The management of technology within an enterprise engineering framework

Computers ind. Engng Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 497-51 I, 1995

Pergamon

THE

03~0-~52(~)00205-3

Copyright © 1995 ElsevierScienceLtd Printed in Great Britain. All rights r~erved 0360-8352/95 $9.50+ 0.00

MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGY WITHIN ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING FRAMEWORK

AN

JOSEPH SARKIS,* ADRIEN PRESLEY 2 and DONALD H. LILES 3 ~Department of Information Systems and Management $eiene~, University of Texas at Arlington, Box 19437, Arlington, TX 76019, U.S.A. 2Automation and Robotics Research Institute, University of Texas at Arlington, Box 19045, Arlington, TX 76019, U.S.A. and 3Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019, U.S.A. Aklrlet--Many attempts at implementing Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) technologies are unsuccessful. This paper presents a methodology for the strategic management of technologies such as those involved in CIM. This methodology, entitled the Enterprise Engineering methodology, is based on the premis that technology should only be implemented after the basic foundations are put in place. The methodology is an integrated sociotechnical framework that addresses organizational, cultural, process, and technological issues. To place the methodology in focus, the paper first presents an overview of the current manufacturing environment. The methodology is then discussed in depth. The development and implementation experiences with the methodology are also presented.

I. INTRODUCTION

The manufacturing and operations function has gained much attention from manufacturers and researchers in the last couple of decades. Much of this is due to increasing international competition and the perceived lack of domestic manufacturing industry progress. In addition, a number of external and internal manufacturing enterprise factors have caused management to reconsider the way their enterprises are functioning. A summary of these environmental factors includes [1-3]: (i) shortening product life cycles--products appear and disappear from the market at a more rapid pace; (ii) changing customer expectations--customers needs are to be satisfied much more rapidly, with customer expectations having evolved from commodity based product requirements to those that are more complex and customized with higher quality and service expectations; (iii) evolving fields of competition--competition has gone from regionalized domestic competition where rules and regulations are relatively consistent for enterprises to one where global competition occurs for all levels of enterprises (in terms of size and location on the value chain); (iv) changing focus--the focus for improvements and corporate structure is evolving from exclusively a product and task (functional) orientation to one of process and customer orientation; (v) redefinition of competitive relationships---cooperation and alliance formation among various enterprises (vertical enterprise integration) is more commonplace, thus meeting customer needs includes both external and internal customers. To address these and other evolving competitive issues a number of enterprise characteristics and supporting tools and philosophies have been identified and introduced by practitioners and researchers. The first section of this paper will be devoted to a brief review and discussion relating to these characteristics, tools and philosophies, with emphasis on computer integrated manufacturing enterprises. The relationship of these factors to an enterprise's competitive and strategic direction will also be discussed within a larger framework called the Enterprise Engineering (EE) framework. The discussion will include, among other issues, the need for development and integration of a corporate strategic plan with a manufacturing strategy, cultural change, enterprise 497

498

Joseph Sarkis et al.

improvement and, technology development and deployment issues. The paper will identify emerging managerial issues and research implications for the advanced manufacturing/high technology computer integrated enterprise. 2. BACKGROUND

To compete in a globally competitive manufacturing environment, a number of dimensions must be addressed in the manufacturing and technology strategy. Manufacturing strategy and its dimensions has been defined in a number of ways (Table 1). A number of common elements exist among them. One that is most prevalent is determination of the type of technology the company should pursue. These manufacturing strategy elements show that there is a strong linkage between the manufacturing strategy and the technology strategy of an enterprise. Additionally, Table 2 provides a comprehensive, but non-exhaustive, list of objectives and criteria that a manufacturing enterprise needs to consider in measuring progress of these manufacturing strategies for current and future manufacturing environments. These strategic initiatives are well covered in the literature, see [4-6, 2]. These objectives and strategies can be supported by a number of technological (hardware, software, and organizational) developments. These developments include computer integrated manufacturing (CIM) [or computer integrated enterprise (CIE)] environments as a fundamental framework for a manufacturing enterprise. Many of these integrative (systems) technological tools are currently available to help manufacturers achieve objectives facing these emerging strategic initiatives. However, U.S. manufacturers, large and small, have been painfully slow to adopt and take advantage of these technologies, especially integrated programmable automation [6, 7]. A number of reasons for this have been posited, including inadequate planning, justification, implementation and maintenance of these technologies. The lack of adoption of these technologies can not be addressed on only one dimension. Due to the pervasive implications of these advanced and programmable technologies, these issues must be considered from the larger scope of a systemic, holistic view of the enterprise. Organizational factors are a principal reason for the success or failure in the adoption and implementation of integrated technologies. Table 3 lists several of these organizational factors which must be considered for successful adoption and implementation [8-14]. It is critical to their success that technology management of these types of technology be considered from a strategic perspective, not simply one that is operational [15-18]. To help in addressing these issues, a systems approach has been developed and is presented below. 3. THE ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING FRAMEWORK

