Does Best Practice Makes Perfect? Fitting Off-the-Shelf Applications to Meet Your Needs

From the Editor, Gabriele Piccoli

I am just now wrapping up writing a book (which turned out to be a much more involved undertaking than I had planned, but let's not rehash the wisdom of questionable decisions made in the past). The target of the book is the required information systems course for MBAs -- you know, the course that a few decades into the Information Age happens to be one of the most important ones in the modern MBA curriculum? That seemingly simple fact, however, is lost on many masters students, who come into the semester thinking they don't need to learn all that techno-mumbo-jumbo. Thus, the critical success factor of any textbook of the "information systems for non-IT managers" kind is its ability to "enroll" the student, as a very good friend of mine would put it. In other words, the book must be good at "making the case" for its own existence. I have a feeling of déjà vu here; where have I heard of this problem before?!

Last week, I was working on the chapter titled "Getting IT Done" -- a chapter that focuses on the process by which information systems come to be in the organization (i.e., systems design and development, systems selection and acquisition). That chapter benefited greatly from this month's CBR survey, as I was able to use fresh data to make the case that the way information systems come to be in modern organizations is changing -- and that managers need to be more sophisticated and more involved than ever. We see much less of the dichotomy traditionally captured in the "make or buy" decisions. Rather, we are purchasing more and more off-the-shelf applications that subsequently go through a configuration and customization process. In the book, I call this the "buy and make" process.

OK, enough about my book, let's get to the important stuff: this installment of CBR! The idea for this issue was seeded by the many discussions I had with one of the authors (and my colleague here at Cornell) Erica Wagner. Erica has some very creative ideas and some strong opinions about software, particularly large-scale applications (e.g., ERP), having done much of her work studying their implementation. I have seen her doing the "best for whom?" routine a few times, in which she raises some very interesting challenges to the notion of best practice software. The best-for-whom routine, in addition to being interesting and stimulating, is a perfect fit with CBR, where we feel quite comfortable having and voicing opinions.

Moreover, because here at CBR we like to back up our opinions with evidence and fresh data, Cutter issued a survey designed to take stock of user experiences with the implementation and use of application package software. We then invited a team of experts to comment on the results. Our academic contribution for this installment is provided by Erica Wagner, Assistant Professor of Information Systems at the School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University (USA), and Sue Newell, Cammarata Professor of Management in the Department of Management at Bentley College (USA). Both Erica and Sue do substantial field research on the design, development, and implementation of large-scale software applications. Providing our view from the field is Bill Ulrich, Senior Consultant with the Cutter Consortium Business-IT Strategies and Enterprise Architecture practices. Bill is also the President of Tactical Strategy Group, Inc., and has more than 25 years' experience advising a wide range of organizations on migration and transformation projects, having worked with Fortune 1000 companies, government agencies, and high-tech firms.

In this issue of CBR, Erica and Sue bring to bear their years of studying enterprise systems (ES) and best practice software implementations to frame the survey. They use the survey as a springboard to draw conclusions about the opportunities and pitfalls presented by the buy-and-make paradigm. But, in good old Cutter style, they don't shy away from challenging vendor (and executive!) rhetoric. I particularly draw to your attention their discussion of the limitations of the best practice software concept. Much negotiation and many tradeoffs are required during the deployment and implementation of large, highly integrated applications like enterprise systems. For this reason, it is very dangerous to fall prey to the overly simplifying "transform the organization" rhetoric. Erica and Sue conclude by presenting six actionable guidelines that I am sure you will find useful.

Bill then does an outstanding job of systematically analyzing the survey and painting a comprehensive picture of the experience our respondents have had with application package software. I specifically draw to your attention his discussion of the implementation and integration challenges that these packages bring about. Bill concludes by summarizing the findings of the survey -- a nice touch for busy readers and a feature that perhaps we should have in every issue -- and contributing a set of broad recommendations.

The buy-and-make paradigm to systems development is here to stay. Today's organizations have access to an unprecedented array of off-the-shelf applications seemingly addressing almost every single one of their software needs. But the truth is that organizations today are as unique as they have ever been (if not more), and purchasing prepackaged applications requires (often significant) adjustments both to the software and within the organization. The result? Get ready for more of the same: hard-to-establish systems requirements, extensive negotiations, and significant need for change management during and after systems implementation.

I hope that you will find the ideas and suggestions in this issue of Cutter Benchmark Review to be helpful as you continue to fearlessly navigate this brave, new, buy-and-make landscape.

-- Gabriele Piccoli, Editor, Cutter Benchmark Review