ERP Systems Implementation In Public Administration – Objectives And Critical Success Factors

Objectives Behind Choosing ERP System Implementation

Discuss about the ERP Systems Implementation in Public Administration.

ERP stands for Enterprise Resource Planning, and it is a system that when adopted by a business organization, helps in the use of a system of integrated applications in management and performance of complex and expensive operations related to technology service delivery as well as human resource management.

Public administration, unlike a single business organization, is a governmental component that deals with a variety of projects meant to some parts or the whole country. Their frameworks are set by the law and statutory regulations hence they are more complex (Wallace 2010).

Governments aim at improving their environments from an internal resource optimal use and allocation to a state of achieving process integration and external focus. It has to organize various systems for revenue collection, planning and budgeting and the actual distribution of resources to different sectors of the economy some of which include development projects in different parts of the country and paying the salaries of civil servants. These are much more complicated processes than for a single business organization. A private company only deals with core processes that are centralized in one area and are majorly aimed at achieving returns benefitting the owners and employees at a smaller extent. Thus, there is absolutely nothing complicated about their operations to be specific.

The achievement of this goal requires an integrated system to be put in place. ERP systems are highly desired because of its association with a general increase in efficiency, improved information access, and distribution, reduction in total ownership costs as well as achievement of high levels of accountability and transparency in service delivery and resource utilization and waste minimization. This is the exact reason why public administrators would ideally want to implement ERP systems in their centers of operation.

Another objective is to establish a centrally based management system that brings together and ensures coordination of the various structures and units of the government. There is dire need of creating an automatic supporting system for the compound and time demanding duties such as finance and accounting, management of human resources, and the general management of assets, inventories and worker’ payrolls.

The ERP system is further expected to do away with a lot of documentation processes, some of which are deemed unnecessary. The documents circulation and distribution should be systemized in such a way that it caters for quick accessibility and flow of information across several target departments.

Critical Success Factors for ERP Implementation in Public Administration Sector

Another objective, in this case, is to create a system that explicitly specifies the goals and objectives outlined in the public procurement processes, which are usually complicated and therefore, do not tolerate ambiguity. The length of the terms of the contract in procurement procedures must be spelled out appropriately to avoid having to deal with unrealistic deadlines for contracts.

Another important objective of public administrators is to create a sound analysis system that factor in the various processes of the government to improve their efficiency and effectiveness.

Finally, there is a need for the administrators to have a good project management plan which is crucial and can only be arrived at by the use of practical and proven methodologies. Roles and duties related to various projects have to be assigned and delegated correctly and quickly and thus offering a solid support to top management. If done, the risks of project and system failures are instantly minimized or eliminated.

Critical Success Factors (CFS) are classified into four groups namely; factors concerned with public procurement, factors associated with government processes management, factors related to project team competencies and factors connected with project management (Pollard 2009). Factors related to public procurement procedures are considered very vital since they control the extent at which the implemented ERP system functions. The requirements for these systems must be adequately defined by the contracts thus making it necessary to be applied by the IT specialists. Little or no knowledge of ERP systems has an effect on the contract deadlines and implementation dates. Sometimes very short deadlines are set for the contracts while but they should not have been that way if a good ERP system is implemented.

The administration should clearly document goals and objectives of the public procurement contracts (Rosacker 2008). This makes the project an ambiguity-free operation. Their inclusion in this category of factors is in line with their vital role in determining the rate of success associated with the ERP implementation.

Factors related to government processes management are thought to be the most important factors. They comprise frozen information requirements, established government procedures and process engineering (Ziemba 2013). Public administration always requires that an excellent analysis is conducted that examines the information needs and relevant government processes. These processes go hand in hand with the desire for success when ERP systems are implemented in the public administration sector.

Factors related to team project competencies has to do entirely with the team members in a given project who in this case, are the specialists and technicians in the IT Company as well as the government agency. IT professionals charged with the responsibility of implementing ERP systems in any organization, particularly in public administration should be highly efficient. They should be competent enough to be able to handle the system appropriately beside being familiar with the various government processes which are to be supported by the system as well as the information which it aims to distribute (Klein 2008). The knowledge of the specialists must be able to have answers to the question related to both the general and the particular function of the system to be implemented. The teams of agents of the government enjoy the opportunity of tapping from the consultants’ knowledge of business analysis and information system implementation.

