CHAPTER 4 - CODING AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
4.1 Summary of coding and data analysis stages
4.1.2 Initial coding
4.1.2.3 Use of each a priori category
It should be emphasised that the interview protocol was derived directly from the 10 a priori categories as shown in Appendix 7. As a result the informants responses to questions in the protocol closely followed the sequence of a priori categories.
How initial categories were correlated with each a priori category is now described:
A priori category APC-A (the enterprise implementation project) was readily correlated with categories A1 (dimensions of the project), A5 (implementation strategy adopted) and A10 (the ERP software implemented).
A priori category APC-B ( the ERP project objective or business driver) was readily correlated with different types of business driver that interviewees discussed;
those that enabled new business strategies (B-17) , and where the enterprise system business case was often subsidiary to the wider strategic business case, those that allowed new lower cost operational models to be introduced (B-20), often aligned with outsourcing of these business functions, those that were simply necessary to allow the business to survive – the do-nothing option B-24) and finally those where the enterprise system allowed Y2000 compliance (B-27).
A priori category APC-C (business cases) provided 10 correlated categories, most of which can be regarded as dimensions of the business case such as timing, responsibility and contents as discussed above.
A priori category APC-D (reasons for not using business case metrics) was correlated with 5 categories (D41-D45). These reasons for not using business case metrics were supported by extant literature in this field of research, as outlined in Table 4–1.
A priori category APC-E (estimated system benefits) was readily correlated with the many different estimating methods and comments on responsibility for preparation and use of these metrics.
A priori category APC-F (the reasons for not measuring benefits) were frequently discussed, although interview transcripts had to be closely studied to interpret whether the interviewee was referring to estimated benefits in the business case (if one was written) or realised benefits that were estimated during or post-implementation.
A priori category APC-G (the delivery of business benefits) provided many correlated many categories, some correlated to the nature of the benefits (quantifiable or otherwise), others correlated to the timescale involved. So, this a priori category, the delivery of benefits, generated other categories that provided temporal and organisational dimensions to the benefits from each of the business drivers itemised in APC-B.
A priori category APC-H (project management success) led to multiple categories mostly concerned with project planning and project management issues and also provided temporal and organisational categories correlated to project success.
A priori category APC-K (objective measures of business success) led to five correlated categories, including for example, the delivery of planned benefits in the business case, which reflects earlier categories generated by a priori code APC-B, objectives of ERP projects
A priori category APC-L (subjective measures of business success) generated over 10 different measures. The distinction between objective and subjective
measures of success was based primarily upon the use of empirical data or observations as objective measures.
The 100 initial categories and their correlation with the a priori categories are shown below in Table 4–2.
A ERP implementation projects (25 cited as examples during interviews and in project documentation ( see Appendix 7)
Dimensions of project A1
Size of ERP project A2
Timescale of implementation A3
Scope of business applications implemented A4
Implementation strategy adopted A5
Sequence of implementation i.e. sequentially or big bang A6 Geography or business division scope of project A7 Standard data and business processes from use of single
instance
Industry software release used A13
Other software integrated into solution A14
E-commerce software integrated into ERP solution A15 More componentisation of ERP software in last decade A16 B Objectives / business drivers of ERP projects
Enabling new business strategy B17
Timing of implementation B18
Using new ERP release can give competitive advantage B19
New lower cost operational models B20
Timing of implementation B21
Shared service centres use ERP B22
Shared service centres precede outsourcing program B23
Doing nothing not an option B24
Legacy systems not fit for purpose B25
Above described as burning platform B26
Year 2000 compliance B27
Timing of implementation B28
Y2K or other compliance projects often obscure other business benefits
B29 Y2K projects often used as umbrella for approval of other ERP
projects
B30 C Business cases
Contain objectives / business drivers C31
Large global ERP projects with powerful business drivers require less bottom-up justification
C32
Responsibility for preparation C33
Timing of preparation C34
Public sector organisations have to follow standard C35
A priori category (APC)
Correlated categories Cat.
#
Non-executive directors asked to give benchmarks for business case
C36
Include benefits estimates C37
Used for approval C38
Disconnect between business case and implementation program
C39 Often incremental ERP projects ie BI and CRM require more
rigorous business cases
C40 D Reasons for not using business case metrics
No stakeholder continuity D41
Range of stakeholders D42
Lack of accountability D43
Accountability of business managers and external parties D44
No reliable metrics in business case D45
E Estimated system benefits
Tangible and intangible benefits E46
Business information (BI) systems provide intangible benefits E47
Use of ROI criteria E48
More simple years payback of investment used to assess value E49 Assign responsibility for delivery of benefits E50
Process owners given responsibility E51
Used by consultants to justify their fees E52
Evaluated by pilot project E53
F Reasons for not measuring actual benefits
No benefits estimated in business case F54
Changed business environment F55
Business merged after ERP project F56
Project cancelled or aborted F57
Lack of incentive F58
No measurement method F59
Inadequate accounting system F60
G Delivery of benefits
Responsibility assigned in business case G61 Responsibility assigned later in project lifecycle G62
Timing of benefits delivery G63
Benefits of enabling wider business strategy are aligned with timing and success of business strategy
G64 Benefits of new operational models (ie outsourcing of
business processes) measurable post-implementation
G65 Benefits of urgent cannot do-nothing projects immediate G66 Benefits of compliance projects are immediate ( ie Y2K G67
Causality between project and benefits G68
H Project management success
Implementation plans within business case H69
Effective project management H70
Use of management consultants H71
Multiple consulting firms makes accountability unclear H72 Use of systems integrator to take overall responsibility H73
Project director from business H74
Corporate governance process H75
Stakeholder commitment H76
Business process owners appointed H77
Delivers business success H78
A priori
Different measures of success, budgeted cost, delivery to time and technical parameters
H80
Total cost of ownership (TCO) H81
Change control processes H82
Scalability of pilot project H83
K Objective measures of business success
Delivery of planned benefits in business case K84
Retrospective reviews K85
These reviews often part of overall quality management systems
K86 )n-flight reviews more common than retrospective reviews K87 Fewer lessons now learned as ERP experiences increase K88 L Subjective measures of business success
Project delivered on time L89
No business disruption L90
Used as showcase project L91
Used as basis for software release development L92 Users happier with new system when surveyed L93 Survey reports systems better than legacy systems L94 Seems to have delivered benefits but these were not measured L95
Consultants used for further work L96
Easier to produce business information L97
Project manager promoted L98
Press releases L99
Project promoted by ERP software vendor L100 Table 4–2: Identification of categories from the a priori categories