The EE framework affects the performance of an enterprise through a general systems approach to improvement of processes and deployment of appropriate technologies within an organization. The level of improvement within the EE framework not only focuses on continuous improvements but also the incorporation of radically different and innovative processes and technology into an organization. Four major elements that form the foundation of the EE framework are identified in Fig. i. The heart of this process and the focus of this paper will be on the EE methodology element. The EE methodology's goal is the improvement of enterprise performance. The EE methodology transforms current enterprise performance into a desired level of performance. The supporting elements for this methodology include management commitment and vision, an enterprise reference architecture, and a supporting set of tools for design and analysis. The commitment and vision of upper level management guides the EE methodology. It is this vision which provides the context and direction for the methodology. It has been found that for successful enterprise-wide improvement efforts, strong support from upper management must be present [16, 19]. The presence of an enterprise reference architecture aids an enterprise in its ability to understand its structure and processes. Similar to a computer architecture, the enterprise architecture is comprised of several views. The enterprise architecture should provide activity, organizational, business rule (information), resource, and process views of an organization. These views should be cross referenced with each other to provide an integrated picture of the enterprise. The activity

Enlerprise Engineering

~

~,

499

..

m iii

.-

.,=

~.

~

~

.~

~

~, -

,,~

~:~a. g 8e.~l

o ._~

6

~

.6g-.8"~"

- ~ -~i

~.o "

~ :~~

& o 0

~

=~ 8

!~-

~:~ ~'~.~

.=.=~~ °~ 0~

¢

~

;6 ....

500

Joseph Sarkis et al. Table 3. Organizational critical success factors for adoption and implementation of integrated technology Top management support User involvement in design and implementation Links with suppliers and vendors Overcoming resistance to change Presence of project champion User training Manager-project relationships and communications Project team composition (cross functional) Project team's understanding of importance of implementation Pace of implementation Presence of technical personnel Management of the organizational learning process Project planning Willingness of management to make organizational and managerial changes

view defines the functions performed by the enterprise. The process view outlines the temporally sequenced steps that form the processes utilized by the enterprise to achieve its objectives. The organizational view details how the enterprise organizes its personnel and reporting structure. The business rule view defines the entities (and information about the entities) managed by the enterprise and the rules governing the relationships between the entities. It is equivalent to an information view. The resource view details the resources managed by the enterprise. Enterprise architectures can also be viewed at various levels of abstraction including generic (applicable to all enterprises), partial (applicable to a particular industry segment) and particular (a specific enterprise) levels. A number of reference (generic/industry level) enterprise architectures to aid the EE framework currently exist [see 20-26]. The reference architectures can serve as "To-Be" models, whereupon, the specific enterprise views would need to be documented by the individual enterprise. 4. THE ENTERPRISE E N G I N E E R I N G METHODOLOGY

This section describes the final and central component of the EE framework, a methodology that addresses the issues of the deployment and management of integrated enterprise technology into a manufacturing enterprise. This EE methodology is an integrated sociotechnical framework based on field and literature research. The EE methodology provides a pervasive systemic top-down approach to technology management in an enterprise. It integrates technical, organizational, and operational aspects of technology into a comprehensive model for technology management. The methodology provides for the development and management of an enterprise's human resources, processes, and technology under the guidance of a strategic plan. It recognizes that the skill and expertise of an enterprise's workers are its most valuable resource and the one which ultimately provides it with the greatest competitive advantage. Central to the development of this methodology is the principle that technologies such as

~

and tment

)

(

EnterDrl~Reference Architecture

Tools oi' Analysis

"~

Fig. I. Elements of the Enterprise Engineering Framework.

