|
|
Bob McDaniel Tektronix Case September 18, 2003 MIS600-02 Fall 2003 In 1993, Tektronix, Inc. found itself competing internationally in sixty countries, leading the industry worldwide in sales of Oscilloscopes, TV measuring and monitoring equipment, and workgroup color printers. Increasing global competition, declining financial performance, and an aging IT infrastructure that was unable to respond to new customer demands was driving the company to simplify and restructure its operations. Issue #1 – The need to update IT infrastructure and implement an ERP system Tektronix did not assess other ERP solutions and select the best choice for its needs. Instead, the CFO and CIO chose a vendor they had experience with and justified the choice with a short examination of features and suitability measures. Issue #2 – The complexity of implementing an ERP system To implement the ERP system, Tektronix chose to use external consulting to provide implementation expertise not available in-house. As a result, several iterations of contractors were hired, extending both the time and escalating the total implementation costs. The complexity of updating and replacing four hundred and sixty legacy systems and the changing of existing processes, required non-custom or “plain vanilla” approach to implementation and the imposition of standardization. No financial measure of success was established for the project to provide visibility to the success or failure of the project, other than the successful installation of the ERP system. Analysis and Evaluation Issue #1. It is easy to understand, given five previous project failures, why management chose to go with the quick choice of vendors made by senior management. However, given the magnitude of the undertaking and the total investment required, in my opinion it would have wiser for the senior management to take a look at other current ERP offerings, even if they still made the final choice themselves.
|
