Abstract
The pre-implementation process of an IS is characterized by procedures of selection and evaluation, which is rather in a pattern of change in a planned process. However, the research on organizational change gave rise to several approaches according to which, the change can be explained by other processes (political, interpretative, incremental, and complex). For this research, the authors seek to study the process of pre-implementation of an IS in order to check whether it pursues a planned process, or the observed change may also have characteristics of other explanatory processes of change. To this end, a qualitative study by case study is conducted in Basic Bank. The results show that change during the process of pre-implementation of the IS is explained not only by the planned process but also by the political and interpretative process. Based on this result, it is recommended to practitioners who wish to lead a change within their organizations to envisage the managerial actions from the outset of the project in order to reduce the potential conflicts of interest between actors.
TopBackground
The pre-implementation evaluation of an Information System (IS) is of major importance (Mussi et al. 2018). Indeed, during this phase, it is possible to identify issues which were likely to affect implementation and use of the new system (Mussi et al. 2018). The pre-implementation process, as part of a project to implement integration solutions IS such as Global Banking System (GBS), consists in a study leading to the selection of an ERP software, software developer, and consultant (Hustad and Dag Hakon, 2011; Mourrain and Deltour, 2016). This process is characterized by the specifications preparation, the target and the functional coverage definition, the software developer choice, etc. (Al Mashariand and Al- Mudimigh, 2003). Markus and Tanis (2000) claim that failures in the pre-implementation process may escalate the rest of the project. According to Velcu (2010), the failures in this process could lead to an overall unsuccessful implementation. The ERP pre-implementation process has proved to be a particularly critical stage (Markus and Tanis, 2000; Verville et al., 2007; Razmi and Sangari; 2013; Mourrain and Deltour, 2016; Mdima et al., 2017). Indeed, it’s a demanding “process which required a high level of knowledge and competencies about the system, and tough negotiation processes between project leader, vendor, resellers and consultants” (Hustad and Dag Hakon, 2011, p.1). This can generate a change in the organization.
This change is characterized by the tracking methods and selection procedures and evaluation of the software package (Kaur and Mahanti, 2008, Kutlu and Akpinar, 2009), which is rather in a pattern of change in a planned process (Kotter, 1995; Soeini and Miri, 2011; Pichault, 2013). However, the research on organizational change gave rise to several approaches sometimes paradoxical. According to these approaches, organizational change can be explained by other processes such as the political process, the interpretive process, the incremental process and the complex process (Vas and Ingham, 2002; Vas and Jaspart, 2010; Pichault, 2013). Organizational change during the pre-implementation process of the ERP is little studied in the literature. According to Hustad and Dag Hakon (2011), the pre-implementation process of the ERP projects need for more empirical studies.
Key Terms in this Chapter
ERP: Set of application software modules with an integrated architecture used by an organisation as their primary engine for integrating data, business processes and information systems across its business value chains in real time ( Ngai et al., 2008 ).
Interpretative Process of Change: Change is marked by a consideration of the actors’ perceptions.
Explanatory Process of Change: The modeling the progression of change.
Planned Process of Change: Change is marked by a succession of phases, monitoring of procedures and setting of objectives.
Global Banking System: Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems in Banking sector.
Complex Process of Change: Change is marked by unexpected phenomena, stops and blocking.
Political Process of Change: Change is marked by power struggles and continuing negotiations between the interests of different stakeholders within the organization.
Incremental Process of Change: Change is marked by building on previously developed choice.