Enterprise Engineering

501

integrated computer systems should only be implemented to support processes which have been improved and integrated by empowered employees under the guidance of a well defined and articulated corporate vision. In this model, computers and automation become tools for the achievement of enterprise goals, not ends in and of themselves. The model describes the integrated stages necessary to accomplish this systemic implementation of technology. The management of integrated enterprise technology can not always be viewed from the traditionally myopic viewpoint. Specifically, technology has often been introduced through a bottom-up path with a focus on improvement of operations in a single department without consideration of the context of its relationship to the rest of the enterprise. This approach has usually led to islands of technological excellence focusing on locally optimal technological solutions. Problems also arise when technology is introduced for the sake of technology as well as the radical introduction of technology in areas where the processes and culture are not readily able to handle such technology. These issues, among others, have led to a failure to adopt, justify and implement strategic enterprise wide technology. The motivation for the EE methodology was a direct result of field experiences and research in assisting companies in integrating computer technologies. Most of these companies were small manufacturers; however, similar experiences were experienced at larger companies. The EE methodology was developed as part of a technical assistance program to help small and medium sized companies become more competitive. Initial plans consisted of assisting manufacturing enterprises in implementing specific technologies (shop floor systems, information systems, etc.). In many cases, it was found that these companies did not have in place the fundamentals necessary for successful implementation. Selection of technologies was usually haphazard, with no guiding plan in place. Selection was made without a comprehensive understanding of the organizational, cultural, and process changes required. Common field observations included hardware and software whose implementation failed due to factors such as: the system was too complicated for the personnel to use, organizational barriers preventing widespread acceptance, incompatibility with the companies processes and procedures, and lack or incomplete understanding of the requirements to be met. Because of these difficulties, it was decided that a methodology to help companies conduct the implementation and management of computer and other technologies was needed. The EE methodology is modeled using IDEF0. IDEF0 is a functional systems modeling tool that was developed through the Air Force's Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing (ICAM) program. IDEF stands for ICAM DEFinition. IDEF0 is used to represent the functional (i.e. activity or process oriented) framework of a system. There are five elements to the IDEF 0 functional model: the activity (or process) is represented by boxes; inputs are represented by the arrows flowing into the left hand side of an activity box; outputs are represented by arrows flowing out the right hand side of an activity box; the arrows flowing into the top portion of the box represent constraints or controls on the activities; and the final element represented by arrows flowing into the bottom of the activity box are the mechanisms that carried out the activity. The inputs, control, output and mechanism arrows are also defined as ICOM's. Another characteristic of the IDEF0 modeling technique is that each activity and the ICOM's can be decomposed (or exploded) into more detailed levels of analysis. These characteristics will be evident in the graphical description of the EE methodology (for example, see Fig. 2). The development of the EE methodology was accomplished through a thorough review of the literature, field observation of good practices and reader-writer cycle with industry experts from consulting firms and large enterprises [27]. The IDEF model was created incrementally with each part of the model being described in more and more detail. As parts of the model were completed, they were sent to the experts for comment. The methodology was then validated at several small manufacturing enterprises. Even though this model may not provide many surprises, its relatively rigorous development process helps to validate its role as an enterprise improvement methodology. More details about the application of the EE methodology are presented below.

4.1. Phases of the Enterprise Engineering methodology This section discusses the phases and components of the EE methodology. The high level

502

Joseph Sarkis et al. Etwlm~mlnl

s~t~

Strategy A1

Vh~n

_ ~ F.xl=lngBum

Com'Team

Frccn Cu~n~tSupl~lV Proc~m,,

Plane

Technology Plans ..~

l/Solutk~ ~FiSyet~' NKIback t Feedback ToCumomert/ IbSUpl ~enVPro~me ~"~i Ii0,

~

~41

ImpklnlenlldItolullonl

M~age~nt Fig. 2. High level functional model of Enterprise Engineering methodology.

diagram of the EE methodology is represented in Fig. 2. Four major integrated activities define the EE methodology. These activities are: A I. A2. A3. A4.

Develop Vision & Strategy Change Culture Integrate & Improve the Enterprise Develop Technology Solutions.

Each of these activities and their linkages are described in more detail within the remaining sections. Each section will initially discuss the general activity followed by a discussion of factors specifically related to the management of technology. Because the focus of this paper is on the management of computer integrated enterprise technology, the last activity (A4) is given special emphasis by being decomposed into an additional level of detail. The fully decomposed set of activities are shown in Table 4.