What Organization needs to do when Implementing ERP

Factors related to project management should be given consideration. They are related to problems such as inadequate support for top management which are known to negatively affect the implementation process due to the lack of clear and prompt delegation of duties. There is an urgent need to establish effective methodologies that are concerned with project management, particularly where large projects are operational. Project management if not, failure is inevitable.

In this changing and developing world, there arise many changes in various sectors which call for the concept of risk and change management. Changes have to be managed properly because ERP implementation is always associated with a variety of changes bearing high risks of failure. All the people involved and benefit from the actual use of the implemented ERP system should be included in the implementation process so as to come to terms with the related changes.

 There has to be a good and positive communication between team members and those from various departments who ideally use the system, so as to successfully initiate the ERP system. On top of that, the success of the system can also be attributed to the monitoring and control programs put in place to keep the team members on their toes as they partner and collaborate with consultants and research centers.

When ERP is being implemented in a given public administration sector, the organization is required to ensure there is full commitment and focus on the business process management. One of the main issues that arise when ERP system is implemented is the fear of change by the people to whom the system is implemented (Jansenn 2006). In most cases, it is the employees who are faced with such fears since technological advancements must always be accompanied by current training and adaptation process. Technical problems are usually well defined yet difficult to solve. Thus, they require intelligent minds, a lot of hard work, commitment, passion and dedication towards its incorporation. ERP system is an example of such technology whose implementation and operation process requires intelligence and commitment.

Managers are therefore charged with the responsibility of conducting meetings with the intention of informing people involved, about new systems before they are implemented and during the actual implementation process. They have to clearly give reasons as to why the changes are brought in as well as the practical benefits associated with the successful implementation of the particular system. Employees are expected to be positive and accept that adoption of new and modern technology is the new way of running businesses hence the earlier they accept this, the faster they will get comfortable and adapt to its use.

Proper integration of a new ERP system calls for massive changes especially in the working regime of the organization as well as how people go about their daily routines in the business organization. This shift is difficult and painful but if everyone involved can calm down and bear with the pain of moving on, the business firm in question will make one step ahead to achieving ultimate success. There is an urgent need for the organization to establish a system of communication and training to employees to make them acquainted with the demands of the new ERP systems. A way has to found that makes the system look friendly to the employees and not scare them.

Employees, on the other hand, are required to show a significant level of cooperation with the management. They must be ready to work to their best levels to support the incoming systems. They should not feel that the old system was better than the new one. Employees should also avoid the fear of losing their jobs if they fail to adapt to change. They are expected to at least give change a try without having to criticize the management for bringing such changes.

The process has to be modified to accommodate the new software which ultimately focuses on what clients need. It is understandable that it is indeed difficult to transform long-established habits especially when it alters the roles and responsibilities of various people in the organization. However, this should not be a license for managers to loosen the belt and helplessly watch as employees reject new systems which ideally would majorly benefit the employees as well as the entire business organization.

There are massive differences between the ERP implemented in public administration and that in private sectors. In public administration, it backs up supporting processes which are meant to satisfy the individual and collective needs of citizens as a result of their coexistence in the society.  Private businesses, on the other hand, have ERP systems that support core processes that aim at maximizing profits and returns for the business owner. The supporting processes to be backed up in public administration sectors include accounting, inventories, payroll, fixed assets and human resource management.

ERP systems in public administration must be structured according to the requirements of general public governance and conform to applicable laws and standard procedures. The laws involved here are specifically about rules governing budgetary accounting, employment, wages and management of fixed assets (Khun 2010). The management of inventories in a warehouse operates on a different principle than it is in private manufacturing business organizations.

To sum this up, the government sector’s ERP system is geared towards to providing a return to their clients who in this case, are the citizens, even if it is not exactly what is required by the people. Again, there is no gamble here for public administrators since they have to be paid even if the system implementation fails along the way. However, the private businesses are concerned with ERP systems that yield good returns for the owners and employees. If a system fails in this case, revenue loss is spread across to managers and sometimes employees.

