said that in many instances they would absorb the costs of the adaptation to
maintain good relationships with the SMEs. VCs stated that missing unique processes
during proposal development represented the ‘greatest level of fear’ from a VC
perspective. Because of this fear, these VCs deliberately allocated more time to
seeking out unique processes during the scoping and analysis phases of their proposal
development work.
120
55.4.3 Tailoring ERPs for SMEs
Whilst some VCs believed that nothing was unique about their SME clients’ processes
(see section 5.4.2), others considered that some level of tailoring needed to be
recommended in every proposal developed so that processes administered in the
ERP would suit the specific needs of clients. VCs defined tailoring in only two ways:
configuration and customisation. No VCs considered, for example, that selecting ERP
modules constituted the tailoring of ERP systems.
The few VCs who considered that SMEs do not have any unique business processes
deemed that proposing tailored ERPs was not necessary. In other words, these VCs
considered that their job was simply to scope the project, analyse business processes
and select standard modules for implementation. They did not consider module
selection to be a tailoring exercise. These VCs did not define the configuration of ERP
systems as tailoring either. Instead, they saw this simply as setting up the standard
modules for rapid implementation. These VCs, along with all other VCs I interviewed,
saw this type of ERP configuration as inevitable and this was accounted for in their
proposals.
The VCs who did believe SMEs had unique processes said this was achieved by
configuration. Configuration of ERP systems was defined by all VCs as the selection
of various options within the software (using ‘check boxes’ and ‘radio buttons’) to
enable or disable ERP modules and other functionalities, in addition to specifying
various parameters to produce reports and ERP ‘look and feel’ tailored specifically for
the client. Most VCs considered configuration to be a standard aspect of
implementation and of minimum concern. They also highlighted that ERP systems
could deliver a wide range of functionality directly, with configuration only, and VCs
stated that this was likely to be a result of the past two decades of maturity in the
ERP space. The VCs considered that when processes were understood, configuring
the system to administer those processes was simply a mechanical exercise such as
switching functionality on or off within the software, setting parameters in the
software for various processes, adding client business logos to system reports and so
121
on. A few VCs, however, considered configuration work to be a complex exercise and
reflected this in the proposals as a major element of the implementation process in
terms of time and cost.
Customisation, by contrast, was defined by VCs as work that involved programmers
changing the program code of ERP modules (i.e. software development), which could
be costly in terms of both time and cost to the client. The customisation of ERP
systems was a source of tension for the VCs and this became apparent when I asked
the following question:
What degree of customisation of the final ERP solution do you generally find
is necessary as a result of the proposal?
Most VCs stated that they preferred to avoid customisation whenever possible. Most
VCs argued the case for this either on the grounds of customisation cost, or on the
grounds of customisation risk. In either case, these VCs experienced the same tension
when they found that they had little choice but to include elements of customisation
in their proposals.
VCs arguing on the grounds of cost stated that customisation of their ERP systems
was one of the biggest threats to implementations because modified code could
make systems vulnerable. That is, customisation can inadvertently, negatively impact
linked modules and also malfunction when system upgrades were conducted. These
VCs considered that the costs incurred to remedy these impacts could be prohibitive
to their clients and possibly threaten ongoing relationships.
VCs arguing on the grounds of risk suggested that if an ERP system was not at least
an 80% fit, following configuration, then it might not be the right product for the
client. They stated that the initial customisation of ERP modules required continued
customisation every time an ERP software manufacturer updated its software. They
stated that this is to reduce vulnerabilities or incompatibilities between the
customised modules and the standard manufacturer produced modules. The VCs also
stated that this can become a very expensive and disruptive process for their clients.
122
It is at this point, for these reasons, that some VCs stated that they actually ‘qualified’
out of the proposal process. Clearly, issues of customisation present a tension for
those VCs who see that clients do have unique business processes, but their system,
due to customisation challenges, cannot support this. To address this, VCs typically
tried to determine whether a business process could be changed to suit standards
built into the software before considering software customisation.
In summary, all VCs, by definition, tailored their ERPs to client needs, irrespective of
their own definitions of tailoring and irrespective of whether this pertained to specific
module selection; configuration; customisation; programming a complete ERP; or
even restructuring business functions to align with ERP implementations.
55.5 Incorporating clients’ strategies
I was interested to know the extent to which VCs elicited information about the SME
clients’ strategies or strategic intents, and included such considerations in ERP
proposals, because the literature (section 2.4) emphasised there should be alignment
between ERP systems and strategy. More specifically, this can involve aligning
strategy with business processes (including changing processes to capitalise on ERP
capabilities that help achieve these strategies) and aligning processes with the ERP
system (which can involve tailoring the ERP system to support unique processes). If
VCs do not consider client strategy during proposal development then the risks of
misaligned strategies and processes increase commensurately.
During the interviews with VCs I first gave them opportunities to talk about SME
strategy unprompted when they discussed areas such as their methodologies. This
gave me an indication of whether client strategy considerations were included as part
of their scoping and analysis/redesign phases. Later in the interview I asked the
following question to explore this explicitly to gather deeper understanding about
the VCs’ techniques for understanding their clients’ strategies:
How much time do you devote to understanding your client’s strategic goals
during proposal development?
123
There were two main themes evident regarding the extent to which VCs mentioned
client strategies when describing clients and their methodologies for incorporating
client strategies in their proposals. The majority of VCs did not raise issues of client
strategy at all. This became particularly evident when I asked questions about
information elicitation such as ‘What is the most important information that you
need?’ The VCs’ focus during my interviews with them, when unprompted about
client strategy, was clearly problem solving as it pertained to business processes, as
well as the urgency of this in relation to the time available to understand those
processes during proposal development.
The minority of VCs who did mention issues of client strategy considered this to be
irrelevant to proposal development. This was attributable to two main reasons. First,
these VCs did not see strategy as something that impacted costs associated with the
proposed ERP system. Second, they did not see any connection between strategy and
issues of tailoring the ERP system to suit the business. To these VCs, costs and
tailoring were both issues that were influenced by business processes, not strategy.
The VCs’ dominant process mindset seemed to draw them away from discussions
about client strategy.
When I prompted VCs specifically about whether they devoted time to understanding
client strategy, many complex viewpoints or perspectives emerged from the VCs’
responses as summarised in Table 5.1.
A few VCs believed that their SME clients did not have strategies. These VCs stated
that at the smaller end of the SME market, clients do not have defined strategies or
sets of strategic goals or any strategic documentation. The VCs stated that the day-
to-day concerns of the business was the focus of their clients and that those clients
called the VCs in to help to fix problems associated with this. When I asked these VCs
further about this from a strategic management context, for example, ‘Do you
explore the value chains of your clients?’, little was offered as to their own
understanding of strategic management principles, giving rise to a possible mutual
124
ignorance of strategy between the VCs and their clients, or simply a failure to
communicate about issues at a strategic level.
VC Perspectives about SME client strategy Nuanced VC perspectives
1. VCs believing that SMEs do not have strategy
2. VCs believing that strategy is important
Some VCs believe that strategy was not part of the problem they were trying to solve
3. VCs believing that SMEs do have strategy but this is not addressed for various reasons
Some VCs interpreted business processes as client’s strategies
Some VCs did not engage in strategy elicitation because clients were reticent to divulge information
4. VCs believing that SME strategy and the ERP system are synonymous
Some VCs believed that the ERP system itself was the SME’s strategy Some VCs believed that growth of the ERP system was the SME’s strategy
Table 5.1 VC perspectives, following prompting, about dedicating time to understand strategies.
A few said that they believed strategy was important. The VCs with this perspective
stated that it was important to understand strategy in order to get the long term
project right. In other words, they could see the connection between the ERP system
they were recommending, its impact on processes and the connection of this to the
strategic intentions of business owners for several years ahead. In this sense they
acknowledged that there needs to be alignment of strategies and business processes
supported by the ERP system. These VCs highlighted that, without such strategic
125
considerations, various negative consequences could emerge during an ERP
implementation such as lost time, wasted money, poor decision making, poor and
irrelevant reporting by the ERP system, and a general non-alignment of business
processes. These VCs described rudimentary techniques or enquiries that were used
to understand their clients’ strategies such as asking about strategic plans or
intentions relating, for instance, to product development, geographic expansions or
reductions, profit expectations, online presences and/or competitor positions. They
did not, however, articulate other techniques from the strategic management field
such as value chain or SWOT analyses. These VCs were also more likely to elicit
information about unique business processes which were seen by the clients as being
part of their IP.
The next perspective was held by most of the VCs. This was a perspective that
consisted of three different viewpoints. VCs with these views believed that SMEs do
have strategies but these VCs do not actively elicit information about these strategies
for the following three reasons:
Some VCs believe that strategy was not part of the problem they were trying
to solve
Some VCs interpreted business processes as clients’ strategies
Some VCs did not engage in strategy elicitation because clients were reticent
to divulge information
Those VCs with the first view, who believed that strategy was not a part of the
problem they were trying to solve, maintained a strong process orientation in their
discussions and this was clearly their proposal development focus. They emphasised
that their clients’ strategies were of no interest to them unless they directly impacted
the proposed ERP system. VCs offered examples of this, stating that the inclusion of
an RFID (radio frequency identification) module for future product processing would
be of interest whereas issues of financing new ventures were of little interest. These
VCs did not describe any techniques used by them to understand their clients’
strategies.
126
Several VCs actually confused many processes to be business strategies. For instance,
when I was talking to one VC about the types of strategic issues encountered during
proposal development he provided the following as an example of an SME client’s
business strategy:
“I can give you an example of one of the places I’m in now, they wanted bar-
coding and barcode shipping, sort of scan a pallet and that’s shipped but they
don’t ‘lot track’ so you can’t do it because you’re not lot tracking, so they’ve
got to bring in lot tracking before they can barcode.”
This is clearly a process supporting organisational customer responsiveness and
efficiency strategies. Other examples included VCs believing that strategies were such
process related areas as stock coding and various ERP services (ways in which ERPs
can process data and information). These VCs believed they were articulating
strategic manoeuvres that they were helping their clients to activate via the ERP
system. When I asked these VCs about the ways in which these changes would
address strategic considerations, such as their clients’ critical success factors and key
performance indicators, they immediately replied with descriptions about the ways
in which their ERP systems could, for example, speed up processing, reduce manual
processes and produce faster reports. As with the VCs holding the previous views,
these VCs did not discuss the use of techniques for understanding client strategies.
The third perspective was held by only a few VCs who stated that discussing strategy
with clients during proposal development was not possible because a suitable level
of trust had not yet been built up in the relationship. These VCs took a view that as a
partnership improves over time between the VCs and their clients, then discussions
about strategy can commence. But they also stated that conducting such discussions
during the proposal development phase could amount to ‘consulting for free’ and
this was shunned by these VCs. The overarching view of these VCs was that any
discussions about strategy could wait until the next phase of the project, i.e.
implementation. As with the previously described VCs, these VCs did not offer any
127
insights into the types of techniques they would use in those subsequent information
elicitation sessions about client strategies.
The final VC perspective was held by VCs who believed that client strategy and the
ERP system were synonymous. Two distinct viewpoints emerged from these VCs
including:
Some VCs who believed that the ERP system itself was the SME’s strategy
Some VCs who believed that growth of the ERP system was the SME’s strategy
VCs with the first perspective stated that they considered their ERP systems to be the
(new) strategy being adopted by their clients. This was exemplified in the following
quote when I asked the VC about the time devoted to understanding client strategies:
“So in terms of strategy if you’re talking about the strategy of the ERP
providing additional services... then yes… but if you’re talking about a strategy
whereby the guy has said to his external accountant, ‘should we finance this’,
or whatever, [we] couldn’t give a [damn].”
This quote shows that the VC does not have a clear understanding of strategy because
ERP services, which are business process operations oriented, are being mistaken for
business strategies. These VCs stated that any strategic discussions that were to be
conducted with their clients would pertain directly to the ERP system being proposed
and that, beyond this, discussions about strategies would not be entertained. When
I probed these VCs further about the types of strategic discussions they would have,
it became apparent that these discussions were about processes that the ERP
systems could administer. Similarly, when asked about the types of techniques they
used to elicit understanding about their clients’ strategies, these VCs stated that this
was developed during discussions at meetings with clients. Although I argue in
Chapter 3 that ERP systems can be strategic resources for SMEs, this finding
demonstrated that these VCs did not understand their ERP systems in this strategic
sense.
128
VCs with the second view believed that the growth of their ERP system, over time,
was the client’s strategy. These VCs stated that their clients’ strategic solutions, to
the business problems being experienced, lay in the modular expansions of their ERP
systems over time and thus growth of their ERPs. This is possible because, as I
highlight in Chapter 1, ERP systems are designed to serve many functions within
businesses and are built so that modules can be added as, and when, a business
needs them over time. These VCs were more focused on the potential for their ERP
system to grow with the SME into the future, overlooking the need to understand
their clients’ current strategic intentions, in order to develop accurate, quality
proposals.
In summary, it is clear from these different VC perspectives that most did not have a
clear understanding of strategy and for the few that did, they did not think it was
relevant to them during proposal development. This gives rise to questions about the
VCs’ abilities to produce quality proposals for ERP systems that align their clients’
business processes with their strategies or strategic intents.
55.6 Summary
In summary, this chapter highlighted the complex roles of the VCs as they navigated
the ERP proposal development phase of interaction with their SME clients. It revealed
that there were several tensions, constraints and even contradictions, inhibiting the
work of VCs in this phase and that these pertained to perceptions as well as the range
of techniques applied during their work. Issues around communications, information
elicitation, relationship development and resources including time, cost and
capabilities were found to bring about various tensions, potentially threatening the
success of ERP proposal development and, later, the ERP implementation itself. The
VCs’ methodological techniques were reported from scoping, analysis and redesign
perspectives, which highlighted that each of these phases were traversed by VCs
during proposal development and that each presented VCs with a range of complex
considerations. Finally, this chapter presented findings about the ways in which VCs
dealt with their clients’ business processes during proposal development and the
129
ways in which they perceive their clients’ strategies, highlighting that the locus of
thinking for most VCs was clearly on business processes during proposal
development.
The next chapter discusses the implications of these findings in the context of my
overarching and sub research questions, and how these findings confirm, extend and
add to existing IS knowledge.
130
CChapter 6: Discussion
6.1 Introduction
The main aim of this thesis is to explore what VCs experience as the most effective
techniques for developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for SMEs. I explained in
Chapter 1 that it is important to understand these experiences because ERP projects
often do not meet the expectations of SME clients, and because VCs often find that
SMEs do not have the strategic mindset and/or ICT expertise to articulate their ERP
system requirements. This suggested it would be useful to consolidate the views of a
number of VCs from Victoria, Australia to determine what techniques they find
effective for dealing with these issues. I approached this aim by exploring the
following specific questions that were posed in Chapter 3:
1. What are the common experiences VCs have in dealings with their SME
clients during proposal development?
2. How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles in relation to their
SME clients?
3. What information do VCs elicit from SME clients to develop the ERP
proposal and what techniques do they believe are effective?
4. What are the main kinds of adjustments VCs make to standard ERP packages
when they tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs?
In this chapter I discuss the implications of the findings (Chapter 5) for the state of
knowledge about ERP proposal development for SMEs from the perspective of VCs.
Each major section that follows answers one of the questions above and highlights
where my findings confirm, extended or challenge previous research synthesised in
Chapter 2. This is followed by another major section that will answer my overarching
research question using the conceptual framework developed in Chapter 3. This
chapter finishes with a section that identifies various implications for VCs and IS
scholars arising from the conceptual framework.
131
66.2 What are the common VC experiences during proposal development?
The first research question posed in Chapter 3 was:
What are the common experiences VCs have in dealings with their SME
clients during proposal development?
This question was important to answer because I anticipated that how VCs perceived
their SME clients would influence what techniques VCs used and found effective
when developing ERP proposals. Such insights are important because, as I argued in
Section 2.8.1, there have only been a few studies exploring VC perspectives of, and
experiences with, SMEs in the context of accounting IS (Bradshaw, Cragg &
Pulakanam 2013), websites (Carey 2008) or ERP systems (Liang & Xue 2004; Mathrani
& Viehland 2009) and their SME clients.