4.2. Develop Vision and Strategy The EE methodology is executed under the guidance of a strategic plan. Management's vision of the future is the common goal towards which all personnel in the enterprise direct their efforts. In a strategic management framework, processes and technologies must be consistent with and support the enterprise's strategic plans. Therefore, the development of any plan for technology must begin with upper management's development of the company's strategic plan. The strategic plan is a comprehensive planning document detailing where the enterprise wants to go and how it plans to get there. As seen in Fig. 2, a key input into this activity is the motivation to change. This motivation must come from top management. The changing competitive environment discussed earlier is a key driver for this motivation. In this environment, companies which do not respond to these changes encounter a higher probability of failure. The primary outputs of the activity are the strategic plan itself, along with a core team of individuals identified to lead and facilitate the change. The plan is composed of several integrated elements. At the highest level is the vision, a clear and concise statement which defines the organizational aspirations. A well defined and articulated vision provides the organization with a common sense of purpose. The vision should meet certain criteria. It must focus on strategic advantages---those things which distinguish an organization from others. It must inspire and empower employees to meet the vision. Finally, it must be clear enough

Enterprise Engineering

503

to be used as a decision making criteria. Supporting the vision are a set of objectives. The objectives are an extension of the vision but are focused on specific areas the company considers to be vital to the competitive well being of the enterprise. Once the vision and objectives are clear, management must determine the strategies which will be used to meet the vision and objectives. Strategy provides an integrated means towards achieving corporate objectives. This strategy development process follows the SWOT-MOSP approach for strategy deployment. The SWOT-MOSP model consists of the following elements: organizational assessment of strengths and weaknesses in light of environmental opportunities and threats (SWOT), development and reliance on a shared sense of basic identity and mission to inform the choice of a few overarching objectives, formulation of a strategy to define activities to achieve the objectives, and operationalization of these principles in a set of policies (MOSP). Major functional strategies identified in the literature include marketing, finance, human resource, engineering, manufacturing, and information systems strategies. While functional strategies are developed to support business level strategies, consideration of the capabilities that an organization has in each of its functional areas is a critical aspect of strategy formulation. A company's position and capabilities in regard to automation and technology may serve as a competitive advantage which must be exploited. The roles of each of the functional strategies should fit within the overall corporate strategy of the firm. That is, the functional strategies should be integrated such that conflicting strategies among the functions and with the overall corporate strategy are reduced or eliminated. Since we are primarily concerned with manufacturing enterprises, we shall look more closely at the elements of manufacturing strategy and technology. Two major types of technology, process and product technologies, are areas in which an organization needs to focus its expertise. Most firms have traditionally understood and considered the role that new products have in competitiveness. Process technology is considered neutral, at best, and usually relegated to operational decisions. Process technology can offer much to support a company's strategy. To properly support the strategy, however, decisions made about process technologies must be consistent with the strategy. The basic problem is that most decisions, particularly those in manufacturing, require trade-offs among various criteria. All too often the trade-offs are internally inconsistent to corporate strategy. Within the EE methodology context for technology management, four additional strategies, each of which may be linked to the functional strategies, are seen as being especially important. An Table 4. Full decomposition of activities within the Enterprise Engineering methodology A1 DEVELOP VISION AND STRATEGY AII Develop Vision A I 2 Develop Enterprise Engineering Strategy AI 3 Develop Business Strategy AI4 Organize for Improvement A2 CHANGE CULTURE A21 Evaluate and Assess Existing Culture A22 Facilitate and Commit to Improved Communication A23 Share and Sell the Vision A24 Build Trust A25 Empower People A3 INTEGRATE AND IMPROVE THE ENTERPRISE A31 Understand the Customer A311 Identify and Classify Customers A312 Determine Customer Needs A313 Evaluate Customer Satisfaction A314 Evaluate Competitors A315 Set Goals for Future Levels of Service A32 Understand the Product A321 Identify Products Provided to Customers A322 Understand and Improve Product A323 Translate Product Characteristics into Process Specifications A33 Understand and Improve the Process A331 Bound Process and Identify Relationships A332 Document and Evaluate Process A333 Simplify. Stabilize, and Improve Process A34 Design and Implement Effective Controls A341 Identify and Simplify Feedback Paths A342 Design and Develop Required Feedback Mechanisms A343 Implement Feedback Mechanisms

A4 DEVELOP TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS A41 Understand the Needs A411 Assess System Performance A412 Model and Analyze Areas of Impact A413 Formulate System Requi~*ments A414 Plan Project A42 Design the System/Solution A421 Generate Conceptual Design A422 Generate Detailed Design A423 Construct and Evaluate Prototypes A424 Plan System Conversion A425 Review Detailed Design A43 Construct System/Solution Modules A431 Build (Acquire) Modules A432 Integrate, Test, and Validate Modules A433 Develop Procedures and Documentation A434 Develop Training Program A44 Implement the System/Solution A441 Integrate Modules into Operational Elements A442 Conduct Training A443 Test for Acceptance A444 Review Implemented System