ERP comes with changes which carry high potential risks of failure. The management must effectively control and manage the resulting changes. Any ERP implementation should have a change management team that includes business and change specialists who plan how various changes are communicated with the business. This enables the business to address problems such as employees’ resistance to change which may slow down the works in progress (Kwak 2009). It calls for management strategies such as proper communication of ideas to the employees and makes them see the logic and importance of change.

Managers should conduct extensive training in new skills and give incentives to those who are quickly adopting the system to increase diffusion of change and adaptation ideas to all employees. It helps detect discontent among top earners who may feel threatened by the new system and are, therefore, campaigning for the old system to be used. Extended training is the key here to these employees to enable them to pick up the changes.

It gives management time to use the opportunity to convince the employees that the experience they have gained so far while using the other systems is important and will quickly boost their quick learning and adaptation to the new regime (McAndrew 2005). They should also be assured that their jobs will not be terminated because of the system change.  The changes associated with new ERP systems majorly affect the employees. Thus, appropriate change management helps regain the confidence of employees and motivate them to accept the changes and move on with the new routines.

Conclusion

ERP systems have proved beneficial and worth implementing especially in public administration sectors where the government processes are numerous and require proper analysis. It is, however, comes with many risky changes and if commitment and dedication are absent during implementation and operation, it leads to eventual failure.

References

Baskerville, R. L. and Myers, M. D., 2009. Fashion waves in information systems research and practice. Mis Quarterly, 647-662.

Boonstra, J. (Ed.), 2008. Dynamics of organizational change and learning. John Wiley & Sons.

Borman, M., and Janssen, M., 2013. Reconciling two approaches to critical success factors: The case of shared services in the public sector. International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), 390-400.

Esteves, J., and Bohórquez, V. W., 2007. An updated ERP systems annotated bibliography: 2001-2005. Instituto de Empresa Business School Working Paper No. WP, 07-04.

Galliers, R. D., and Leidner, D. E., 2014. Strategic information management: challenges and strategies in managing information systems. Routledge.

Grabski, S. V., Leech, S. A. and Schmidt, P. J., 2011. A review of ERP research: A future agenda for accounting information systems. Journal of information systems, 25(1), 37-78.

Hanafizadeh, P. and Ravasan, A. Z., 2011. A McKinsey 7S model-based framework for ERP readiness assessment. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), 7(4), 23-63.

Janssen, M. A., Schoon, M. L., Ke, W., and Börner, 2006. Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Global environmental change, 16(3), 240-252.

Kuhn Jr, J. R., and Sutton, S. G., 2010. Continuous auditing in ERP system environments: The current state and future directions. Journal of Information Systems, 24(1), 91-112.

Kwak, Y. H., and Anbari, F. T., 2009. Analyzing project management research: Perspectives from top management journals. International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), 435-446.

Morris, J. J., 2011. The impact of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems on the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting. Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 129-157.

Nour, M. A. and Mouakket, S., 2011. A classification framework of critical success factors for ERP systems implementation: A multi-stakeholder perspective. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), 7(1), 56-71.

Osayawe Ehigie, B. and McAndrew, E. B., 2005. Innovation, diffusion and adoption of total quality management (TQM). Management Decision, 43(6), 925-940.

Pollard, C. and Cater-Steel, A., 2009. Justifications, strategies, and critical success factors in successful ITIL implementations in US and Australian companies: an exploratory study. Information systems management, 26(2), 164-175.

Rosacker, K. M., and Olson, D. L., 2008. Public sector information system critical success factors. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 2(1), 60-70.
Vaidya, K., Sajeev, A. S. M. and Callender, G., 2006. Critical factors that influence e-procurement implementation success in the public sector. Journal of public procurement, 6(1/2), 70.
Wang, E. T., Shih, S. P., Jiang, J. J. and Klein, G., 2008. The consistency among facilitating factors and ERP implementation success: A holistic view of fit. Journal of Systems and Software, 81(9), 1609-1621.

Ziemba, E., Oblak, I. and Informatyczna, B. S., 2013. Critical success factors for ERP systems implementation in public administration. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 8, 1-19.