The findings in Chapter 5 revealed that the VCs interviewed perceived SME clients in
similar ways as VCs in these other studies, and in ways consistent with the general IS
literature on SMEs which I reviewed in Chapter 2. That is, VCs stated their SME clients
often:
lacked ICT/ERP knowledge and did not understand what they were looking for
in an ERP system, but had some sense that it might help to run their
businesses and solve some of their business problems (Bradshaw, Cragg &
Pulakanam 2013)(see also section 2.4.2)
lacked relevant IS skills to run an ERP system (Mathrani & Viehland 2009;
Ramdani, Chevers & Williams 2013)(see also section 2.4.2)
did not want to change their existing business processes/practices (Liang &
Xue 2004)(see also section 2.5.1), and tensions ensued when SME staff saw a
mismatch between current processes and proposed new ERP based processes
(Howcroft & Light 2008)
132
had manual, paper-based processes or, at best, email and Excel spread sheets
(Mathrani & Viehland 2009)
found it difficult to see the benefits of ERP systems relative to their cost
(Mathrani & Viehland 2009)
did not necessarily have a formal business strategy (see section 2.4.1)
were not willing to commit time (Carey 2008)(see also section 2.3) to ERP
proposal development because owner-operators would often need to attend
to daily running of their business (see section 2.3)
The findings also show that VCs tended to perceive their SME clients as
heterogeneous in terms of their clients having different types of business problems
and ways of administering standard business processes. Overall, however, VCs saw
SMEs homogeneously rather than heterogeneously because, to a large extent, all
SMEs presented VCs with the same set of challenges listed above.
In the next section I examine how this perception of SME clients, and other issues,
influenced how VCs interpreted their ERP proposal development roles.
66.3 How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles?
The second research question posed in Chapter 3 was:
How do VCs interpret their proposal development roles in relation to their SME
clients?
This question was important because these roles, in light of their perception of SME
clients, provided the broader context to understand the specific techniques VCs used
and found effective when developing proposals for SME clients. It also served to
contribute to the debate in the literature (see sections 2.6 and 2.7) about which roles
should be performed by VCs versus SMEs. At one extreme some scholars argue that
SMEs should take responsibility to acquire the necessary expertise and develop
133
business cases for the selection and implementation of ICT/ERP systems. This
suggests the VC role should be one of merely selling services and/or software in
response to SME requests for tenders (RFT) or quotes (RFQ). At the other extreme
scholars recognise many SMEs are not capable of this and expect VCs to perform
problem solving, education and client management roles. I also identified a gap in
knowledge concerning the techniques VCs used to fulfil these roles, especially during
the proposal development phase since most literature focuses on ICT/ERP
implementation.
This study contributes to the debate by confirming the views of scholars arguing that
SMEs often expect VCs to fulfil problem solving, education, client management and
relationship development roles. Indeed, the VCs in this study preferred that SMEs did
not develop RFTs/RFQs so that VCs could maintain control of their problem solving
role, which challenged the views of scholars arguing that SMEs should be responsible
for this work. More importantly, my novel approach of focusing on the ERP proposals,
rather than implementation, extended the limited research in this area (section 2.7)
by providing more nuanced understanding of VCs’ interpretations of and tensions
between these various roles, and by identifying techniques they use to fulfil these
roles. Further, examining the ERP proposal stage led to new VC roles not previously
identified in the literature: time/cost management and competitor/influencer
analysis roles. These roles emerged because VCs developed proposals without charge
and needed to win the ERP contract before their time was billable.
The following sections discuss in further detail how my findings extend the literature
and also the new findings not previously reported in the literature.
66.3.1 Extending the literature on VC roles
This study confirms prior IS/ERP studies (section 2.7) that VCs were found to perform
problem solving, education, client management and relationship development roles
with SME clients. My findings extend this literature by offering a more nuanced
understanding of how VCs interpret these broad techniques, especially due to my
novel focus on the pre-contract ERP proposal stage that results in time pressures that
134
VCs typically do not encounter during the implementation stage, as well as identified
specific techniques VCs used to fulfil these roles.
The findings show (see section 5.2.1) that VCs perceived their role fundamentally as
problem solving, as also found by Bradshaw, Cragg and Pulakanam (2013) in the
context of accounting IS, in the sense that an SME comes to the VC with process-
related problems, and VCs viewed their role in terms of determining how the ‘best
practices’ embedded in their ERP systems could solve these problems. This study
shows, however, that the ERP VCs revealed a strong sales or ‘business fit to software’
orientation to their problem solving role. This orientation is often not recognised in
the SME-ERP literature because it mainly examines VC roles and perceptions during
ERP implementation (Liang & Xue 2004; Mathrani & Viehland 2009), at which point
they are charging fees for their time (Doom et al. 2010; Laukkanen, Sarpola &
Hallikainen 2007). Even the SME-IS studies that explored the VCs’ roles and
experiences focused on the stage after VCs were commissioned to develop websites
(Carey 2008) or when VCs had a pre-existing relationship as the SME’s accountant
(Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013). This study, by contrast, examined the proposal
development stage before SMEs became paying clients, and thus introduces
additional issues which affect the VCs’ roles and experiences with SME clients as they
strive to understand their clients’ businesses, develop trusting relationships, win the
contract and secure a long-term relationship with their SME clients to implement and
manage their ERP systems. More specifically, these tensions among the various roles
meant that VCs focused only on identifying and examining problems that could be
solved by their ERP systems (rather than SME problems more generally), preferring
to leave more granular and time consuming analysis of the SMEs business process
problems until the implementation stage.
The findings confirmed the literature that an important role for VCs is developing
long-term relationships with SME clients, and was a technique the VCs in this study
used to engender trust so that clients would provide sensitive information the VCs
needed to develop their proposals. But I also pointed out in section 2.7.2 that there
135
is a lack of knowledge in the IS literature concerning the issues faced and techniques
used by VCs to develop these relationships, especially during proposal development.
I extended this knowledge by reporting in section 5.2 (and its various sub sections)
that the main techniques used by VCs to develop long-term relationships included
face to face communication (within meetings, workshops and software
demonstrations), non-disclosure agreements, fitting around the client’s day to day
business needs (and trying to manage this process) and reference site visits. I also
found there were tensions that hampered the VCs’ abilities to develop relationships.
The dominant relationship development barrier was the VCs’ clients interpreting
proposal development more as an acquisition of a product, and less as leading to an
ongoing implementation exercise requiring long-term relationships. This deferral of
responsibility for role miscommunication by the VCs during proposal development
has not been reported previously. My findings suggest, however, that this
misconception by SME clients might be exacerbated by VCs not recognising that their
ERP sales orientation during proposal development may encourage clients to see the
engagement more as a product purchase than a business problem solving exercise.
This study also confirmed the educational role for VCs found in the literature (section
2.7.2) that some VCs used education as a technique to compensate for their SME
clients’ lack of ICT/ERP knowledge (section 2.4.2). My findings offered a more
nuanced understanding of how VCs interpreted the importance of this role, and the
techniques they used, when compared to this literature, especially in light of the
commercial pressures faced by the VCs during proposal development. Overall, I found
that some VCs believed this role was important while others rejected it outright
(section 5.2.6), and that VCs rarely formally educated clients during proposal
development due to their time constraints. The only education role most VCs
undertook was to present to, or discuss with clients, issues about the ways in which
the SMEs’ processes could be streamlined or automated by the ERP system. The
prevailing technique used by VCs, during proposal development, to provide clients
with some education was generic demonstrations of their ERP software. Commercial
pressures meant that it was very rare for VCs to tailor these demonstrations with
136
actual client data to make them more relevant and effective for clients. VCs did not
educate clients on broader areas outside the context of the specific business
problems being focused on, such as the potential positive and negative impacts of
the ERP system on decision-making and trading partner relationships, and the risks
and challenges of process changes and business restructuring.
Finally, this study confirms the VC client management role in the literature (section
2.6.2) which compensates for the deficiency of SME abilities, and in some cases
desire, to manage ERP projects and VC relationships (section 2.4.2). The study
extends our understanding of this role as interpreted by the VCs because it revealed
complex challenges they faced managing SME clients who have constrained time
availability (section 5.2.5.1), eliciting sensitive information (section 5.2.5.2) and
dealing with staff conflicts internal to SMEs (section 5.2.5.3) that affected proposal
development. This also challenges the notion of some scholars, as I mention in
section 6.3, that SMEs should manage these responsibilities, since VCs found they
needed to employ techniques to address these issues. My findings highlighted that
the VCs were aware of the busy nature of their SME clients, but did not have a
solution to managing this other than to maintain continuous communications with
clients to arrange and manage meetings. The main technique VCs used to address the
problem of accessing sensitive client information was, when necessary, to offer non-
disclosure agreements to instil confidence in their clients. Many VCs found that when
trust had been established with smaller firms during proposal development, such
information was then generally easier to obtain. The VCs conversely were very clear
that RFTs or RFQs were not good techniques for eliciting information. This reflected
the VCs lack of confidence in the ability of SMEs to prepare relevant RFTs and RFQs
but also highlighted the VCs frustration with their clients’ lack of understanding about
ERPs. This frustration conflicts somewhat with the VCs’ views on formally educating
their clients as described above. VCs found dealing with staff conflict during proposal
development to be particularly difficult, but did not see it as their role to help to
resolve staff conflicts and, instead, the dominant technique most VCs used was to
come back at a later time when staff had resolved the problems themselves.
137
66.3.2 New VC roles not found in the literature
This study also identified two new VC roles (time/cost management and competitor
analysis) that have not previously been reported in the literature on SMEs and IS/ERP
because the focus of prior work has been on ICT/ERP implementations rather than
proposal development. I summarise these roles and, where applicable, the
techniques VCs used to fulfil the roles.
The VCs’ commercial constraints, pertaining to time and cost during proposal
development, identified in this study highlighted a further role they recognised and
sought to manage. This role involved trying to manage effectively or balance the
trinity of their time and costs whilst producing a quality proposal, whereby VCs
recognised that any perceived non-value-add time spent on the proposal was a cost
to their business. Tensions such as fitting in with the day to day uncertainties of their
clients’ busy schedules and work patterns meant that VCs had to vigilantly maintain
communication with them to ensure schedules were going to work. Similarly, given
the SMEs time constraints, VCs would use tools such as templates and checklists to
elicit information as efficiently as possible to maximise the minimal time available to
them whilst with clients. VCs found themselves making constant refinements to, and
streamlining, their methodical approaches. VCs used these techniques to try to
balance the tension between time/cost and quality – a tension not reported in the
literature about the proposal development stage.
The other new role that this study identified was one of competitor and influencer
analysis. The findings showed that VCs were aware of their competitors in the
marketplace and of the associated threats (section 5.2.6), as well as other parties
which could influence an SME’s decision about the ERP proposal (section 5.2.6). VCs
therefore spent time during proposal development to understand these influences
so that, consistent with their ERP sales orientation of their problem solving role, they
could determine and justify the value proposition of their ERP system relative to
competitors. This finding also highlights the challenge VCs face in balancing the time
spent on this role, compared to other roles such as education, time/cost
138
management and more in-depth problem analysis that may conflict with their ability
to produce quality proposals. These and other implications resulting from the VCs’
need to balance competing roles are explored further in section 6.7.
The following section explores how the commercial pressures and SME idiosyncrasies
influence VCs’ perceptions about which techniques they find effective for eliciting
information from SME clients during ERP proposal development.
66.4 What information do VCs elicit from SMEs and how?
The third research question was:
What information do VCs elicit from SME clients to develop the ERP proposal
and what techniques do they believe are effective?
This question pertained to the types of information or business needs/requirements
VCs sought, and the techniques they found effective for eliciting and understanding
these from SME clients. In section 3.5 I stated that the answer to this question
included consideration of what VCs perceived to be the important requirements to
elicit and understand so they could develop successful ERP proposals and, thus,
implementations. Answering this question extends existing IS knowledge because,
while the literature recognises the importance of such requirements, there has been
little research that has examined the VC perspective pertaining to SME-related
requirements elicitation when developing proposals (see section 2.7).
More specifically, the SME-ERP (and broader SME-IS) literature acknowledges the
importance of understanding an SME client’s business goals and objectives (Esteve-
Perez & Manez-Castillejo 2008; Mathrani & Viehland 2009; Raymond &
Uwizeyemungu 2007; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011), business needs and
expectations (Deep et al. 2008), and business processes (Deep et al. 2008; Malhotra
& Temponi 2010; Vilpola, Kouri & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila 2007) before ERP
implementation. However, these ERP researchers typically argue or imply that the
onus is on SMEs to understand their own needs and convey this to VCs. My study
challenges this notion by highlighting, as reported by other SME-ERP scholars (Doom
139
et al. 2010; Laukkanen, Sarpola & Hallikainen 2007), that VCs do (and in the case of
this study, prefer to) elicit this information from SMEs themselves (see section 5.2.1).
This was also highlighted as a VC preference in section 6.3 in relation to the VCs’ SME
client management role.
The findings, in answering this question, also extend the literature with more
nuanced understanding of the techniques VCs find effective for eliciting
requirements from SME clients. The SME-ERP literature, whilst advocating good
communications as a key technique for VCs when eliciting requirements, tends to
generalise this as simply, for example, ‘communications’ (Argyropoulou et al. 2009),
‘emphasis on the determination of clear goals and objectives’ (Mathrani & Viehland
2009; Upadhyay, Jahanyan & Dan 2011), or ‘participation from every department is
a must’ (Deep et al. 2008). My findings show that there is complexity associated with
communications techniques aimed at eliciting requirements from SME clients within
tight timeframes.
The next sections examine the techniques VCs use to elicit SME client strategy and
business process requirements (respectively), and the issues they face, in more
detail.
66.4.1 Extending the literature on eliciting information about client strategy
This first section explores the extent to which VCs elicited information about and
understood SME clients’ strategies when developing ERP proposals. The SME-IS
literature more broadly (section 2.4) emphasises this is important so that any changes
to business processes due to the implementation of ICTs/ERPs are aligned with these
strategies. The few prior IS studies that have examined VC experiences when working
with SME clients during IS projects have found examples of VCs who help SMEs
identify and formulate their business strategies (Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013;
Carey 2008), as well as examples of VCs who did not see such enquiries as part of
their role (Carey 2008). I was unable to find any SME-ERP studies which had explored
VC experiences with regards to strategy-related requirements elicitation.
140
Overall, my findings challenged these SME-IS studies because, at least in the ERP
proposal development stage, none of the VCs stated they helped SMEs develop their
strategies (see section 5.5). However, this study confirmed the SME-IS literature
because I found that some VCs recognised the importance of eliciting information
about client strategy. The main set of techniques these VCs found effective for
eliciting this information was to perform rudimentary enquiries into client strategic
plans or intentions relating, for instance, to product development, geographic
expansions or reductions, profit expectations, online presences and/or competitor
positions.
More significantly, however, I found that most VCs did not see their clients’ strategies
as relevant. This was surprising because, as Esteve-Perez and Manez-Castillejo (2008)
suggest, long-term business solutions involving ERPs, and the processes that they
administer, must align with business strategies to succeed. I therefore anticipated all
VCs would perform rudimentary enquiries on client strategies to ensure the ERP
systems would align with these strategies and to ensure SME stakeholders could see
the strategic benefits of process change to the whole business and thus decrease the
chances SME staff will resist these changes.
From another perspective, however, this study confirms and extends the literature
by offering a more nuanced understanding of why few VCs engaged in strategy
discussions with clients. The findings confirmed the literature because VCs stated
their SME clients often lacked strategic management experience (see sections 5.2 and
6.2), which would decrease the chances the business requirements obtained by VCs
during proposal development would be strategically informed. The study also
extends our understanding of the challenges VCs face regarding engaging in strategy
discussions. First, in section 5.5 I explained that in cases where some VCs believed
they discussed strategy with clients during proposal development, a critical
examination of the examples they used to support this claim indicated they were
generally referring to business processes. Similarly, some other VCs thought their ERP
system was the client’s strategy. This finding extends the literature by highlighting
141
that in some instances the reasons why VCs did not engage in strategy discussions
with clients was because they did not understand strategy. Second, unlike much of
the SME-ERP literature, this study found some VCs recognised that clarity on an SME
client’s strategy is not always achievable because SME strategies are often in a state
of flux due to changing competitive threats (see section 5.5). Finally, the focus of the
literature on ERP implementation means that prior work has not recognised that the
time and ROI constraints upon VC resources during proposal development (see
sections 5.3 and 6.3) means they do not have time to engage in these discussions and
instead focus only on eliciting process-related information, as explored next.
66.4.2 Extending the literature on eliciting information about client processes
This section explores the extent to which VCs elicited information about and
understood SME clients’ business processes when developing ERP proposals, and the
techniques they found effective. The SME IS/ERP literature does acknowledge the
importance of understanding/eliciting process requirements (section 2.5) but it does
not provide nuanced understanding of the difficulties faced and the techniques they
use to do this (section 2.7), especially in light of the tight time frames during ERP
proposal development. Further, prior work has not explored VCs’ views on and
whether they elicit information regarding any SME unique business processes. The
findings of this study extend IS knowledge by revealing the challenges VCs faced
eliciting information about client processes relating to obtaining sensitive
information, handling group think by staff within SMEs and their lack of
understanding about ERP systems, and handling the threat of change as perceived by
the SMEs. It also extends prior work by identifying techniques VCs found effective for
dealing with these issues, and their perceptions of the importance of understanding
SMEs’ unique processes. These contributions to knowledge are summarised next.