504

Joseph Sarkis et al.

organizational strategy supports the Develop Vision and Strategy activity by putting into place the organization necessary for the enterprise to succeed. A culture change strategy supports the need for the kinds of cultural change required for a company to remain successful. To remain competitive, the enterprise must continually evaluate and improve the processes it uses to produce the products which satisfy customer requirements. This activity is supported by an enterprise improvement and integration strategy. A technology strategy helps ensure the orderly and prudent implementation of technology. To use technology for competitive advantage in any industry, companies must be explicit about the role of technology in their strategies. Being explicit requires answering 4 basic questions: !. 2. 3. 4.

What forms the basis of competition? Which technologies must be mastered in order to compete? How competitive is the company in these technologies? What is the firm's technology strategy?

4.3. Change Culture

The goal of cultural change is to put in place an organizational structure and workplace consisting of an innovative, flexible, and highly motivated, committed work force supported by a dynamic, high performance, high commitment corporate culture. In order to effectively change the corporate culture and for effective technology implementation, it is necessary that management practices and policies, and organizational structure change to achieve the desired outcomes. Corporate cultures can be observed in the formal and informal organizational structures and in a multitude of managerial practices. Elements of organizational structures that support the corporate culture include: lines of responsibility and authority, reporting structure, skill levels, attitudes toward teamwork, communication patterns, information flows, job definitions, and leadership and management styles. Management practices that support corporate culture will need to be identified throughout the organization. Some of the most significant are: activity definitions, control systems, job descriptions, policies and procedures, responsibility distribution, authority and accountability structure, and measurement and reward systems. As can be seen in Fig. 2, the Change Culture activity is controlled by elements of the strategic plan relating to human resources and cultural change. This activity seeks to transform the existing culture, management practices, and organizational structures of the enterprise so that the changes required for EE can occur. Many of the "organizational" technologies, such as total quality management and concurrent engineering, should initially be considered for evaluation and implementation at this stage. The primary outputs of this activity are a changed culture with supporting management practices and organizational structures, and an empowered workforce. As the model illustrates, it is this empowered workforce which becomes the mechanism ensuring the successful implementation of process changes and supporting technologies. Human and organizational factors must be taken into account for the successful implementation of integrated computer technologies. Human integrated manufacturing, in which computers are used as tools to complement human skills, flexibility and creativity is an integral part of technology implementation. Implementation of technology without integration of humans into the system will lead to failure. Organizational issues make management involvement and commitment a must. At operational levels, the implementation of these technologies require highly skilled and committed workers. For example, shop floor implementations must involve production managers, supervisors and operators, who may be more aware of operational activities than middle and upper level managers and staff. One of the most important characteristics for successful adoption of programmable and advanced technology is the presence of a "champion" for the technology. Credibility and commitment of the project champion are important characteristics of successful technology adoption. This implies that organizational and cultural aspects of the enterprise play a large role (if not the most important role) in the adoption of integrated enterprise technology. Additionally, the implementation of new technologies, especially technologies which require the integration of several organizational functions, require that the proper organizational culture and infrastructure be in place. Internal customer/supplier relationships must be fully understood in

Enterprise Engineering

505

order to ensure effective communications and cooperation. New skills, knowledge, forms and locations of decision making, and new reporting and accountability relationships must be in place for the successful implementation of integrated technologies.

