Page 31 - DCAP302_ENTERPRISE_RESOURCE_PLANNING

Unit 2: ERP and Related Technology

The Myth of Re-engineering Novelty: Re-engineering, although about familiar concepts, is new in notes
that these concepts are combined in a new synthesis. These key components have never been together
before.
The Myth of the Clean Slate: Regardless of Hammer’s (1990) exhortation, “Don’t automate,
obliterate!” clean slate change is rarely found in practice. Or, as Davenport and Stoddard (1994)
state, A “blank sheet of paper” used in design usually requires a “blank check” for implementation.
Hence, a more affordable approach for most companies is to use Clean Slate Design which
entails a detailed vision for a process without concern for the existing environment. However,
the implementation is done over several phased projects. Also supported by preliminary
findings of Stoddard & Jarvenpaa 1995: their findings ran contrary to Hammer (1990), “although
re-engineering can deliver radical designs, it does not necessarily promise a revolutionary approach
to change. Moreover, a revolutionary change process might not be feasible given the risk and cost
of revolutionary tactics.”

The Myth of Information Systems Leadership: In contrast to the much touted leadership role,
Information Systems (IS) is generally viewed as a partner within a cross- functional team that
is generally headed by a non-IS project leader and a non-IS business sponsor who have better
control over the processes that are being redesigned.
The Myth of Re-engineering vs. Quality: Unlike Hammer & Champy’s (1993) call for all out
“radical change,” most companies have a portfolio of approaches to organizational change
including re-engineering, continuous improvement, incremental approaches, and restructuring
techniques.
The Myth of Top-Down Design: The implementation and execution of the redesigned processes
depends upon those who do the work. Hence, the participation, and more importantly, acceptance
and ownership, at the grass roots level is essential for successful BPR.
The Myth of Re-engineering vs. Transformation: BPR is a process that contributes to
organizational transformation (OT), however it is not synonymous with transformation. OT is
defined as, “Profound, fundamental changes in thought and actions, which create an irreversible
discontinuity in the experience of a system” (Adams 1984). OT is generally about the emergence
of a new belief system and necessarily involves reframing, which is a discontinuous change in
the organization’s or group’s shared meaning or culture. It also involves broad changes in other
organizational dimensions besides the work processes: such as organizational structure, strategy,
and business capabilities.
The Myth of Re-engineering’s Permanence: Davenport & Stoddard (1994) speculate that re-
engineering has peaked in the US in 1994 and would probably become integrated with much
broader organizational phenomena: such as another synthesis of ideas that includes the precepts
of re-engineering; its integration into existing change methods; or its combination with quality
and other process-oriented improvement approaches into an integrated process management
approach.

What is the relation between Bpr & information technology?

Hammer (1990) considers information technology (IT) as the key enabler of BPR which he considers
as “radical change.” He prescribes the use of IT to challenge the assumptions inherent in the work
processes that have existed since long before the advent of modern computer and communications
technology. He argues that at the heart of re-engineering is the notion of “discontinuous
thinking – or recognizing and breaking away from the outdated rules and fundamental
assumptions underlying operations... These rules of work design are based on assumptions about
technology, people, and organizational goals that no longer hold.” He suggests the following
“principles of re-engineering”: (a) Organize around outcomes, not tasks; (b) Have those who use
the output of the process perform the process; (c) Subsume information processing work into the
real work that produces the information; (d) Treat geographically dispersed resources as though

LoveLy professionaL university 25