The first challenge VCs faced with eliciting information about client processes related
to obtaining sensitive information from SMEs, such as IP pertaining to unique
business processes (section 5.2.3 and 5.2.5.2) and financial information (section
5.2.5.2), that was an essential part of VCs’ problem solving role (section 5.2.1). The
142
findings of this study highlighted that a technique VCs found effective for dealing with
this issue was developing trusted relationships with SME clients (see section 5.2.3),
although this was hard to build during the time constrained proposal development
stage. The VCs made it clear that constant communication with clients was a key
technique to engendering the trust needed to elicit business process requirements.
They also used non-disclosure agreements, if this was necessary, as a way to appease
client fears of breach of confidentiality by VCs.
The second challenge was SME ‘group think’ (see section 5.2.5.3) whereby valuable
information about processes would be missed in group discussions, and only
detected later by chance. This would delay proposal progress and waste time due to
the need to modify the proposal. The findings of this study reveal that VCs found the
most effective technique to overcome group think was to make arrangements to
meet staff individually because SME personnel would be more open with VCs on a
one-to-one basis. Another technique was to request that the business owner or CEO
not be present at meetings with staff because VCs knew this too would reduce, and
in many cases eliminate, the pressure SME personnel felt to state views they wanted
the business owner to hear.
The third challenge faced by VCs was the lack of SME knowledge about ERP systems
(section 5.2.4), which prolonged proposal development work because they needed,
to varying degrees, to fulfil an additional educational role rather than just problem
solving. The SME tendency to see their businesses in terms of products and services,
rather than business processes, further frustrated the VCs during discussions about
processes with clients. The findings of this study highlight that the dominant
techniques used by VCs to address this problem, and help VCs and SMEs understand
how their ERP systems could solve process-related problems, were presenting
software demonstrations (section 5.3.1.1) and conducting site visits (section 5.3.1.2).
More specifically, prior literature has not reported on whether and how these
techniques help VCs to elicit information about client processes. My findings suggest
demonstrations do help because clients can visually see and understand the types of
143
impacts the ERP system could have on their businesses and then feedback this
immediate understanding to VCs from the SME process needs perspective. This study
also contributes to knowledge by expanding on the issues VCs face using these
techniques. For example, the VCs’ commercial time and cost constraints meant they
did not have time to use tailored software demonstrations. The VCs considered using
tailored demonstrations to be more effective for eliciting information about
processes because their clients would see their data, in action, inside the ERP, so that
clients understood better how the ERP system might or might not improve their
business processes, and so that clients could provide feedback on this understanding
to the VCs. Further, site visits enabled similar feedback opportunities to those
described above for demonstrations, but these were constrained somewhat in that
it was difficult for VCs to organise site visits to the SME clients’ competitor firms for
reasons of market competitiveness, yet these firms would provide the best available
context for the SMEs due to their industry similarities.
The findings highlighted a final challenge (section 5.4.1) that resulted in tensions
between VCs and SMEs, and among staff within SMEs, relating to perceived threats
of change that ERP systems bring with which VCs found themselves confronted in
their client management role (section 5.2.5.3). The literature highlights that VCs and
SMEs can have different expectations of each other (see section 2.7.2), as confirmed
by the VCs in this study (see section 5.2.1), but it does not report on how VCs deal
with clients’ perceived threat of change. In section 5.4.1 I explained that the main
technique used by VCs was spending time explaining the benefits of changing
business processes to the best practice standards of their ERPs. The literature also
does not recognise the challenges VCs face dealing with internal politics within SMEs,
whereby this study found that the dominant technique VCs found effective was to
defer eliciting information about client processes and return at a later time when
disputes had passed. The findings did not reveal any reference by VCs to conflict
resolution skills which probably explains their reaction to the challenge of dealing
with client politics.
144
The SME-ERP literature recognises the importance of gathering information about all
processes, including unique business processes, of a firm for the ERP implementation,
but it does not look at the VCs’ views about this or whether they elicit information
about unique business processes during the proposal stage. My findings extend this
understanding by showing that some VCs did not recognise that SMEs had unique
processes at all. Of those who did, some preferred to leave consideration of these
until the implementation phase, whilst others did elicit this information during the
proposal stage because they considered this to be a very important aspect of the
proposal and the success of the ERP implementation.
The next section examines the perceptions of VCs regarding the need to tailor their
ERP systems to align with the unique processes of SME clients and the ERP tailoring
techniques they used.
66.5 What types of adjustments do VCs find effective when preparing proposals?
The fourth research question was:
What are the main kinds of adjustments VCs make to standard ERP packages
when they tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs?
This question was important because it determined VC perceptions about tailoring
and the tailoring techniques they used to ensure their ERP systems supported their
clients’ (unique) processes and solved their business problems. My findings
confirmed the ERP tailoring approaches recommended by IS scholars (see section
2.5.2) by showing that VCs preferred to minimise or avoid customisation and, rather,
tailor ERP systems using module selection and configuration (section 5.4.1). This
study extends the literature, which largely overlooks the VC experiences of tailoring
(section 2.7), by offering nuanced understanding of their perceptions, decision-
making and associated issues.
The VCs in this study did not consider ERP module selection to be a tailoring
technique and instead perceived this merely as a typical aspect of ERP
implementation. This included the few VCs who did not believe their SME clients had
145
any unique processes to which their ERP systems needed to be aligned. The majority
of VCs, by contrast, found their clients did have unique business processes but varied
in terms of the point during the project that the ERP system was tailored. Some VCs
left such tailoring to the implementation stage because the time pressures they faced
during proposal development meant they did not have time to identify unique
processes until later. This further emphasises the tensions encountered by many VCs
pertaining to balancing time/cost management and problem solving roles. This was
in contrast to other VCs who considered identifying unique processes during the
proposal stage to be a crucial technique because, if not detected early in the project,
problems can ensue during implementation.
The findings of this study also confirmed the tendency by VCs reported in the
literature (section 2.5.2.3) to avoid or minimise customisation so that ERP systems to
align with their clients’ unique processes, with configuration being the preferred way
to achieve this. The primary reason for avoiding customisation is to reduce the
upfront and ongoing costs of ERP systems for the SME clients, which is consistent
with the VCs’ sales focus during proposal development (see section 5.2.2). This
aversion to customisation is such that VCs who did identify their clients’ unique
business processes would try to convince SMEs to use the best practice process
standards built into ERP systems to avoid customisation if their ERP systems could
not be adapted to the unique processes through configuration (see section 5.4).
66.6 Theorising VC proposal development techniques to tailor ERPs for SMEs
I argued in Chapter 1 and sections 2.6 and 2.7 that a common position taken in the IS
literature is for SME adoption/implementation issues relating to ERP systems (and
ICT generally) to be seen as (and theorised in terms of) SME internal competencies
(or failures) in areas such as strategy experience, ICT/ERP knowledge, and/or VC
selection and management (e.g. Cragg, Caldeira & Ward 2011). In this research I took
a comparatively novel theoretical perspective (after authors such as Bradshaw, Cragg
& Pulakanam 2013) of focusing on the experiences of VCs when developing ERP
proposals for SMEs using the VRIO framework and complemented by BPM principles.
146
I did this because very little had been reported about VCs experiences developing ERP
proposals for their SME clients. This represented a gap in our understanding of the
pre-ERP implementation techniques of VCs and the effectiveness of these. In chapter
3, I also argued that there is no literature concerning how the combination of the
VRIO framework and BPM principles can be used to conceptualise or interpret the
work of VCs during proposal development.
This led to the following overarching research question that I will answer in this
section based on answers to research questions 1-4:
What techniques do VCs experience as effective when developing proposals
that tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and how can these be
interpreted using the VRIO framework and BPM principles?
This project contributes to knowledge by exploring how the VRIO framework and the
BPM principles in combination can be used to conceptualise understanding of the
techniques used by VCs during proposal development. More specifically, this study
demonstrates that combining the VRIO framework and BPM principles is needed to
interpret the findings, rather than just one or the other on its own.
The first section below will summarise the techniques that VCs experienced as
effective for developing proposals that tailored ERP systems for individual SMEs
based on the ‘valuable’, ‘rare’ and ‘inimitable’ components of the VRIO framework.
The second section will summarise the techniques VCs experienced as effective for
developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs based on the
‘organisation’ component of the framework. The third section uses the BPM
principles discussed in Chapter 3 as the basis for explaining the techniques VCs
experienced as effective for developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for
individual SMEs. The final section uses the VRIO framework to summarise the major
problems identified in this research with the VCs’ overall approaches to developing
ERP proposals for individual SMEs. This emphasises the value of IS scholars in future,
147
theorising issues around SME adoption/implementation of ERPs in terms of VC and
SME relationships, and particularly the strategic role VCs could potentially play.
66.6.1 Theorising VC proposal techniques to tailor ERPs to SME strategic resources
The findings in section 5.5 highlighted that a few VCs understood strategy, recognised
that their clients had strategic intentions and associated ‘valuable’ resources (see
principle in table 3.1). These VCs used rudimentary enquiries into their clients’
strategies to elicit such information. This enabled the VCs to determine the ‘rarity’
and/or ‘inimitability’ (see table 3.1) of the client’s resources in terms of the client’s
strategic:
non-process related resources that gave them competitive advantage, where
the tailored ERP system must support and not undermine these resources by
improving non-strategic processes (that is, the ‘organisation’ principle in table
3.1)
processes recognised by SMEs as their IP (see section 5.2.3), where the ERP
system must be tailored to help enact these processes and not undermine
them (sections 5.4.2 and 5.4.3).
These VCs experienced some techniques as effective for developing proposals to
tailor ERP systems for an individual SME’s non-process related strategic resources.
These techniques mainly involved meetings with SME owner-operators who provided
the context VCs needed to understand these resources. VCs also used the meetings
to convince owner-operators of the need for ERP-related process change to achieve
their strategic objectives. In this way VCs were effectively convincing owner-
operators that the ERP would be a part of a resource ‘bundle’. Having acquired
context, VCs tailored their ERP proposal by selecting modules relevant to these
strategic resources and their underpinning ‘organisational’ or non-strategic
processes. They also specified configuration of the modules if necessary. Challenges
for VCs were in convincing owner-operators of the need for change, especially where
clients were not clear about their own strategies or how ERPs could support ‘valuable’
resources.
148
These few VCs also experienced some techniques as effective for developing
proposals to tailor ERP systems for an individual SMEs’ unique, strategic processes.
SME owner-operators often regarded these processes as sensitive intellectual
property. The VCs’ techniques therefore first centred upon managing their client
relationships to engender trust. Meetings with owner-operators and other selected
SME personnel (e.g. those who knew the nuances of the processes) was a technique
used to do this, but VCs also offered non-disclosure agreements to build trust if
necessary. Upon eliciting the necessary information, VCs then specified detailed
configuration or customisation requirements in proposals. VCs experienced time
pressures with this exercise because of the complexities and rich details needed for
this level of process understanding, coupled with the challenge of eliciting this
sensitive information. In this sense, clients’ unique, strategic processes were viewed
by VCs as ‘socially complex’ (and thus inimitable) resources. This meant VCs often left
the identification and tailoring of these processes until the implementation stage.
The potential for implementation failure thus increased due to the risk of overlooking
unique, strategic processes, which should be identified and supported by the ERP
system.
All VCs appeared to see relationship development as important for eliciting detailed
requirements and for building potential for long-term engagements with their clients.
These long-term relationships often included, for example, ERP education and
ongoing tailoring as the client’s strategies changed or were realised (e.g. growth).
This was communicated to clients during the proposal development stage and in
some cases would be explicitly noted in proposals. The VC accounts suggested they
saw themselves as ‘valuable’ resources, although only a few VCs (as highlighted
above) saw this relationship in terms of its strategic value to clients. There was no
evidence in my data that VCs articulated to clients during proposal development how
their tailored ERP system, and the VCs themselves, could form a bundle of ‘rare’
resources which few of the client’s competitors would have. The results of this study
suggest VCs would have difficulty with this because they often find they are servicing
149
their clients’ competitors (see section 5.3.1.2) and therefore cannot offer exclusive
relationships which would confer such competitive advantage.
While a few VCs did consider strategic resources, this study revealed that the majority
of VCs believed client strategy was irrelevant to ERP proposal development or, in
some cases, did not appear to understand the notion of strategy (see section 5.5).
This suggests that the dominant technique used by most VCs was ‘not’ to identify
‘valuable’, ‘rare’ and/or ‘inimitable’ client resources, or to consider the potential of
their ERP system to be a ‘valuable’ resource conferring competitive advantage
(‘rarity’ and ‘inimitability’) by being bundled with other client resources. In part this
might be attributed, as I noted in section 5.2.1, to VCs typically being approached by
SMEs to solve business problems that were more operational in nature, such as
problems managing data and transactions. But VCs without strong awareness of
strategy (section 5.5) would be unlikely to recognise whether or not a client’s
process-related problems have a strategic dimension. Overall, these VCs who did not
engage in strategic discussions with clients instead looked at SME resources
essentially through a process and problem improvement lens, as explored next.
66.6.2 Theorising VC proposal techniques to tailor ERPs to SME non-strategic resources
The findings of this research suggest most VCs interpreted their role as business
problem solvers of non-strategic or operational process problems using their ERP
system (see section 6.3). Even the few VCs who saw client strategy as important still
focused on process problems, although they were more likely to distinguish between
strategic and non-strategic processes. The lack of most VCs’ engagement with
strategy during the proposal development stage highlights the potential risk their
problem solving, and other associated techniques, based on the ‘organisation’
component of the VRIO framework, will not be linked with the other strategy
components.
The dominant non-strategic perspective of most VCs can be attributed, in part, to
their time constraints and lack of strategy knowledge, and/or their SME clients’ lack
of strategy experience (see section 6.4.1). My findings showed that all VCs
150
recommended some form of tailoring for every client, so their ERP systems were
always specifically designed for each client in superficial (such as via the addition of
client logos to output screens and printed reports) through to more sophisticated
ways (e.g. selecting modules and configuring them to support the clients’ processes).
This study also highlights that many VCs preferred to encourage clients to adapt their
operational processes to take advantage of the best practice embedded in their ERP
system.
VCs found various techniques to be effective for eliciting information about their
clients’ non-strategic processes and related problems to develop their proposals on
how their ERP systems would tailored. They preferred face-to-face elicitation, via
meetings and workshops, because these enabled the VCs to attain nuanced
understanding of the day-to-day operations within their clients’ businesses. The VCs
invested precious time with client management (see section 5.2.5) to develop a deep
understanding of clients’ operational tasks, including continuous communication
with clients to maintain proposal development schedules and handling conflicts and
group think issues within SME firms. They used (mostly generic) demonstrations to
present the various functions of the ERP software (see section 5.2.4) to the clients to
absolve the need for VCs (from their perspectives) to provide more formal education.
These were useful for eliciting feedback about the suitability of the system for the
clients’ operational processes, and for quickly determining which modules should be
selected.
The next section summarises how the BPM principles underpinned other techniques
VCs experienced as effective when developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for
individual SME clients.
66.6.3 Techniques for developing proposals tailoring ERPs based on BPM principles
The findings of this study suggest that it was worthwhile to supplement the VRIO
framework with major principles from the BPM discipline to conceptualise more
completely the techniques VCs experience as effective for developing proposals
tailoring ERP systems for individual SMEs.
151
First, this study highlights that the VCs’ accounts of their individual methodologies
(synthesised in Appendix 2) were consistent with the three broad BPM
methodological stages (section 3.4.1), despite them having no formal knowledge of
them. During the scoping stage, the VCs’ time pressures meant they typically found
it effective to identify quickly, and focus upon, the specific process-related problems
or ‘pain points’, as advocated by BPM practitioners. This stage is undertaken by VCs
using a combination of face-to-face meetings with the SME owner-operator and key
staff, high level conceptual designs, ERP software demonstrations and reference site
visits (section 5.3.1). The analysis stage followed this during which the material and
details gathered during the scoping stage were understood but at a finer level of
detail which was then applied to the next stage, redesign, within which this detail
about the client’s business processes was considered in terms of tailoring and fit to
the ERP system to solve the client’s business problems and which included further
discussions with the client about process related changes that need adaptation to the
ERP system. The findings also show that only some VCs elicited unique processes, and
that most generally preferred and found it more effective to scope and analyse
process problems with a view to matching these as closely as possible with standard
ERP modules with minimal tailoring.
Second, VCs also reported the use of rudimentary BPM tools to be effective as
techniques for tailoring ERPs to SME processes. Although the VCs generally lacked an
awareness of the BPM discipline, tools such as worksheets and checklists similar to
those used in BPM were commonly used. Even pencilled flow diagrams were used in
some instances, which could be considered a precursor to the use of more formal
BPMN diagrams (see section 3.4.2).