4.4. Integrate and Improve Enterprise Processes are the means by which an enterprise accomplishes its mission. Technologies are implemented to make the enterprise's processes operate more effectively and efficiently. For an enterprise to fully realize the benefits of any technology, it must be applied to organizational processes which have been imported and integrated into the enterprise's overall network of processes. Otherwise, the results are likely to be the case where the enterprise does the wrong thing faster or produces the wrong output more efficiently. This is why the model stresses the importance of process improvement prior to technology implementation. Inputs into this activity are existing processes and feedback or information concerning the performance of the process. The primary output is a set of process improvements. The four main activities to accomplish the simplification, integration, and improvement of the enterprise are: Understand the Customer, Understand the Product, Understand & Improve the Process, and Design & Implement Effective Controls. They are similar to the steps commonly used for integrating customer requirements into product design. It is at this stage that business process reengineering, continuous improvement, and other process improvement efforts are accomplished. In the Understand the Customer subactivity, the enterprise must identify the customer set, determine the needs of these customers, evaluate the enterprise's ability to satisfy the customer needs, and set goals for future levels of service. A major output of this activity is a list of product requirements which need to fulfil the needs of the customer. In the Understand the Product subactivity, customer requirements are used to define a set of process requirements needed to produce the desired product features. This transformation process consists of three activities. The products provided to the customer is first identified. The product is then improved by developing new product features and characteristics that better meet the needs of the customer. These product characteristics need to be transformed into a corresponding set of process requirements which define how these product characteristics will be produced. The Understand & Improve the Process function develops or improves the processes used by the enterprise to produce the products needed by its customers. The primary output of this function will be process improvements and an associated set of process performance measures which specify how the process is expected to behave. However, the feedback loop from the Develop Technology Solutions activity to the Integrate and Improve Enterprise activity show the close interaction of these two activities. Process improvement can be brought about using one of two approaches, each with a different technology and automation focus. In what is commonly known as continuous improvement, process re-engineering or process redesign, the current process is improved by attempting to eliminate non-value adding activities while maintaining or improving the efficiency or effectiveness of the process. Technology may be applied at this stage to further improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and adaptability of the process. While technology and automation capabilities are considered, the primary focus is still on improving the current process. A second approach is becoming increasingly common. In this approach, commonly referred to as process innovation, the current way of doing things is ignored. The old processes are essentially ignored, with the design of the new system based on consideration of automation and information technology available. The new process is then designed to exploit these capabilities. Within the EE methodology, both approaches are valid. The approach used for a particular project at an enterprise will depend on several factors including the capabilities of the enterprise, the importance of the project, the time available for the project, expected benefits, and risk allowed. In general, innovation approaches have the greatest potential for improvements but require a higher level of skill and knowledge, take longer, cost more, and are associated with higher risk. The Design & Implement Effective Controls function is required to ensure that the process of understanding customers, products, and processes has been and will remain effective. The output of this function is feedback information which is sent to the other functions within the Integrate & Improve Enterprise activity. Technology needs and plans should also be developed within this activity. The technology needs

506

Joseph Sarkis et al. Culture

Plenl

E ~ t

Technology Needs System Specs & Test Plan

~:ur°~ rss

ntat~on St-,tus Updsles, & Documlntat~n

~.i T carl Oilcrapencles

~/~ II Integrated Modules I

lIthe i " ~Smy s~t e nIV l ~ . ~ Solution

A441

~ Iml~emen~d Solutions

Empo~red People

Fig. 3. Functional model for phases in developing technology solutions.

are used in the Develop Technology Solutions activity to define and develop systems which are required to support and enhance the redesigned processes. A technology plan is also generated which will be used to justify the adoption of technology solutions.

4.5. Develop Technology Solutions This section details the activities involved in the selection, design, and implementation of technology solutions. This activity can be decomposed into four major functional phases (diagrammed in Fig. 3): A41. A42. A43. A44.

Understand the Needs Design the System/Solution Construct System/Solution Modules Implement the System/Solution.

The successful development of technology, especially integrated technologies, requires the coordinated efforts of a multidisciplinary and multifunctional team. The use of a multifunctional team also reduces the organizational (political) barriers by making all departments and functions aware of the consequences of advanced technology implementation. The major mechanism to accomplish this activity is a multifunctional team (empowered people as output from the Change Culture activity). 4.5.1. Understand the Needs. This activity is shown as the first box in Fig. 3. As can be seen, a major requirement at this step is the transformation of defined technology needs from the Integrate and Improve Enterprise activity into specific solution requirements to conform with higher level strategies. A technology plan developed as part of the strategic planning process should guide this activity. Once the needs are reviewed, alternative solutions and configurations in the form of system requirements should be formulated, assessed, and approved for design. A transition or project management plan is an output at this stage and guides the selection and transformation of the chosen design into a workable solution during construction and implementation where it will be tested, reviewed, and evaluated. High level system models are constructed which address the needs. Understanding the needs is accomplished by identifying the system from an AS-IS definition of the type of system presently