66.6.4 Theorising future opportunities for VCs developing ERP proposals for SMEs
The findings also emphasise that the combination of the BPM principles and the VRIO
framework may also help with theorising in relation to identifying future
opportunities for VCs in improving their ERP proposal development work. I examine
these opportunities arising from the BPM principles and the VRIO framework next.
152
The BPM principles offer useful concepts for explaining two main opportunities for
VCs. First, one principle that distinguishes BPM from other related management
fields is the importance of attaining a holistic understanding of enterprise-wide
strategic and non-strategic processes (see section 3.4). The results of this study
suggest the VCs experienced considerable time pressures which limited their ability
to do this (see section 5.3.1). It is therefore important, in future IS research, to
theorise and analyse VCs in terms the extent to which they apply this principle.
Second, there are opportunities for VCs to make use of formal BPM analytical tools
such as scoping diagrams, gap analyses and BPMN. IS researchers can conceptualise
these tools in broad categories such as those summarised in section 3.4.2.
The theoretical discussion in sections 6.6.1 and 6.6.2 (plus the literature review in
section 2.7) suggests that IS researchers could undertake more research which
theorises (and analyses) ERP proposal and (post-)implementation issues in terms of
VC relationships with SMEs, and not merely in terms of SME internal competencies.
Viewing proposal development through a VC/SME relationship lens contributes to
our knowledge and understanding of the complexities and nuances of this stage
because the extant literature tends to theoretically view VCs and SMEs as operating
separately and does not adequately acknowledge the intersection of their activities.
The VRIO framework summarised in table 3.1 challenges the views of IS scholars who
see SMEs as being responsible for all aspects of ERP adoption and implementation.
The findings of this study provide some support for the notion that VCs do
compensate for difficulties SMEs have with that work, if only superficially and
reluctantly, during the proposal stage, as also found by Bradshaw, Cragg and
Pulakanam (2013) in the context of accounting IS. The VC aim of securing long-term
relationships with clients suggests there is value in conceptualising VCs as internal
members of client firms due to the VCs’ endeavours to compensate for shortfalls in
client’s internal competencies. In other words, IS researchers might consider VC-SME
relationships as the unit of analysis (e.g. Carey 2008), based on the VRIO framework,
so they can explore the potential of VCs to become sources of operational value for
their SME clients.
153
There is evidence that some VCs are also of strategic value to their clients because
they aimed to elicit and understand client strategy, and to articulate in proposals how
their ERP system could be tailored to align with this. This implies there is potential to
theorise and analyse VCs, using the VRIO framework, in terms of whether and how
they engage clients in strategy discussions, as well as see their ERP system and
themselves as strategic resources (see section 6.6.1). But this research also raises
questions as to the capabilities of VCs to fulfil this role with their current business
model in which proposals are developed without charge. For example, some VCs did
not appear to understand strategy and, even if they did, their business model meant
that they did not have time to develop this understanding. The advantage of this
theoretical approach to examining VC and SME relationships during the proposal
stage is that it questions the suitability of the VCs’ business model, not just SME
internal competencies. For example, VCs could adopt the approach used by one VC
who provided an estimate without charge but billed for the full proposal (see section
5.2.2). This business model may enable VCs, for instance, to devote more time for
discussions about client strategy, reduce their sales orientation to problem solving,
educate clients about ERP systems, and ensure that the ‘valuable’ and ‘rare’ unique
processes are explored and understood during the proposal stage rather than left
until the implementation stage (see section 7.3.3 for further detail). More
importantly, it may decrease the potential risk that VCs develop proposals which do
not achieve alignment of an SME client’s strategy, processes and their ERP system in
the post-implementation stage.
66.7 Summary
In summary, this chapter discussed the experiences of VCs using various techniques
to develop proposals to tailor ERP systems for individual SME clients interpreted
using the VRIO framework and BPM principles. In the next chapter I summarise the
contributions to knowledge and practice of my research, outline the limitations of
the study, and suggest opportunities for future research arising from this work.
154
CChapter 7: Conclusion
7.1 Introduction
This research sought to understand what ERP VCs experience as the most effective
techniques for developing proposals to tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs. As ERP
vendors shift their emphasis from large businesses to the SME sector, and open new
markets for their software, SME adoption of these system continues to build
momentum. This is significant because SMEs represent a significant segment of the
Australian economy and because there have been many reports in academic and
practitioner literature about difficulties associated with successful ERP
implementation. SMEs are unlike their larger counterparts, with quite different
characteristics and heterogeneity, which means these systems inevitably require
some level of nuanced tailoring for SMEs. Implementation failure of such complex
systems could be catastrophic for SMEs which typically have limited resources to
cope with such disasters compared to larger businesses. This underscores the
importance of the planning stage of these implementations into SMEs. Planning
typically involves the development of ERP proposals by ERP VCs who are called in by
the SMEs to help them with their ERP adoption. These ERP proposals are the blue
prints for change in the way the business administers its processes to meet its
strategic goals and objectives. The research problem was that we did not know how
VCs perceived their SME clients, nor what VCs actually did to develop these proposals
during this important stage.
Focusing on the proposal stage enables us to understand what VCs do to develop
quality proposals that minimise the risk of implementation failure and help the SMEs
to solve business problems and improve their businesses. It provides an opportunity
to determine the extent to which VCs consider their clients from both business
process and strategic perspectives before the implementation of ERP systems. This
study therefore explored the ways that VCs considered their own role and the
techniques that they used within that role, so that we might gain an understanding
about their approaches to this important stage. It also considered the VC perspectives
155
of their SME clients because these would influence the ways in which they go about
their work during proposal development, ultimately impacting the quality of
proposals developed.
To try to solve the problem I posed the following research question:
What techniques do VCs experience as effective when developing proposals
that tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs and how can these be
interpreted using the VRIO framework and BPM principles?
In addressing this question, new insights into the work of the VCs at the proposal
stage emerged. Using the interpretive research approach I was able to identify
various tensions between the VCs and their SME clients, in relation to proposal
development techniques and the impact of the individual SME characteristics. These
were previously unreported in the SME ERP literature. The RBV’s VRIO framework
and BPM principles helped to conceptualise the work of the VCs, uncovering gaps in
their approaches to proposal development from both strategic and business process
perspectives. This highlighted the rationale for reporting about the VCs’ experiences,
rather than the SMEs’ experiences, at the proposal development stage. Prior research
had predominantly focused on the experiences and expectations of SMEs, and
particularly owner-operators, with regard to ERP adoptions, and this was mainly
directed at the implementation or post-implementation stages.
VC techniques constituted the role that VCs assumed during proposal development
and the approaches (tasks) they took within their role to produce proposals. Previous
research on ERPs and ICT in SMEs highlighted the important role that VCs fulfil during
ERP implementations from relationship, communications, methodological and
resourcing perspectives. Thus using these themes as a basis for my enquiry, I found
that VCs assume a complex role encompassing problem solving, time and cost
management, relationship development, education and client management, and that
a variety of techniques were administered to accomplish these role dimensions.
Techniques included, for example, electronic and face-to-face communications and
156
meetings, software demonstrations and site visits. During these activities several
tensions and constraints for VCs were revealed in relation to managing time, cost,
information elicitation and relationships. Analysing the research findings in terms of
the conceptual framework highlighted also that VCs maybe overlooking other
analytical approaches, in particular BPM, that can help them understand the
alignment between their clients’ business strategies and processes. This would result
in the production of quality proposals and improve chances for ERP implementation
success. Answering the research question highlighted several contributions to
knowledge which I present in the next section.
77.2 Contribution to knowledge
This study provides three main contributions to understanding the proposal
development process, in particular the techniques VCs use during this part of ERP
development for SME clients. The contributions include:
a more nuanced understanding about the role and approaches of VCs during
proposal development
a conceptual framework that assists researchers to conceptualise the work of
VCs
a new way for researchers and practitioners to consider the relationship
between the VCs and SMEs
I explain these in detail next.
7.2.1 The role and approaches of VCs during proposal development
The research has presented more detailed information about the role of and
techniques used by VCs. There are several examples of this new understanding.
As highlighted in section 2.6.2, most of the SME ERP and SME ICT literature reports
on VC activity at the implementation and post-implementation stages of ERP or ICT
adoption. Little was known about the work that VCs do at the proposal development
stage of ERP adoption by SMEs. This thesis highlighted that whilst SMEs rely on VCs
to help them solve their business problems, and VCs actually see this as their key role,
157
VCs are heavily influenced by their need to make a sale and the temptation to fit the
business to the software rather than vice versa. This has several ramifications
including:
the choice of techniques used by VCs to develop proposals
the perception of SMEs of the role of the VCs and the SMEs’ own role during
the proposal development process
a heightened potential for incomplete proposals upon their submission to
clients because of overlooked client strategies and BPM approaches
The thesis has reported details of the techniques and approaches applied by VCs
during proposal development. These have not been previously reported and
contribute to the knowledge of VC proposal development. I identified eight steps
commonly used by the VCs even though none were following an explicit methodology
(see Appendix 2). Several of the techniques applied during these steps, whilst
considered by the VCs to be effective, actually constrain or cause tension for VCs. The
use of ERP software demonstrations early in the proposal development stage was an
example of this. On the one hand VCs saw this as a technique to not only show their
clients what the system does, but also to quickly elicit information from their clients
about their business processes. The constrained time frames whilst doing this forced
a product sales/business-fit-to-software emphasis which runs the risk that clients
would see the ERP adoption exercise as simply a short term product purchase and
not a long term proposition for change. However, this conflicts with the VCs’ desires
to develop long term relationships with their clients as a technique to sustain
contracts for jobs such as ongoing maintenance of the ERP system, upgrades to the
system and training of SME clients’ staff for system use. This is an important
contribution to knowledge because the VCs do not see such adverse consequences
in their proposal development techniques and such nuances have not previously
been reported.
The VCs’ accounts of their experience demonstrated that they and their clients often
found themselves at odds in their expectations of each other. The reasons for this
158
were that the VCs’ techniques drove the proposal development process and
influenced the way SMEs perceived the relationship. This finding implies that this
technique may be why VCs found that clients expect the VCs to take command of the
proposal stage rather than being actively involved. This gave rise to problems in
managing the relationship with the client which have not been previously reported.
VCs experienced problems in managing regular communications and schedules with
clients who characteristically find it difficult to commit time and resources to the
proposal development process. For example, the VCs reported a tension, as I present
in section 5.2.4, where VCs and SMEs found themselves in diametrically opposite
positions of where they wanted each to be. That is, VCs wanted clients to be better
educated about ERPs before proposal development, and SMEs wanted VCs to drive
the whole process and educate them at the same time. Such perceptions adversely
impacted other aspects of the VCs’ role, such as time and cost management and
problem solving as I report in chapter 5. The importance of VC and SME perceptions
during the ERP proposal stage have not been previously researched.
In section 2.4 I highlighted that it is important that the SME clients’ business
strategies are articulated to facilitate effective ERP implementations which ensure
alignment of strategy with business processes. However, the majority of the VCs did
not identify client strategies and some in fact mistook business processes for
strategy. Without a clearly identified strategy driving process change via an ERP
system, a business runs the risk of implementing a system that streamlines the wrong
processes, accelerating potential disaster. This is an important contribution to
knowledge because without an understanding of their clients’ strategies, VCs are not
able to deliver complete ERP proposals. I include some recommendations for
practitioners to address this, in section 7.3.2.
The research documented how VCs have developed individual methodologies that
broadly align with BPM principles. For example, they use approaches consistent with
BPM’s first three general phases, scoping, analysis and redesign. But given that ERP
systems administer business processes, I expected that they would have a deeper
159
understanding of BPM principles. This was not the case. VCs reported that they used
only rudimentary tools to scope, analyse and redesign client processes in developing
the proposal. This finding extends our knowledge of proposal development and calls
into question the ability of the VCs to deliver quality proposals that fully address client
business process problems. From the practitioner perspective I include some
recommendations to address this in section 7.3.3.
77.2.2 The conceptual framework
The research question sought to determine the techniques that VCs experienced as
effective when developing proposals that tailor ERP systems for individual SMEs. To
do this, this thesis linked the RBV, the VRIO framework and BPM, leading to a
framework offering concepts for explaining and understanding the techniques VCs
used, as well as those they did not use and probably should, when developing
proposals to tailor ERP systems for SMEs. As I stated in chapters 3 and 6, prior studies
have not combined the VRIO framework and BPM, so it was unclear how this
combination could be used to conceptualise the work that VCs do during proposal
development. This study concludes that both the VRIO framework and BPM,
together, are appropriate for conceptualising VC proposal development work. The
framework synthesises theories of strategy and business processes, emphasising the
alignment of these and the importance of this for ERP implementation proposals and
effectiveness. It facilitates productive relationships with SME owner-operators and
managers who are less likely to possess the background and understanding that their
counterparts in larger organisations have. It conceptualises the SME resources, the
VC-SME relational resources, the importance of these resources at different stages
as explained using BPM principles, and the BPM-related techniques VCs perceived as
effective for managing/considering these resources during proposal development.
The ‘Organisation’ component of the VRIO framework was used to conceptualise the
techniques that VCs use to identify client process problems, typically of a non-
strategic kind, during proposal development. It also helped to explain that VCs are
missing some opportunities to enhance their proposals. This was evident because the
160
‘O’ component links to strategies (see section 6.6.2) and the VCs’ techniques did not
address processes to this extent. This highlights the value of the ‘O’ component in
conceptualising the VC techniques and its alignment with BPM principles. The ‘O’
component did help to explain the VCs use of BPM principles but highlighted a
shortfall here too. The principles (and associated tools) applied were only done so at
a rudimentary level (i.e. a broad adoption of the first general phases of BPM and the
use of some fundamental BPM tools only).
The other, more strategic elements of the VRIO, i.e. Value, Rarity and Inimitability
helped to explain techniques that VCs are not using, but probably should be, to
achieve the alignment needed to produce quality ERP proposals that deliver their
clients competitive advantages. This thesis found that most VCs’ techniques do not
evaluate their clients’ resources in terms of value, rarity and inimitability, highlighting
a significant contribution to knowledge in that VC proposals are not likely to be
strategically aligned or offer a strategic value proposition, and if they ultimately do,
it is probably only by chance. The VRIO suggests that VCs should evaluate their clients’
resources using techniques that take each element into account. BPM principles and
tools can assist VCs to do this at the operational level. Some recommendations for
this appear in 7.3.2.
77.2.3 The relationship between VCs and SMEs
As I highlighted in chapters 2 and 6, IS researchers tend to theorise VCs and SMEs
separately in studies pertaining to ERP implementations, and particularly during the
proposal development stage. The relationship between VCs and SMEs during
proposal development represented a gap in the literature. In this study I have argued
that the approach used by researchers to address the problems of the VCs should be
to focus on the VC-SME relationship as one where VCs compensate for the SMEs’
shortfall of resources and capabilities. In this sense researchers should theorise VCs
in terms of their potential as strategic resources of the SMEs. The relationship from
the SME perspective would be conceptualised as the SMEs harnessing of a strategic
161
resource that compensates for their resource and capabilities gaps pertaining to
strategy and process alignment, and ERPs.
This approach represents a contribution to knowledge because the VC-SME
relationship, conceptualised in this way rather than theorising VC techniques
separately from SMEs, would help researchers to contribute new knowledge about
ways VCs can develop higher quality ERP proposals that have a greater chance of
effectiveness at implementation. This is because the alignment of client strategy and
processes will have been considered before the actual implementation stage, and not
just the alignment of processes with ERPs, as is characteristic of the current
relationship. This new VC value proposition would also enable the VCs to justify a
change in their business model as described in section 6.6.4.
77.3 Recommendations for VC practice
There are several recommendations for VC practice emanating from this research.
This section presents recommendations for improving the development of SME ERP
proposals so that they take into account the alignment of SME strategies with
business processes. It also provides recommendations for an alternative VC business
model that offers a way for VCs to reduce the tensions and constraints reported in
Chapter 5.
7.3.1 Recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to SME strategies
Some recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to SME strategies
include:
As I highlighted in section 3.3.5 a simple but effect tool VCs could use to gain
a quick, high-level understanding of their SME client’s strategic intentions is
to develop a set of well-crafted questions to perform a SWOT (Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis. This technique could
enable VCs to identify business functions or functional areas that require
strengthening. This would equip VCs with a more informed focus, than they
presently attain, for more detailed tailoring of proposed ERP systems,
162
involving detailed module selection and configuration recommendations that
address identified weaknesses in the business and which the client has helped
the VC to detect through the SWOT technique.
Another technique also highlighted in section 3.3.5 is the ‘value chain
framework’ which would help VCs to gain a high level understanding of the
SME clients’ primary and secondary business functions. The primary functions
identified can then become the focus for the proposal because it is within
these functions that the value adding, income generating, processes of the
firm reside. A carefully crafted set of questions could quickly establish this
fundamental strategic information at a first meeting with the client. This tool
alone, however, only provides a snapshot of the functions of a VC client’s
business, and the implication here is that a deeper level of strategic analysis
by VCs is needed to understand their clients’ strategic positions.
If the VCs took issues of rarity into account, they would be able to articulate
strategic competitive advantages and could present a more persuasive
proposal that the client would be more likely to accept. This would address
the VCs’ need to make the sale and direct them to a greater problem solving
emphasis with improved chances for implementation success (see section
5.4.3). As I described in section 5.4.3, rather than developing a value
proposition via recommendations for the customisation of the ERP system to
their client’s unique processes, VCs, with insights drawn from their SWOT
analysis or Value component of VRIO, could consider the potential for
‘bundles’ of resources to develop value propositions. This could be done, for
example, if VCs identified particular, standard modules of the ERP backed by
capabilities/skills enhancement of the client’s staff through ERP training,
together delivering a unique value proposition to address identified
problems. In this sense, VCs would need to extend themselves beyond
process analysis for ERP implementations, to strategy and process analysis for
163
their clients’ firms, looking beyond simply ERP solutions, to more holistic firm
changes outside the scope of the ERP system. This would require them to take
into account strategies, people (capabilities) and other resources, in addition
to technology (ERPs) and business processes.
VCs might have a better chance of recommending an ERP system that is
aligned to the strategies, or strategic intentions, of the client firm if they
consciously consider:
the unique historical conditions of their SME clients, such as long term
customers who have grown to expect processes to be conducted in a
particular way, and the impacts that an ERP system might have on
them;
causal ambiguity, such as imperfectly understood processes spanning
many locations and people and the identification and integration of
these, for the proposed ERP system, for example, recommendations
for the installation of a customer relationship management (CRM)
module to retain detailed understanding of each of the firm’s
customers, enabling tailoring and thus lock in; and
social complexity, such as management’s internal interactions and the
client’s cultural implications that might impinge on ERP
implementations.
BPM borrows from the strategic management discipline to help determine
overarching strategic positions. For example, Porter’s (1990) generic
strategies can be applied as a tool to determine a VC client’s overall strategic
position, such as cost leader or differentiator. From this the VC could begin to
formulate a view of the types of system requirements that might be needed,
164
such as expense management (efficiency) modules (to support cost
leadership strategies), or innovation, quality and customer relationship based
modules (to support differentiation strategies) (see section 3.2.1). The generic
strategies framework described is one tool set that, with a few well-crafted
questions, could provide the VCs with valuable, preliminary strategic insights
before moving onto the scoping and analysis of client processes.
77.3.2 Recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to SME processes
Applying some of the tools and insights from the BPM discipline can add value to the
way VCs elicit information about their clients’ business processes during proposal
development. Some recommendations for developing proposals tailoring ERPs to
SME business processes include:
Problems pertaining to accessing the right information such as limited SME
knowledge and the SMEs’ business perspectives might be alleviated
somewhat by applying a ‘Process Scoping Diagram’ as mentioned in section
3.4.2. This tool would provide the VCs with an easy to understand, visual
framework to guide rapid information elicitation whilst working with SME
clients, across key process problem areas in relation to inputs, outputs,
controls, enablers and process flows. My findings show that VCs do not
presently analyse processes in this way. Rather, they tend to draft processes
in simple written notes and, sometimes, pencil and paper flow diagrams that,
at least, miss the control and enabler elements.
A BPM scoping model called the ‘Gap Model’ could also provide VC
information elicitation guidance in a similar way but focusing on the current
and desired measures of performance of processes (such as how many
transactions are/need to be processed in a day) and levels of capability to
manage processes (how things are processed presently and how things are
proposed to be done to improve current methods). The gap model technique
can, for example, help to detect gaps that might be addressed as ‘bundled’
165
resource value propositions, such as an ERP coupled with a staff training
program. Using this type of model formalises the VCs’ technique for eliciting
such information which presently amounts to client discussions about process
measures and little about capabilities (particularly resource capabilities).
Process scoping diagrams and gap models would draw from the SME clients
the right type of information about the process problem areas in the firm, and
they would also help the VCs to formulate quickly, views about suitably
aligned ERP solutions.
In section 3.4.2 I described BPMN modeling, which is a technique of BPM to
graphically depict key organisational processes at a basic level. BPMN
modeling is not a technique currently performed by VCs who, rather, opt for
basic pencilled flow diagrams at best. BPMN can be quickly learned by VCs
who would need to acquire some basic training in BPM, including process
modeling. Models developed in BPMN software can show processes in any
level of detail. These can include details such as costs and timeframes for each
stage of a process and, depending on the BPMN software tool used,
simulations of throughput can be performed, for example, the number of
invoices that can be processed in a one hour time frame and the associated
costs and other process impacts of this. Developing rich process detail
(typically occurring in the preparation of diagrams at Levels 2 to 7), would
probably impinge the time/cost management role of the VCs during proposal
development and would probably not be feasible under the VCs current
methodological model (see Appendix 2). However, the preparation of Levels
0 and 1 diagrams could be accomplished, on a lap top computer or tablet,
literally whilst discussing the primary functions of the business with a client
and these would help to elicit information and articulate unseen problems
such as ‘bottle necks’ (queuing of processes) or waste.
166
The gap model and BPMN diagrams can be applied by VCs to operationalise
the ‘O’ component of the VRIO framework because these tools enable the
elicitation of information about VCs’ client’s organisational capabilities and
process integration, in a structured way. This would equip SMEs with a more
detailed understanding (than the VC’s current methods enable, see Appendix
2) of the processes of their businesses and their influence on their abilities to
exploit resources efficiently and effectively to achieve competitive
advantages. Such information is vital for the tailoring of management control
systems such as ERPs. These techniques would provide VCs with greater
overall business process information accuracy during proposal development
and thus an ability to deliver higher quality proposals. It would also provide a
base upon which to develop a business process architecture for the client
firm, enhancing the VCs’ value propositions.
BPM diagrams form the basis of an organisation’s ‘business process
architecture’ (BPA). The BPA is a body of knowledge about a firm’s processes
comprising its value chains. This is important because it directly links
processes to a firm’s strategies or strategic intentions which VCs do not do.
Using BPA as a technique for eliciting information for tailoring ERPs, VCs can
methodically gather strategically pertinent process information including
process costs, time frames, ownership (governance), risks and compliance
(e.g. processes impacting legislative requirements such as tax obligations).
BPA would also provide some relief to problems of group think within SME
firms, because it would shift the inherent political focus of SME staff, false
impressions of staff, and conflicts of interest among staff, explicitly to a
problem focus. This is because the BPA approach is robust when compared to
problematic elicitation by software demonstrations and reference site visits.
These additions to VC proposal development techniques, if implemented, could
require more time initially. Nonetheless, the trade-off for VCs would include a
167
strengthened problem solving role over ERP sales/business fit to software emphasis
because of:
the new focus on strategically connected processes over ERP system
connected processes;
a strengthened relationship development role because the tools force
discussion with clients about their views of the future of the business and not
just about problems to be fixed;
a strengthened competitive role because of a more holistic problem solving
approach that is not typical of the VC’s methodological framework (see
Appendix 2); and
an improved position to perform a richer SME client educational role because
the VCs, following some training in strategy and BPM, will be better informed.
To address negative impacts on the VCs’ time and cost management role, one
alternative for VCs to consider is a change in their role by shifting the emphasis in the
trinity of constraints from time and cost to quality, and then to offer their clients a
higher quality proposal but charge fees for doing this. This would lessen the effect of
the trade-off described above. I provide recommendations to address this in the next
section.
77.3.3 Recommendations for the VCs own business model
In section 6.6.4 I suggested that it might be the VC’s business model that requires
change because of the additional pressures associated with eliciting information
about their client’s strategies. Research conducted by Bradshaw, Cragg and
Pulakanam (2013) focused on accounting IS consultants, some from accounting firms,
who were aligned with various accounting software packages, not unlike VCs are with
ERP systems. The accountants/consultants in this instance develop relationships with
their SME clients that extend beyond implementing accounting software packages
because they are accountants foremost and ‘can improve the business development
168
of an SME’ (Bradshaw, Cragg & Pulakanam 2013). ERP VCs may be able to adopt a
similar model, for example, offering a strategy/process consulting service to detect,
analyse and solve strategy and process problems and invoice for this. They could then
include, as part of their problem solving framework, proposals for ERP
implementation in cases where this would be relevant. This approach also recognises
that not all business problems can be solved by an ERP system, and sometimes
require other methods of information communication or policy measures (Christofi
et al. 2013).
In this proposed VC business model, the constraints pertaining to their roles would
reduce as the ERP sales/business-fit-to-software vs. problem solving tensions would
likely become less relevant; time spent would be charged for, reducing the impacts
of the costs of proposal development on the VCs; and this would certainly enhance
VC understanding about their clients’ business processes before ERP implementation.
Issues of client strategy being ignored in the current model would be addressed,
ultimately resulting in strategically aligned outcomes; that is, business processes and
ERP modules working in unison with strategic intentions. But the VCs’ capabilities to
shift from ERP consultant to strategy/process consultant might require some
measure of training and development in strategic management and BPM to enhance
their information elicitation methodologies. Client expectations would also need to
be addressed, as this transition in practice means that SMEs would be paying for
business and systems advice up front. The value, however, for the client would be in
paying for a business problem solution that includes recommendations for an ERP
system, but then they would also have the option of either proceeding with that VC
or not proceeding at all; using the proposed solution for an alternative
implementation with another VC; or they could choose to implement the proposed
recommendations on their own if they possess the requisite capabilities to do this.
Overall, the chances for better quality and more successful ERP implementation
outcomes under this model would compensate for the additional client expense at
169
the outset and would help to engender the longer term relationships sought and
valued by both VCs and SMEs.
77.4 Limitations of the research project
My research findings should be considered in light of my research approach (see
Chapter 4) and the limitations that are inherent to this (see section 4.8). The research
was limited to a small sample of VCs in Victoria, but it is likely that the findings will
have broader relevance at least in the Australian context. It can be noted however
that many of the VCs have SME clients interstate or overseas and thus the relevance
may extend further.
The research findings are also limited in that:
I did not interview VCs from firms not holding an office in Victoria, Australia.
This could impact generalisations to some extent, for example, foreign VC
firms, located overseas and serving the SME sector abroad, indeed may
possess cultural idiosyncrasies and methodological nuances that do not
reflect those of Australian VC firms.
it captured information only from VCs and not their SME clients. The VCs’
claims of the effectiveness of various techniques of proposal development,
could not be compared with SMEs views or the implementation outcomes.
in only two out of a total of twenty one VCs firms agreeing to participate,
was I able to interview more than one VC (I interviewed two VCs each from
two firms). Whilst these VCs, in their respective companies, held similar
views about their SME clients, it cannot be assumed that other VCs across
the remaining nineteen firms held similar views to their peers.
Whilst acknowledging these limitations, I believe my research does provide new
insights into an area of ERP research that has been largely unexplored. I hope that it
will be of value to both researchers and practitioners and will provide a foundation
170
for further research where the issues can be more precisely scoped and
comprehensively explored.
77.5 Further Research Directions
This research established an understanding of the roles of VCs as they traverse the
scarcely reported ERP proposal development stage of SME client engagement. It
showed that VCs fall short of applying several strategic and process oriented
techniques that could enhance the value propositions that they present their SME
clients. Several future research opportunities emerge from this study:
It would be useful to investigate the VCs’ reactions to the various
recommendations in section 7.3 pertaining to strategic and process
information elicitation issues and the potential for a change to their business
model.
There would be value in extending the investigation of VC perspectives but
as case studies into one or two VCs’ firms to assess the perspectives of VCs
working with the same sets of SME clients and using identical proposal
development methodologies.
A study that included SMEs’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the
techniques that VCs use to develop ERP proposals would provide a more
complete view of the process.
It would be useful to conduct a similar study with VCs working with the SME
sector who explicitly work with BPM principles and tools. This could then be
assessed against the findings in this study for similarities and possibly future
synergies between the two types of VCs.
The conceptual framework used in this research (a synthesis of RBV, VRIO and BPM)
enhances our understanding of the ERP proposal development work of VCs and how
important this can be to the successful implementation of ERP systems for their SME
171
clients. VCs developing ERP systems for this sector, and possibly VCs of other
enterprise systems for the same sector, who adopt the recommendations discussed
in section 7.3, will be better prepared to develop proposals that align their SME
clients’ strategies with their business processes and offer those clients greater
chances of achieving sustainable competitive advantages upon the implementation
of those systems.
172
AAppendices
Appendix 1 – Interview Schedule
Appendix 2 – Eight Step Methodological Framework
Appendix 3 – Example NVivo Data Coding
173
AAppendix 1 – Interview Schedule
Introduction
Research aims described
Consent form administration conducted (signing, acknowledgement, hand
over)
We are interested in hearing about your experiences with SME clients particularly
as you develop proposals for them for the implementation of tailored ERP systems.
Overview - Introduction
I’d like to commence with some questions that will provide me with a basic profile
of you and the kinds of SME clients that you work with.
1. Can you please tell me your title and describe your current position?
2. What is your role in developing ERP proposals for SME clients?
3. Can you tell me about your SME clients in terms of things like their size,
industry, IT capability and prior experience with ERP?
Methodology
I’m interested to know about what you do when you develop proposals for the ERP
systems for your SME clients.
4. How do you usually start when you undertake a project with an SME client?
5. Can you walk me through how you engaged with a client on a recent project?
6. In developing ERP proposals what kinds of information do you need to elicit?
Probes: if necessary
Do you obtain information about the business needs of the client?
174
Do you obtain information about the way the client currently operates?
7. What is the most important information that you need?
Probes: Is this information usually easy to obtain?
8. In your experience, what are the most important skills and knowledge needed
by clients for proposal development to work effectively?
9. What skills and knowledge do your SME clients have [Can you tell me more
about the skills and knowledge your SME clients have]?
10. How do you adjust your methods to suit your client’s levels of skills and
knowledge?
Probes: Types of skills/knowledge in particular
Analytical skills (strategy/process)
ERP/enterprise systems knowledge and skills [including
customisation]
Proposal/business case development skills
11. Do you ask your clients to conduct any analysis for the proposal? Why do you
do this?
Probes: Analysis of their own firm, markets, cost, feasibility, needs etc.?
How does this analysis feed into the proposal?
12. Do you adjust your proposal development methods to suit your client’s
budgets?
13. To what extent do you adjust the proposal itself to suit your client’s budget?
Probes: e.g. If their budgets are restricted do you reduce the level of
customisation
175
Relationship Development
The next few questions are about the interactions that you have with your SME
clients during the proposal development process.
14. How involved do you get your clients in the proposal development process?
15. What level of involvement do the clients want to have in developing
proposals? How often do they want to take the initiative and how often do
they want to leave it to you?
16. Is there any kind of information that you find difficult to obtain from clients?
17. How frank do you think your clients are with you when providing information
about their business?
Communication/Clarity
Now I’d like to talk specifically about the actual types of communication that you
have with your clients during the proposal development process.
18. What mix of communication do you have with your clients in terms of
meetings, presentations, formal written documents, etc.?
a. Does any particular type of communication stand out as more
effective than the others?
Probes: for example, to engender clarity pertaining to:
proposal processes
perceptions about technological needs (ERP
customisation etc.).
definitions about what constitutes success
19. Do you provide any training to your client during the proposal development
process?
176
Resourcing
Now I’d like to discuss the way that you resource the proposal development project.
20. How much time does it usually take to develop a proposal?
a. Do you break the proposal development process into stages?
b. What resources do you use at each stage?
21. What resources do the SME clients make available to you during the proposal
process?
Probes: for example SME client resources (people, equipment, facilities etc.)
22. Do other people contribute to the final proposal?
Probes: consultants, contractors etc.
Extent of contributions
Effectiveness of contributions
Conclusion
I’d like to conclude the interview with some general questions about the ERP
proposal development process.
23. What degree of customisation of the final ERP solution do you generally find
is necessary as a result of the proposal?
24. What do you find most rewarding and challenging about working with SME
businesses?
25. What do you consider to be the three most significant things that you need to
get the job done well?
26. How much time do you devote to understanding your client’s strategic goals
during proposal development?
27. How much time do you devote to understanding your client’s unique business
processes during proposal development?
177
Wrap Up
There might be a need for me to clarify some of our discussions at a future date. We
might also conduct future research such as this for longitudinal studies.
28. Are you willing to participate in future discussions about this research
project?
29. Would you be willing to be contacted for future longitudinal studies?
178
AAppendix 2 – Eight Step Methodological Framework
1. Need Identified By SME Client - The prospective SME client believes that there is
a need to change the current business system (e.g. business growth requires
more system support, more system functionality is needed to remain
competitive, etc.) or the owner/operator might have been advised about or
discussed this with an external party (e.g. accountant, consultant, industry peers
(referral), professional associations, internal staffs, etc.). The VCs explained that
the owner/operators typically:
1.1. Finds the VC on the web (e.g. a Google search) or is referred by an external
party, and then
1.2. Telephones the VC, sends an email or completes a web form which
establishes the initial communication. The majority of VCs stated that even
at this point SMEs have determined that they are seeking a software product,
not a business solution.
2. VC Pre-Qualification - Vendor consultant (might be more than one individual or
different individuals at each activity) conducts initial (pre) qualification to assess
suitability of ERP for client’s business (functionality fit, alignment) and potential
for client to afford system (price). (Note here the product sales centricity and that
the assessment does not focus upon the VC’s capability to offer a holistic
solution).
2.1. If the SME qualifies then the VC attempts to organise an initial meeting; the
VC tries to establish who at the SME will be involved in the decision to
proceed, what the budget for the system is and what time frames are
expected for implementation; the VC also considers whether client is in an
industry space that is conducive to VC, for example, whether the VC has had
179
implementation experience in a particular industry; the VC also considers a
‘pipeline’ review (again, product sales centricity) to determine if the
opportunity can be won and the time frames associated with this.
3. First Meeting - An official initial meeting is conducted.
3.1. Common interest is explored.
3.1.1. Brochures and other material provided to client;
3.1.2. A basic understanding of the client’s business is attained;
3.1.3. Checklists are commonly used to navigate discussions;
3.1.4. Main process pain points (also known as selling points) are discussed
(preliminary scoping);
3.1.5. Unique business processes identified where possible (this is preferable
at the very early stages of the proposal development process because
these add lots of time and complexity to all phases of the ERP transition
– including proposal development);
3.1.6. VC’s capabilities and capacities to do the work are considered by the
VC;
3.1.7. Clients’ technical capabilities assessed including hardware
installations (workstations etc.), network infrastructure and data
migration potential (from legacy systems, spread sheets etc.);
3.1.8. Relationships are developed.
One interviewee suggested that whilst the industry seems to commonly
produce demonstrations at this point, they are not recommended
because problem definitions are still being developed and by showing a
demonstration at this point the exercise becomes more of a product sale
than a part of a solution to the business problem; thus demonstrations
might serve to confuse prospects more than assist their understanding.
Another stated that showing a demonstration at this point is, “more
inclined to turn people off because they’ll notice the things that it
180
doesn’t do that they’d want it to do.” It is at this step that product sales
and solution provision combine and particularly invoke tensions
pertaining to VC roles as identified in the previous section.
3.2. VC consolidates understanding attained at initial meeting;
3.2.1. VC prepares suitable slide presentation and software demonstration
based on client context (ERP knowledge and skills set, experience,
budget, time frames etc.);
3.2.2. VC develops suitable facilitated workshop plan for a second meeting;
3.2.3. VC also tries to attain an understanding about the backgrounds and
roles of those people who will be attending the next meeting for
presentations and demonstrations in order to be able to answer their
questions in context, for example, in relation to their functional
responsibilities.
4. Second Meeting - A second meeting is conducted and this typically includes a
workshop style approach;
4.1. Slide presentations (about consultant’s purpose, ERP system functionality,
proposal process);
4.2. Rudimentary software demonstrations (such as screen shots or actual ERP
software demonstration);
4.3. Main business processes and needs identified through discussion with key
stakeholders covering various business functions (which might be
administered at separate time slots during the meeting or all at one time and
which includes, wherever possible, the people who actually do the work);
4.4. High level conceptual design (‘blueprinting’ and scoping) drafted;
4.5. Unique business processes noted in detail (including business rules);
181
4.6. VC escorts clients to reference site/s if possible so that clients can “see the
picture that you’re trying to paint”;
4.7. Depending upon the ERP experiences of the client, VCs consider establishing
a ‘test’ system for clients to experiment with before the third meeting and
from which further issues can be identified and resolved in the proposal, via
software tailoring or process adjustment to fit software.
5. Analysis - Vendor consultant develops analytical work;
5.1. VC identifies best practice process templates and potential for use of
standards (such as SCOR – Supply Chain Operations Reference) and ERP
modules for proposed system;
5.2. VC considers previous engagement in similar or same industry to draw
learning and short cuts;
5.3. VC determines whether it is necessary to customise modules to
accommodate unique business processes or whether configuration of
software will cater for unique processes;
5.4. VC develops prototype system for demonstration (perhaps using just one or
two modules of proposed system) and includes some client data if possible
or necessary;
5.5. Demonstration typically set up on a VPN (virtual private network) server for
vendor convenience and then later accessed via the Internet at the
prospect’s workplace for the actual presentation. This step might be
completed on site and/or at consultant’s office and includes all types of
communication to and from the client.
In one case, an interviewee stated that the VC firm will invoice for
specifications/scoping work pertaining to the proposed ERP system and one
likened this to the work done by architects but other interviewees clearly
stated that all work during proposal development was not invoiced. The
182
vendor consultant who did invoice for scoping work at this point indicated
that it helped to secure the client’s ‘buy in’ and commitment to the change
project and that this almost always resulted in final sign off unless
unforeseen extraordinary circumstances occurred such as a business buy out
or merger.
6. Third Meeting - A third meeting is conducted by the VC
6.1. The VC presents the software using identified business processes and the
client’s business data for context where feasible;
6.2. The VC conducts a design confirmation via a cross check with stakeholders
for process inconsistencies or errors (e.g. does use of a proposed standard
(or part thereof), such as the SCOR model, contradict unique business
processes), potential bottlenecks, user interface issues etc.
At this meeting or later at the proposal walkthrough, the VC’s credentials and
client’s confidence can be enhanced by inviting clients to the VC’s offices
where they will see “bricks and mortar and other resources.”
7. Proposal Completed - The VC refines proposal document from feedback attained
at third meeting and ensures that a strong value proposition exists.
7.1. A telephone call from the VC CEO to the SME owner operator to reassure
interest in the proposal from the VC side can also be beneficial at this point
particularly in cases where other VCs are competing for the same
opportunity.
8. Proposal Submitted - The VC delivers the proposal document and conducts
‘walkthrough’
183
8.1. The delivery and ‘walkthrough’ might occur at the same meeting or the VC
might deliberately leave time (24 hours is typical) between delivery and
walkthrough to enable the client to reflect on the document first.
8.2. ‘Client’ signs off (accepts) the proposal document (this might include a letter
of engagement and or a contract for sign off) and the process proceeds to
the implementation stage, or client rejects the proposal and institutes a
further meeting with vendor consultant for continued negotiations or vendor
consultant qualifies out of the opportunity.
184
AAppendix 3 – Example NVivo Data Coding
The following is an example of the NVivo data coding of a ‘sub-sub node’ called
‘Importance’ and it sits beneath a node titled ‘Pre-implementation stage’, which sits
beneath its top node called ‘Methodology’. This ‘Importance’ node contained partial
verbatim quotes from any interviews pertaining to the views held by VCs about the
importance of the pre-implementation (or proposal development) stage in
discussions where this issue specifically arose.
The NVivo output for this sub-sub node is presented in the following table.
Interviewee Partial transcripts coded to ‘Importance’ sub-sub node#1 Respondent: So we had a case where a client had spent about
$50,000 on an implementation for two companies.
Well they probably should have spent $200,000 on
each company – no wonder it didn’t work. And we’ve
subsequently gone in and had a re-implementation for
one of those companies. They’re over the moon,
suddenly they’ve got a system that works, produces
results. And in fact as a by-product one of our
consultants found they were losing money in some
area which had already cost them $200,000. So the
implementation sort of spotted that and saved that as
an ongoing haemorrhaging.
Interviewer: So you’d say these types of examples exemplify the
importance of the pre-implementation proposal
development stage?
185
Respondent: [nods Yes], and also I think the process of talking about
the business and the people in it and getting to know
them gets them involved earlier.
#2 Interviewer: The demo section of your proposal where they're
looking at the possibilities of the system with their data
in it is crucial?
Respondent: It's crucial to our process, yes. They can see it with
their data and as opposed to them actually being
confused it gets them excited. That's the difference
between… I've done demonstrations where you go out
to a company for the first meeting and they're like "Oh,
let's have a look at the product" you’re like "Well, it's
the wrong approach. Let's stop right here because
you're not buying a product, you're buying a solution
to your business problem. If you look at the product
now you're just looking at what it looks like and how it
feels. OK, it's going to work for you, there are six
products here that could work for you."
We always focus on the fact that we don't want, we'll
never do a demonstration on the first meeting. If they
say "Let's see it" you go "No, that's not how we do it,
this is how we do it." If they're not prepared to work
with this then sometimes it's "Well, maybe you're not
for us because we'll give you something that will work
and you won't be happy and we won't be happy." Yeah,
the demonstration [during the proposal] phase is
absolutely crucial.
186
#5 Interviewer: Do you find that their interpretations of success of the
project vary from customer to customer?
Respondent: Yeah I mean I suppose typically your smaller site are
very focused on their own business, they see ERP as
just another piece of software; they're not really
focused around change or business improvement, they
just want another piece of software. You need to
engender that recognition that it will bring change and
how can we add the value therefore.
Medium to larger sized business, they tend to have
already recognised that their current solution is not
meeting their needs because... and they’ll have a
number of reasons why because... So from a project
point of view, you’ve really got to put a different hat
on with one size you can approach things through a... I
guess a more academic project management
perspective...because they’re au fait with those
processes and understand how to run a project.
Whereas the smaller sites are very informal and tend
to, as I say, just be focused on what they need to get
their job done. It’s a different approach. So they don’t
want to put the time or... into our consultants coming
into work with them on a process... They just want the
quickest possible results, “I don’t care what the
outcome is really as long as I get my software”. Their
focus is different.
187
#8 Interviewer: What’s your role in developing ERP proposals for SME
clients?
Respondent: My role is that of an ongoing development, the
proposals I guess incredibly important to
communicating our vision. So as we develop proposals
both for SME and for other enterprises we share that
knowledge around the organisation.
My own team. In terms of the customer relationship
how we engage I guess while we’d all love to do more
remotely I still think that selling ERP is a face to face
business. Customers are about to embark on an
investment that will tie up resources and potentially
disrupt their businesses for three to four months, six
maybe twelve months by the time it’s settled. So it’s a
very important period for the customer to get to know
who they are going to deal with, to trust and believe
that they can actually do the project themselves. Half
of it is them believing they can do it. So taking them
through and coaching them and helping them get to
where they need to be is an important part of the
process.
I think strategically you are trying to avoid levels of
detail so you keep your customer at a level where they
see the value in actually getting you engaged and
paying for your services. But it is fair to say I think in
this day and age we’ve got discerning buyers, so the
pre-sales investment in documentation is a big issue,
188
and for some sometimes it’s quite an inverse
relationship. It’s customers who want it done for the
best price sometimes are very demanding prior to go
live, prior to the signing of the contract. And then you’ll
get other customers who aren’t quite so demanding on
documentation and they’re looking to build a value
relationship. So is there a mid-point there? Yeah I guess
possibly. I think I find that the best sales people and
best pre-sales people are those that can keep their
documentation relevant to the customer. Have it
address the needs, don’t go into detail but it’s
something they can each be held accountable for
throughout the process.
So I guess we all try where possible is to avoid massive
RFP responses. I guess the problem with them is, is
invariably the large RFP is often just a test of energy,
and it’s not necessarily a test of what the solution is
going to look like at the end of the process. We would
prefer to win business where the customer has been
commercial, pragmatic, looking for business outcomes
and we can demonstrate those throughout the pre-
sales process.
#11 Interviewer: So it would be fair to say that it’s a particularly
important [proposal development] issue too, that the
vendors and consultants of ERP systems are there for
the long term?
189
Respondent: Oh yeah, they are. They’re expensive and they should
have a ten to 15 year, maybe longer, window of
usefulness.
#14 Interviewer: How do you usually start when you undertake a project
with an SME client?
Respondent: So the starting point is really to say to the business
“Look tell us about what your problems are” and then
understand it properly and then go from there to solve
the problem. Rather than ticking a bunch of boxes
saying “Here’s an answer to your questions” because
you’re not really going to...
Interviewer: Yeah, so it really quite literally means that if they call
you, you have a discussion with them and then set up
perhaps a meeting time, so you do a face to face?
Respondent: Yeah absolutely. We do, we want to do face to face.
And talk to them and then after that, once we’ve got a
feeling that we think it’s... that we’ve got a fit. Because
that’s really important to us to make sure that our
solution is going to be a fit, otherwise it’s not worth
spending the time. If we believe we’ve got a solution
for them and they’re a good fit for our customers and
our consultants and our skills and we can service them
well, then we’ll sit down with them and we actually put
together a scope. Typically, this is mostly what we do,
we’ll sit down with the business and scope a solution
out.
190
#17 Interviewer: Do you find yourself sometimes, when you’re having
those meetings, that you might be talking to two or
three people and there might be a bit of
misunderstanding between them about a particular
process?
Respondent: Absolutely.
Interviewer: And then send them away and say look you sort that
out and come back to us? Does that happen?
Respondent: All the time.
Respondent: Oh I thought you did this; no, no, no, no, no.
Respondent: Yeah, and again that’s the sort of conflicts that we get
blamed for.
Respondent: That we’ve changed, we’ve interfered, we’ve stuffed
up the whole process when all we’ve really done is
point out where you’re doing something differently to
him that doesn’t add up.
Interviewer: Is it fair to say that that sort of situation gives rise to
the importance of the proposal development stage,
before implementation?
Respondent: Yes, and its, its mainly, it’s there all the time, it’s just
hidden until you try and centralise it into a computer
system where what you do now affects what he [the
SME client] can do.
191
RReferences
AberdeenGroup 2010, Think your organisation is too small for ERP? Think again., Aberdeen Group, A Harte Hanks Company.
ABPMP 2009, Guide to the Business Process Management Common Body of Knowledge (BPM CBOK), Version 2.0, Second Release edn, Association of Business Process Management Professionals, IL.
ABS 2012, Counts of Australian Businesses, including Entries and Exits , Jun 2007 to Jun 2011, Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 06/03/13 2013, <http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Latestproducts/8165.0Main%20Features2Jun%202007%20to%20Jun%202011?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=8165.0&issue=Jun%202007%20to%20Jun%202011&num=&view=>.
Antlova, K 2009, 'Preparedness of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises to use Information and Communication Technology as a Strategic Tool', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions, Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 342-61.
Argyropoulou, M, Ioannou, G, Koufopolous, D & Motwani, J 2008, 'Performance drivers of ERP systems in small and medium-sized enterprises.', International Journal of Enterprise Network Management, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 333-49.
Argyropoulou, M, Ioannou, G, Koufopolous, D & Motwani, J 2009, 'Measuring the impact of an ERP Project at SMEs: A framework and empirical investigation.', International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1-13.
Argyropoulou, M, Ioannou, G & Prastacos, P 2007, 'Enterprise resource planning implementation at small and medium sized enterprises: an initial study of the Greek market.', International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, vol. 3, no. 4, p. 406.
Ashurst, C, Cragg, P & Herring, P 2012, 'The role of IT competences in gaining value from e-business: An SME case study', International Small Business Journal, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 640-58.
192
Ates, A, Garengo, P, Cocca, P & Bititci, U 2013, 'The development of SME managerial practice for effective performance management', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 28-54.
Balzert, S, Burkhart, T, Werth, D, Laclavik, M, Seleng, M, Mehandjiev, N, Carpenter, M & Stalker, ID 2010, 'State of the Art Solutions in Enterprise Interoperability', in MM Cruz-Cunha (ed.), Enterprise information systems for business integration in SMEs: technological, organisational and social dimensions, Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA, pp. 201-29.
Barney, JB 1991, 'Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage', Journal of Management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 99-120.
Barney, JB 1996, 'The resource based theory of the firm', Organisation Science, vol. 7, no. 5, p. 469.
Barney, JB 2001, 'Is the resource based "view" a useful perspective for strategic management research?', The Academy of Management Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 41-56.
Barney, JB & Clark, DN 2007, Resource-Based Theory, Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Barney, JB & Hesterly, WS 2012, Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage Fourth Edition, Pearson, New Jersey.
Barry, H & Milner, B 2002, 'SMEs and electonic commerce: a departure from the traditional prioritisation of training', Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 316-26.
Baxter, GJ & Connolly, T 2014, 'Implementing Web 2.0 tools in organisations: feasibility of a systematic approach', The Learning Organization, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 6-25.
Beckinsdale, M & Levy, M 2004, 'SME's and Internet adoption strategy: Who do SME's listen to?', paper presented to European Conference on Information Systems, Turku, Finland, June 14-16.
193
Behery, M, Jabeen, F & Paradandi, M 2014, 'Adopting a contemporary performance management system: A fast-growth small-to-medium enterprise (FGSME) in the UAE', International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 22-43.
Berry, AJ, Sweeting, R & Goto, J 2006, 'The effect of business advisers on the performance of SMEs', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 33-47.
Bharadwaj, AS 2000, 'A resource based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation', MIS Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 169-96.
Bizowie 2014, The sky’s the limit., retrieved 19/06/14, <http://bizowie.com/>.
Blili, S & Raymond, L 1993, 'Information Technology: threats and opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 13, pp. 439-48.
Bode, S & Burn, J 2001, 'Consultancy engagement and e-business development - A case of Australian SMEs', paper presented to The 9th European Conference on Information Systems, Bled, Slovenia, June 27-29.
Bode, S & Burn, J 2002, 'Strategies for consultancy engagement for e-business development - a case analysis of Australian SMEs', in S Burgess (ed.), Managing Information Technology in Small Business: Challenges and Solutions, Idea Group, Hershey, PA, pp. 227-45.
Bradshaw, A, Cragg, P & Pulakanam, V 2013, 'Do IS consultants enhance IS competences in SMEs?', The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1-23.
Brouthers, K, Andriessen, F & Nicolaes, I 1998, 'Driving blind: strategic decision making in small companies', Long Range Planning, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 130-8.
Buonanno, G, Faverio, P, Pigni, F, Ravariini, A, Sciuto, D & Tagliavini, M 2005, 'Factors affecting ERP system adoption: A comparative analysis between SMEs and large companies', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 384-426.
194
Burgess, S 2002, 'Information technology in small business: Issues and Challenges', in S Burgess (ed.), Managing Information Technology in Small Business: Challenges and Solutions, Idea Group, Hershey, PA, pp. 1-17.
Burke, GI & Jarrat, DG 2004, 'The influence of information and advice on competitive strategy definition in small and medium-sized enterprises', Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 126-38.
Burke, K 2005, 'The impact of firm size on Internet use in small business', Electronic Markets, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 79-93.
Burlton, RT 2001, Business Process Management Profiting from Process, Sams Publishing, Indianapolis, USA.
Burlton, RT 2006, 'The Top Ten Principles (part 1)', Business Rules Journal, vol. 7, no. 1.
Butler, T & Murphy, C 2008, 'An exploratory study on IS capabilities and assets in a small-to-medium software enterprise', Journal of Information Technology, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 330-44.
Caldeira, MM & Ward, JM 2003, 'Using resource based theory to interpret the successful adoption and use of information systems and technology in manufacturing small and medium-sized enterprises', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 127-41.
Caputo, AC, Cucchiella, F, Fratocchi, L, Pelagagge, PM & Scacchia, F 2002, 'A methodological framework for innovation transfer to SMEs', Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 102, no. 5, pp. 271-83.
Carey, J 2008, 'Role misconceptions and negotiations in small business owner/web developer relationships', Journal of Management and Organisation, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 85-99.
Castleman, T 2004, 'Small Business as Social Formations: Diverse rationalities in the context of e-Business adoption', in NAY Al-Qirim (ed.), Electronic Commerce in Small to Medium-Sized Enterprises: Frameworks, Issues and Implications, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, pp. 31-51.
195
Cataldo, A, McQueen, RJ & Hardings, J 2012, 'Comparing strategic IT alignment versus Process IT alignment in SMEs', Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 43-57.
Chang, JF 2006, Business Process Management Systems: Strategy and Implementation, Auerbach Publications Taylor and Francis Group LLC.
Chang, S, Hung, S, Yen, D & Lee, P 2010, 'Critical factors of ERP adoption for small and medium sized enterprises: an empirical study', Journal of Global Information Management, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 82-106.
Chang, SI, Yen, D, Ng, CSP & Chang, WT 2012, 'An analysis of IT/IS outsourcing provider selection for small and medium-sized enterprises in Taiwan', Information and Management, vol. 49, pp. 199-209.
Chao, C & Chandra, A 2012, 'Impact of owner's knowledge of IT on strategic alignment and IT adoption in the United States', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 114-31.
Chatzoglou, P, Vraimaki, E, Diamantidis, A & Sarigiannidis, L 2010, 'Computer acceptance in Greek SMEs', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 78-101.
Chen, J, R. 2009, 'An exploratory study of alignment ERP implementation and organizational development activities in a newly established firm', Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 298-316.
Chen, S, Duan, Y, edwards, JS & Lehany, B 2006, 'Toward understanding inter-organisational knowledge transfer needs in SMEs: insight from a UK investigation', Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 6-23.
Chewning, C 2013, ERP Implementation Failure - Who is Responsible?, retrieved 05/06/14 2014, <http://www.accountinglibrary.com/blog/erp-implementation-failure-1/>.
Christofi, M, Nunes, M, Chao Peng, G & Lin, A 2013, 'Towards ERP success in SMEs through business process review prior to implementation', Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 304-23.
196
Clemons, EK & Row, MC 1991, 'Sustaining IT advantage: The role of structural differences', MIS Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 274-92.
Coates, TT & McDermott, CM 2002, 'An exploratory analysis of new competencies: a resource based view perspective', Journal of Operations Management, vol. 20, pp. 435-50.
Cooper, AC & Schendel, D 1976, 'Strategic responses to technological threats', Business Horizons, no. February, pp. 61-9.
Cotteleer, M, Austin, R & Nolan, R 1998, Cisco Systems Inc.: Implementing ERP, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
Cragg, P, King, M & Huyssin, H 2002, 'IT alignment and firm performance in small manufacturing firms', Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 11 pp. 109-32.
Cragg, P, Mills, A & Suraweera, T 2013, 'The influence of IT management sophistication and IT support on IT success in small and medium-sized enterprises', Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 617-36.
Cragg, P, Tagliavini, M & Mills, A 2007, 'Evaluating the alignment of IT with Business Processes in SMEs', paper presented to 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Toowoomba, 5-7 Dec.
Cragg, PB, Caldeira, MM & Ward, JM 2011, 'Organizational information systems competences in small and medium-sized enterprises', Information and Management, vol. 48, pp. 353-63.
Darch, H & Lucas, T 2002, 'Training as an e-commerce enabler', Journal of Workplace Learning, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 148-55.
Davenport, TH 2000, Mission Critical: Realising the promise of enterprise systems, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
DCITA 2004, Australia's Strategic Framework for the Information Economy 2004-2006 'Opportunities and Challenges for the Information Age', 0 642 75134x, Australian Government Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Canberra, Australia.
197
de Berranger, P, Tucker, D & Jones, L 2001, 'Internet Diffusion in Creative Micro-Businesses: Identifying change agent characteristics as critical success factors', Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 197-214.
de Burca, S, Fynes, B & Marshall, D 2005, 'Strategic technology adoption: extending ERP across the supply chain', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 427-40.
Deep, A, Guttridge, P, Dani, S & Burns, N 2008, 'Investigating factors affecting ERP selection in made-to-order SME sector', Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 430-46.
Dietze, A 2013, The challenges of introducing ERP in SMEs, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants, retrieved 05/06/14 2014, <http://www.rolandberger.com/media/news/2013-12-17-rbsc-news-Challenges_of_introducing_ERP_in_SMEs.html>.
Dolmetsch, R, Huber, T, Fleisch, E & Osterle, H 1998, Accelerated SAP: 4 case studies, Institute for Information Management, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Doom, C, Milis, K, Poelmans, S & Bloemen, E 2010, 'Critical success factors for ERP implementations in Belgian SME's', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 378-406.
Duhan, S 2007, 'A capabilities based toolkit for strategic information systems planning in SME's', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 27, pp. 352-67.
Edwards, P, Sengupta, S & Tsai, C 2010, 'The context-dependent nature of small firms' relations with support agencies: A three-sector study in the UK', International Small Business Journal, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 543-65.
Esteve-Perez, S & Manez-Castillejo, JA 2008, 'The resource based theory of the firm and firm survival', Small Business Economics, vol. 30, pp. 231-49.
Esteves, J 2009, 'A benefits realisation road-map framework for ERP usage in small and medium-sized enterprises', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 25-35.
198
Esteves, J & Bohorquez, V 2007, 'An updated ERP systems annotated bibliography:2001-2005', Communications of AIS, vol. 19, no. 18, pp. 386-446.
Exact 2014, The multi faceted business software for SMBs, retrieved 20/06/14 2014, <http://www.exact.asia/>.
Federici, T 2007, 'ERPs in SMEs: Ex-Post Evaluation of Success Factors', in 15th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), 7-9 June, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Federici, T 2009, 'Factors influencing ERP outcomes in SME's: a post-introduction assessment', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 81-98.
Fillis, I, Johansson, U & Wagner, B 2003, 'A conceptualisation of the opportunities and barriers to e-business development in the smaller firm', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 336-44.
Fillis, I & Wagner, B 2005, 'E-business Development', International Small Business Journal, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 604-34.
Fink, D 1998, 'Guidelines for the successful adoption of information technology in small and medium enterprises', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 243-53.
Focus 2009, ERP Systems Market Primer, Focus Research - ERP Group, Irvine CA.
Frost&Sullivan 2008, 'Frost & Sullivan: Australian SMB Market Holds Strongest Potential for Hosted Services', retrieved 26/08/2010, <http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/250653/forst_sullivan_australia>.
Fulford, R 2013, 'A case study of strategic enterprise resource planning management in a global corporation: Standardisation is the basis of competitive advantage', Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 117-32.
Gable, GG 1991, 'Consultant engagement for computer system selection', Information and Management, vol. 20, pp. 83-93.
199
Gainey, TW & Klaas, BS 2003, 'The outsourcing of training and development: Factors impacting client satisfaction', Journal of Management, vol. 29, pp. 207-29.
Galliers, RD 1992, Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Garg, A & Goyal, DP 2012, 'Striving towards strategic alignment in SMEs: an empirical analysis', Journal of Advances in Management Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 77-95.
Goode, S 2002, 'Exploratory analysis of the effect of consultants on the use of world wide web sites in SMEs', Australasian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 20-8.
Grant, RM 1991, 'The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation', California Management Review, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 114-35.
Gratton, L & Ghoshal, S 2005, 'Beyond best practice', MIT Sloan Management Review, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 49-55.
Gray, C 2006, 'Absorptive capacity, knowledge management and innovation in entrepreneurial small firms', International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 345-60.
Haddara, M & Zach, O 2011, 'ERP Systems in SMEs: A Literature Review', in 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 4-7 January, Hawaii.
Hammer, M & Champy, J 1994, Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto for business revolution, Allen and Unwin Australia, St Leonards, NSW.
Hanson, D, Dowling, PJ, Hitt, MA, Ireland, RD & Hoskisson, RE 2005, Strategic Management Competitiveness and Globalisation, 2nd edn, Thomson, Victoria.
Harindranath, G, Dyerson, R & Barnes, D 2008, 'ICT Adoption and Use in UK SMEs: a Failure of Initiatives', The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 91-6.
200
Harmon, P 2007, Business Process Change - A Guide for Business Process Managers and BPM and Six Sigma Professionals, 2nd edn, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Burlington, MA.
Harmon, P 2011, 'Is BPM a Fad or a Discipline?', BPTrends Email Advisor, vol. 9, no. 19, retrieved 20/11/11, <http://www.bptrends.com/bpt/wp-content/publicationfiles/advisor20111115.pdf>.
Harmon, P 2014, Business Process Change: A business process management guide for managers and process professionals, 3rd edn, Morgan Kauffman, Waltham, MA.
Harrigan, P, Ramsey, E & Ibbotson, P 2009, 'Investigating the eCRM activities of Irish SMEs', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 443-65.
Heredero, CdP & Heredero, MdP 2009, 'Elements that can explain the degree of success of ERP Systems Implementation', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions., Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 468-98.
Hidalgo, A, Albors, J & Gomez, L 2011, 'ERP software selection processes: A case study in the metal transformation sector', Intelligent Information Management, vol. 3, pp. 1-16.
Hill, J, Jones, G, Galvin, P & Haidar, A 2007, Strategic Management an Integrated Approach, 2nd Australasian Edition, John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd, Milton, Qld.
Hitt, MA, Freeman, RE & Harrison, JS (eds) 2001, Handbook of strategic management, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Howcroft, D & Light, B 2008, 'IT consultants, salesmanship and the challenges of packaged software selection in SME's', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 597-615.
Hsu, PF 2013, 'Commodity or competitive advantage? Analysis of the ERP value paradox', Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 412-24.
201
Huang, S, Y., Huang, S, M., Wu, T, H. & Lin, W, K. 2009, 'Process efficiency of the enterprise resource planning adoption', Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 109, no. 8, pp. 1085-100.
Hughes, M, Golden, W & Powell, P 2003, 'Inter-organisational ICT systems: the way to innovative practice for SMEs', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 277-86.
Hultman, J & Eriksson, LT 2008, 'The balancing acts in SME e-commerce development: a multiple case study', International Journal of Electronic Business, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 476-97.
Hustad, E & Olsen, DH 2011, 'Exploring the ERP pre-implementation process in a small and medium sized enterprise: A case study of a Norwegian retail company', paper presented to 19th Conference of Information Systems, Helksinki, Finland, Finland, 9-11 June.
IBM 2007, Making business better: Business process management enabled by SOA - Innovating business and improving productivity, IBM, New York.
Itami, H 1987, Mobilizing Invisible Assets, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Jeston, J & Nelis, J 2008a, Business Process Management - Practical Guidelines to Successful Implementations, 2nd edn, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Jeston, J & Nelis, J 2008b, Management by Process: A roadmap to sustainable Business Process Management, Elsevier Ltd, Burlington MA.
Jeston, J & Nelis, J 2014, Business Process Management: Practical Guidelines to Successful Implementations, 3rd edn, Routledge, New York.
Jocumsen, M 2013, 10 Reasons for SME project failure, retrieved 05/06/14 2014, <http://www.bbo.com.au/better-business-blog/10-reasons-for-sme-project-failure>.
Johansson, B & Sudzina, F 2008, 'ERP systems and open source: an initial review and some implications for SME's', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 649-58.
202
Jones, C, Hecker, R & Holland, P 2003, 'Small firm Internet adoption:opportunities forgone, a journey not begun', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 287-97.
Jones, P, Beynon-Davies, P & Muir, E 2003, 'Ebusiness barriers to growth within the SME sector', Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-26.
Jurisch, M, C., Palka, W, Wolf, P & Krcmar, H 2014, 'Which capabilities matter for successful business process change?', Business Process Management Journal, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 47-67.
Kargar, J 1994, 'Strategic planning system characteristics and planning effectiveness in small mature firms', The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 19-34.
Katerattanakul, P, Lee, J & Hong, S 2014, 'Effect of business characteristics and ERP implementation on business outcomes: An exploratory study of Korean manufacturing firms', Management Research Review, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 186-206.
Khan, RN 2004, Business Process Management - A Practical Guide, Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa FL.
Kidd, PT 2009, 'Enterprise Information Systems: Aligning and Integrating Strategy, Technology, Organization and People', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 271-85.
Klein, HK & Myers, MD 1999, 'A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems', MIS Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 67-93.
Klein, HK & Myers, MD 2001, A classification scheme for interpretive research in information systems, Qualitative research in IS: issues and trends, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey PA.
Koellinger, P 2008, 'The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance - Empirical evidence from e-business in Europe', Research Policy, vol. 37, pp. 1317-28.
203
Koh, SCL & Simpson, M 2007, 'Could enterprise resource planning create a competitive advantage for small businesses?', Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 59-76.
Kole, MA 1983, 'Going outside for MIS implementation', Information and Management, vol. 6, pp. 261-8.
Krigsman, M 2011, 2011 ERP survey: New IT failure research and statistics, retrieved 05/06/14 2014, <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/projectfailures/2011-erp-survey-new-it-failure-research-and-statistics/12486>.
Kvale, S 2007, Doing Interviews, SAGE Publications Ltd, London.
Laukkanen, S, Sarpola, S & Hallikainen, P 2007, 'Enterprise size matters: objectives and constraints of ERP adoption', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 319-34.
Lavie, D 2006, 'The Competitive Advantage of Interconnected Firms: An Extension of the Resource Based View', Academy of Management Review, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 638-58.
Lee, AS & Baskerville, RL 2003, 'Generalizing generalizability in information systems research', Information Systems Research, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 221-43.
Lee, D, Lee, S, Olson, D & Chung, S 2010, 'The effect of organisational support on ERP implementation', Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 110, no. 2, pp. 269-83.
Levenburg, NM 2005, 'Does Size Matter? Small firms' use of e-business tools in the supply chain', Electronic Markets, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 94-105.
Levy, M, Powell, P & Yetton, P 2001, 'SME's: aligning IS and the strategic context', Journal of Information Technology, vol. 16, pp. 133-44.
Liang, H & Xue, Y 2004, 'Coping with ERP-related contextual issues in SMEs: a vendor's perspective', Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 13, pp. 399-415.
204
Lin, C, Huang, Y & Stockdale, R 2011, 'Developing a B2B web site effectiveness model for SMEs', Internet Research, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 304-25.
Lin, HF & Lee, GG 2005, 'Impact of organisational learning and knowledge management factors on e-business adoption', Management Decision, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 171-88.
Love, PED, Zahir, I, Standing, C, Lin, C & Burn, J 2005, 'The enigma of evaluation: benefits, costs and risks of IT in Australian small-medium-sized enterprises', Information and Management, vol. 42, pp. 947-64.
Lubke, D & Gomez, JM 2009, 'Developing and Customising Federated ERP Systems', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Orghanisational, and Social Dimensions, Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 286-99.
Madison, D 2005, Process Mapping, Process Improvement, and Process Management, A Practical Guide to Enhancing Work and Information Flow, Paton Press LLC, Chico, CA.
Maguire, S, Koh, S & Magrys, A 2007, 'The adoption of e-business and knowledge management in SME's', Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 37-58.
Mahal, A 2010, Business Process Management Bascis and Beyond: How Work Gets Done, Technics Publications, Bradley Beach, NJ.
Malhotra, R & Temponi, C 2010, 'Critical decisions for ERP integration: Small business issues', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 30, pp. 28-37.
Mallach, EG 2009, 'Information system conversion in SMEs', Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 44-55.
Maranto-Vargas, D & Gomez-Tagel Rangel, R 2007, 'Development of internal resources and capabilities as sources of differentiation of SME under increased global competition: A field study in Mexico', Technological Forecasting & Social Change vol. 74, no. 2007, pp. 90-9.
205
Martin, L & Halstead, A 2004, 'Attracting micro-enterprises to learning', Community, Work & Family, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 29-42.
Martin, L & Matlay, H 2001, '"Blanket" approaches to promoting ICT in small firms: some lessons from the DTI ladder adoption model in the UK', Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 399-410.
Mathrani, S & Viehland, D 2009, 'Business benefits from enterprise systems implementation in small and medium sized enterprises', Australasian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 31-49.
McGregor, J & Gomes, C 1999, 'Technology uptake in small and medium sized enterprises: Some evidence from New Zealand', Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 94-102.
McQueen, RJ, Cataldo, A & Hardings, J 2012, 'Comparing strategic IT alignment versus Process IT alignment in SMEs', Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 43-57.
Meldrum, M & de Berranger, P 1999, 'Can higher education match the information systems learning needs of SME's?', Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 376-402.
Metaxiotis, K 2009, 'Exploring the rationales for ERP and knowledge management integration in SME's', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 51-62.
Microsoft 2014, Small to midsize businesses wish they had small to midsize problems, Microsoft Dynamics, retrieved 16/06/14 2014, <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics/erp-small-midsize-business.aspx>.
Miles, MB & Huberman, AM 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Miller, D & Shamsie, J 1996, 'The resource based view of the firm in two environments: the Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965', Academy of Management Journal, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 519-43.
206
Moller, C, Kraemmergaard, P, Rikhardsson, P, Moller, P, Jensen, TN & Due, L 2004, 'A comprehensive ERP bibliography - 2000-2004', no. ISSN 1398-067.
Moon, Y 2007, 'ERP: a review of the literature', International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 235-64.
Moyi, ED 2003, 'Networks, information and small enterprises: New technologies and the ambiguity of empowerment', Information Technology for Development, vol. 10, pp. 221-32.
Myers, MD 1997, 'Qualitative research in information systems', MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 241-2.
Neuman, WL 2007, Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 2nd edn, Pearson Education Inc., Boston MA.
Newman, M & Zhao, Y 2008, 'The process of enterprise resource planning implementation and business process re-engineering: tales from two Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises', Information Systems Journal, vol. 18, pp. 405-26.
NucleusResearch 2011, Anatomy of a decision: Oracle JD Edwards EnterpriseOne, Nucleus Research Inc, Boston.
OECD 2004, ICT, E-Business and SME's, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
Olsen, KA & Saetre, P 2007, 'IT for niche companies: is an ERP system the solution? ', Information Systems Journal, vol. 17, pp. 37-58.
Olsen, KA & Saetre, P 2007a, 'ERP for SMEs - is proprietary software an alternative', Business Process Management Journal, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 379-89.
OMG 2011, Business Process Model and Notation, V 2.0, Object Management Group, Needham MA.
Ondrej, Z & Munkvold, BE 2011, 'ERP system customisation in SMEs: A multiple case study', paper presented to Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, 7-11 July.
207
Ongori, H & Migiro, S 2010, 'Information and communication technologies adoption in SMEs: literature review', Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 93-104.
Ould, MA 2005, Business Process Management - A Rigorous Approach, Meghan-Kiffer Press, FL.
Parker, C, Chan, C & Saundage, D 2007, 'Encouraging small firm uptake of SCM using education: A future research agenda', paper presented to 5th International Conference on Supply Chain Management and Information Systems, Melbourne, Australia, 9-12 December.
Peel, MJ & Bridge, J 1998, 'How planning and capital budgeting improve SME performance', Long Range Planning, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 848-56.
Penrose, ET 1959, The theory of the growth of the firm, John Wiley, New York.
Porter, M 1996, 'What is strategy?', Harvard Business Review, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 61-78.
Porter, ME 1980, Competitive Strategy, The Free Press, New York, USA.
Porter, ME 2001, 'Strategy and the Internet', Harvard Business Review, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 62-78.
Porter, ME & Millar, VE 1985, 'How information gives you competitive advantage', Harvard Business Review, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 149-74.
Prahalad, CK & Bettis, RA 1986, 'The Dominant Logic: A New Linkage between Diversity and Performance', Strategic Management Journal, vol. 7, pp. 485-501.
Prahalad, CK & Hamel, G 1990, 'The Core Competence of the Corporation', Harvard Business Review, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 79-91.
Quinton, S & Khan, MA 2009, 'Generating web site traffic: a new model for SMEs', Direct Marketing: An International Journal, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 109-23.
208
Qureshil, S, Kamal, M & P., W 2009, 'Information technology interventions for growth and competitiveness in micro-enterprises', International Journal of E-Business Research, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 117-40.
Ram, J, Wu, ML & Tagg, R 2013, 'Competitive advantage from ERP projects: examining the role of key implementation drivers', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 663-75.
Ramayah, T, Roy, MH, Arokiasamy, S, Zbib, I & Ahmed, ZU 2007, 'Critical success factors for successful implementation of enterprise resource planning systems in manufacturing organisations', International Journal of Business Information Systems, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 276-97.
Ramdani, B, Chevers, D & Williams, DA 2013, 'SMEs' adoption of enterprise applications: A technology-organisation-environment model', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 735-53.
Ramdani, B & Kawalek, P 2007, 'SME Adoption of Enterprise Systems in the Northwest of England', in T McMaster, D Wastell, E Ferneley & J DeGross (eds), Organizational Dynamics of Technology-Based innovation: Diversifying the Research Agenda, International Federation for Information Processing, Boston: Springer US, vol. 235, pp. 409-29.
Ramdani, B & Kawalek, P 2009, 'Knowledge management and enterprise systems adoption by SMEs, Predicting SMEs' adoption of enterprise systems', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 10-24.
Ramdani, B, Kawalek, P & Lorenzo, O 2009, 'Predicting SMEs' adoption of enterprise systems', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 10-24.
Rangone, A 1999, 'A resource based approach to strategy analysis in small-medium sized enterprises', Small Business Economics, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 233-48.
Raymond, L, Rivard, S & Jutras, D 2006, 'Evaluating readiness for ERP adoption in manufacturing SME's', International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1-17.
Raymond, L & Uwizeyemungu, S 2007, 'A profile of ERP adoption in manufacturing SME's', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 487-502.
209
Razi, M & Madani, H 2013, 'An analysis of attributes that impact adoption of audit software: An empirical study in Saudi Arabia', International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 170-88.
Reid, GC 1993, Small business enterprise: An economic analysis, Routledge, London.
Rigby, DK, Reicheld, FF & Schefter, P 2002, 'Avoid the four perils of CRM', Harvard Business Review, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 101-9.
Rivard, S, Raymond, L & Verreault, D 2006, 'Resource-based view and competitive strategy: An integrated model of the contribution of information technology to firm performance', Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 29-50.
Robinson, AG & Dilts, DM 1999, 'OR and ERP: a match for the new millenium?', OR/MS Today, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 30-5.
Rothenberger, MA & Srite, M 2009, 'An investigation of customization in ERP implementations ', IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 663-76.
Ruivo, P, Johansson, B, Oliveira, T & Neto, M 2012, 'Determinants that influence ERP use and value: cross-country evidence on Scandinavian and Iberian SMEs', paper presented to CENTERIS 2012 - Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / HCIST 2012 - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies, Algarve, Portugal, October 3-5.
Ruivo, P, Oliveira, T & Neto, M 2012, 'ERP use and value: Portuguese and Spanish SMEs', Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 112, no. 7, pp. 1008-25.
Ruivo, P, Oliveira, T & Neto, M 2014, 'Examine ERP post-implementation stages of use and value: Empirical evidence from Portuguese SMEs', International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 166-84.
Sage 2011, 7 Steps to building a business case for ERP, Sage Software Inc., California.
SAP 2014, Get growing - with our affordable, scalable small business software, SAP, retrieved 16/06/14 2014, <http://www.sap.com/solution/sme/software/erp/small-business-management/overview/index.html>.
210
Schniederjans, D & Tadav, S 2013, 'Successful ERP implementation: an integrative model', Business Process Management Journal, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 364-98.
Schubert, P 2007, 'Business software as a facilitator for business process excellence: Experiences from case studies', Electronic Markets, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 187-98.
Shang, S & Seddon, P 2000, 'A comprehensive framework for classifying the benefits of ERP systems', paper presented to Americas conference on information systems, Long Beach, CA., 10-13 August.
Shiau, W, Hsu, P & Wang, J 2009, 'Development of measures to assess the ERP adoption of small and medium enterprises', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 22, no. 1/2, pp. 99-118.
Shin, I 2006, 'Adoption of Enterprise Application Software and Firm Performance', Small Business Economics, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 241-56.
Smeltzer, LR, Fann, GL & Nikolaisen, VN 1988, 'Environmental scanning practices in small business', Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 55-62.
Soh, CPP, Yap, CS & Raman, KS 1992, 'Impact of consultants on computerisation success in small business', Information and Management, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 309-19.
Spinelli, R, Dyerson, R & Harindranath, G 2013, 'IT readiness in small firms', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 807-23.
Srivastava, D & Batra, A 2010, ERP Systems, I.K. International Publishing House Pvt Ltd, New Delhi.
Stackpole, B 1999, Vendor/customer partnerships are vital, IT Business Edge, retrieved May 2012, <http://www.datamation.com/entdev/article.php/611141/Vendorcustomer-partnerships-are-vital.htm>.
Steiner, M & Solem, O 1988, 'Factors for success in small manufacturing firms', Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 51-6.
211
Steinfield, C, Adelaar, T & Liu, F 2005, 'Click and Mortar Strategies Viewed from the Web: A content analysis of features illustrating integration between retailers online and offline presence', Electronic Markets, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 199-212.
Sternard, S, Bobek, S, Dezelak, Z & Lampret, A 2009, 'Critical Success Factors (CSFs) for Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution Implementation in SMEs: What does matter for business integration', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions., Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 412-31.
Storey, DJ 1994, Understanding the small business sector, Routledge, London.
Street, CT & Cameron, AF 2007, 'External Relationships and the Small Business: A Review of Small Business Alliance and Network Research', Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 239-66.
Strong, DM & Volkoff, O 2010, 'Understanding organisation-enterprise system fit: A path to theorising the information technology artefact', MIS Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 731-56.
Sumner, M 2005, Enterprise Resource Planning, Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey.
Swan, J, Newell, C & Robertson, M 1999, 'The illusion of 'best practice' in Information Systems for Operations Management', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 284-93.
Taylor, M & Murphy, A 2004, 'SME's and e-business', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 280-9.
TechnologyEvaluation.com 2011, 'Discrete manufacturing ERP evaluation competitor rating analysis for JD Edwards EnterpriseOne (9) by Oracle, PRONTO-Xi Enterprise Management System (670) by Pronto Software, Business One by SAP', retrieved 03/03/2011, database.
Teese, DJ 1980, 'Economy of Scope and the Scope of the Enterprise', Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 223-45.
212
Teittinen, H, Pellinen, J & Jarvenpaa, M 2012, 'ERP in action - Challenges and benefits for management control in SME context', International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 278-96.
Thompson, P, Williams, R & Thomas, B 2013, 'Are UK SMEs with active web sites more likely to achieve both innovation and growth?', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 934-65.
Thong, J, Yap, C & Raman, K 1996, 'Top management support. External expertise and information systems implementation in small businesses', Information Systems Research, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 248-67.
Thong, JYL 2001, 'Resource constraints and information systems implementation in Singaporean small businesses', The International Journal of Management Science, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 143-56.
Ticehurst, GW & Veal, AJ 2000, Business Research Methods - A Managerial Approach, Pearson Education Pty Ltd, Frenchs Forest, NSW.
Towers, S & McGregor, M 2005, In Search of BPM Excellence, Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa FL.
Trauth, E 2001, The choice of qualitative methods in IS research, Qualitative research in IS: Issues and trends, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey PA.
Tse, T & Soufani, K 2003, 'Business strategies for small firms in the new economy', Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 306-20.
Uhlenbruck, K, Meyer, KE & Hitt, MA 2003, 'Organisational transformation in transition economies: Resource-based and organisational learning perspectives', Journal of Management Studies, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 257-82.
Upadhyay, P, Jahanyan, S & Dan, P 2011, 'Factors influencing ERP implementation in Indian manufacturing organisations. A study of micro, small and medium-scale enterprises.', Journal Of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 130-45.
Van Der Hoeven, H 2009, ERP and Business Processes, LluminaPress, Coral Springs, Florida.
213
Vayvay, O, Derman, I & Beceren, E 2009, 'Change Management Strategies for ERP Implementation in SME and a Case Study in Turkey: Anadolu Bilisim Hizmetleri (ABH) Success Story', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions., Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA., pp. 499-511.
Verville, J, Palanisamy, R, Bernadas, C & Halingten, A 2007, 'ERP acquisition planning: A critical dimension for making the right choice', Long Range Planning, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 45-63.
Vilpola, I, Kouri, I & Vaananen-Vainio-Mattila, K 2007, 'Rescuing small and medium sized enterprises from inefficient information systems - a multi-disciplinary method for ERP system requirements engineering', paper presented to 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Hawaii, 3-6 January.
Walsh, G, Schubert, P & Jones, C 2010, 'Enterprise system investments for competitive advantage: An empirical study of Swiss SMEs', European Management Review, vol. 7, pp. 180-9.
Walsham, G 1993, Interpreting Information Systems in Organisations, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
Walsham, G 1995a, 'Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 74-81.
Walsham, G 1995b, 'The emergence of interpretivism in IS research', Information Systems Research, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 376-94.
Walsham, G 2006, 'Doing interpretive research', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 320-30.
Wang, FK & He, W 2014, 'Service strategies of small cloud service providers: A case study of a small cloud service provider and its clients in Taiwan', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 406-15.
Warren, L & Fuller, T 2009, 'Contrasting Approaches to Preparedness: A reflection on two case studies', in M Manuella (ed.), Enterprise Information Systems for Business Integration in SMEs: Technological, Organisational, and Social Dimensions., Business Science Reference, hershey, PA., pp. 400-11.
214
Webster, B, Walker, E & Brown, A 2005, 'Australian small business participation in training activities', Education & Training, vol. 47, no. 8/9, pp. 552-61.
Whyte, WF 1982, Interviewing in field research, Field research: A sourcebook and field manual, Allen and Unwin, London.
Wymer, S & Regan, A 2011, 'Influential Factors in the Adoption and Use of E-Business and E-Commerce Information Technology (EEIT) by Small & Medium Businesses', Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organisations, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 56-82.
Yi, Y, Wu, Z & Tung, LL 2004, 'Do perceptions fully mediate the impacts of individual differences on technology use?', paper presented to Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems PACIS 2004, Shanghai, 8-11 July.
Zach, O & Munkvold, BE 2011, 'ERP system customization in SMEs: a multiple case study', paper presented to 15th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, Australia, 9-11 July.
215