Enterprise Engineering

507

in operation and the level of present performance, a SHOULD-BE definition of the potential performance of the system, and a TO-BE definition of what the new system is desired to provide in terms of operations and outputs. These definitional models become the source document for the system requirements for each area of opportunity. A feasibility study needs to be undertaken prioritizing the potential technological solutions. The end product is a comprehensive document of system requirements and system boundaries. The models that are utilized at these stages should clearly incorporate the strategic direction and dimensions of the enterprise. In addition to defining the system requirements, a project plan detailing how the technology will be implemented and integrated into the enterprise must be formulated. Key tasks, responsibilities, and interdependencies should be defined. These are based on the system boundaries and requirements. The business plan along with specific policies drive the project management effort to prepare an outline of specific tasks, milestones, task duration, timing, and resource allocation that drives the solution development effort. 4.5.2. Design the System/Solution. Alternative conceptual designs depicting logical and physical system component configurations are generated from the system requirements. The alternative conceptual designs need to be analyzed for cost, risk, and performance. The tools that may be utilized at this phase include the many analytical and simulation design tools that were identified earlier. Many of the research models in design and development of advanced manufacturing technology can be used at this phase of the EE methodology. Even though there is much research in this area, consideration of organizational and cultural dimensions is limited. Most of the models rely on easily quantifiable performance measures. Other measures that need to be considered in the detailed design include cultural changes, external and internal configuration, user/customer/supplier interfaces, and the test plan. It is strongly recommended that whatever system is to be designed should consider the technological life cycle of the system. A transition plan detailing how the system will be implemented and integrated into the enterprise needs to be formulated. This transition plan will need to identify integration requirements with current legacy systems. In addition, organizational and cultural issues brought to light during the Change Culture activity should be addressed within this stage. There are essentially two levels of design determination that exist in most technological selection considerations. The first level is the type of technology that will be pursued and than among them the type of operational equipment that will be implemented. The use of evaluation and justification models play an important role at both these levels. 4.5.3. Construct System~Solution Modules. The detailed design and evaluation is transformed through construction or acquisition into untested modules that are logically combined with the necessary interfaces and validated for specification conformance. The solution procedures and documentation development can be initiated prior to construction, where final solution procedure and documentation packets are produced near the end of the project depending on the amount of updates foreseen. The training program needs to be designed to allow progressive learning about the goals and objectives of the solution, as well as procedural and cultural changes. Procedures, documentation and training should be updated from implementation feedback. Failure to consider training, cultural, and organizational issues in the design and development of technology solutions has been a major cause of failure of these technologies to reach their full potential. 4.5.4. Implement the System/Solution. This activity includes the tasks necessary to bring the system from design to an actual working system. Installation and implementation are both addressed here. Installation is the physical placement of a technology into the organization while implementation is the process of taking a technology and making it operate in the actual business environment. Installation success does not necessarily lead to implementation success. Success of implementation manifests itself in two elements: technical success and realization of benefits. Several factors are critical for implementation success. These factors can generally be categorized as being economic, technical, and organizational. Economic factors refer to the availability of resources for the implementation. Acquisition of many new technologies require large outlays of resources which may strain the financial position of an enterprise. Additionally, the implementation process itself often require resources for training, conversion, etc. All of these require adequate planning and budgeting to be in place. Technical factors include the alignment of the technology.

508

Joseph Sarkis et al.

As we have mentioned throughout our EE methodology, organizational factors are the major reason for success or failure in the implementation of integrated technologies. Tested modules are brought on-line in the operational environment according to the transition plan. All personnel affected by the solution are trained to understand the concepts, requirements, performance measurements, and operation. Included in the implementation are the organizational changes which are required. Acceptance testing is the "final test" for the solution modules with the trained personnel operating the system. Acceptance sign-off indicates an implemented system and the beginning of maintenance. Once the solution is implemented, a developmental recap is conducted to summarize the development effort. A post-implementation review conducted 4-6 months after implementation will determine whether the solution has achieved and maintained its objectives and projected benefits. The review information on the solution's performance is forwarded to management and evaluated against the business plan. A number of implementation strategies exist, including phased, "crash", or pilot implementations. For integrated computer automation technologies, their complexity and pervasiveness tend to favor an incremental or phased implementation. 5. IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCES

To date the EE Methodology has been applied at over twenty small and medium sized manufacturers. The actual implementation is accomplished through a program in which the company management and personnel are facilitated through the steps of the methodology in a series of workshops and one-on-one sessions. Field experience confirmed the initial premise that most small companies had neither the organizational nor process fundamentals required to implement computerized technology. As a consequence, the majority of the companies assisted are provided assistance in improving cultural and organizational issues and in documenting, designing, and implementing improved processes. The Develop Vision and Strategy, Change Culture, and Integrate & Improve the Enterprise activities have become the focus of the assistance program. It has been found that the preparation for automation, that is, putting in place fundamentals for organization, culture, and processes, can provide substantial tangible benefits for the companies. While most companies are still working on pre-implementation fundamentals, some have actually undertaken technology and computer system implementation. Even these companies did so only after spending much time and effort in the first three activities. One company which implemented technology using this methodology was a small metal fabricator and distributor. The company had previously attempted to implement an off the shelf order processing and inventory control system. Due to incompatibilities with the procedures and personnel of the firm, the system was abandoned. Working under the guidance of the methodology, the company was provided assistance as it first analyzed and improved the current order processing activity. A technology plan was developed outlining the primary mission of technology at the company and its commitment to technological innovation. An analysis of company data was undertaken and a global data model created. Based on this analysis, a relational database system with applications for order processing was developed and delivered. The database has the flexibility to grow with the company while meeting current needs. Other examples of technologies include the implementation of cellular manufacturing and implementation of advanced manufacturing equipment. 6. EMERGING ISSUES 1N THE MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGY AND ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING

What we have discussed so far is an EE methodology that has focused on the management of technology solutions and their linkage to other EE efforts. In this section we summarize some of the pertinent issues presented within the manuscript as well as introduce other issues that need to be focused upon to advance this field of study. The management of technology (MOT) is an emergent field of study. Traditionally, it has fallen in the realm of diverse established fields such as organizational behavior, information systems, mechanical engineering, sociology, industrial engineering and the management sciences. In the research literature a question on whether MOT will become its own field of study (or science) or whether it should remain as an element in the more established fields.

Ent¢rpris¢ Engin¢¢ring

509

There are two obstacles that MOT must overcome for it to become an established field of study. First, the problem is the lack of definitions (definitional dissensus) in the area of innovation (MOT) research. Scholars have been unable to come to an agreement as to the definitions of innovation, how technological and organizational innovations differ, or how to generate a list of innovations. It has also been noted that the measures that are to be used in this field lack demonstrated reliability and validity. A second major obstacle deals with the lack of a paradigm characterizing MOT. Without a paradigm there is a question as to whether MOT can advance theoretically, and similar to the natural sciences, scientific advance cannot take place without a paradigm [28]. Another concern is that research in the social (cultural) impact of programmable technology within the manufacturing field has limited usefulness and is sometimes contradictory. The two reasons given for this are that the research and studies in these areas have focused on description rather than explanation and the studies have been too simplistic and general. That is, the research in this area has been on a listing of observations and the theory has not been developed to support these observations. The studies also assume simple linkages between characteristics of the organizational environment and the technology. A need exists for explanatory research focusing on the inclusion of human, social and organizational factors and their relationship to deployment of integrated technology [29]. The lack of cultural performance measures that can be utilized within analytical models is a barrier to inclusion of cultural and other intangible factors in pervasive design methodologies for integrated computer controlled technology. This is also true for justification processes, where quantifiable measures have been utilized and organizational, cultural and other intangible dimensions have been neglected. These performance measurement issues extend to the need for development of relationships of external to internal performance measures and relationships among intra-organizational levels. Enterprise, simulation and analytical models, that can focus on transitory periods, to help design, develop and implement integrated technology are also required. For example, what models and tools can provide insights for hybrid environments that typically exist within this transitory period? The issue of business process reengineering has to also be addressed. Dctcrmination of when radical process innovation is most appropriate when compared to continuous improvement evolutionary process innovation needs to be addressed. There is a need for models that will help to determine when the most opportune environment exists to pursue onc strategy vcrsus another. From an integrated computer technology perspective, the research needs to relate the impact of changes in processes at one level (e.g. inter-organizational) to other levels (inter-personal/ functional). There arc a number of reference models, architectures, and frameworks that exist for business processes (these may be defined as business process "templates"). They exist as both actual practical applications and as research models. The use of these business process reference models need to be studied and validated. While millions of dollars and an innumerable number of hours has been spent on developing and implementing these templates, few researchers have looked at the effectiveness, validity, and usefulness of these tools in the improvement of business processes. From a support and operational performance perspective, there is a need for cost management and accounting systems research. The standard cost management approaches and systems have been a detriment to the adoption and implementation of integrated enterprise technology. Cost management systems currently play a large role in the manufacturing and technology area, but little research has focused on development and integration of these systems within the integrated strategically oriented manufacturing technologies. Additionally, the emergent role of these systems needs to be studied from the perspective of business process reenginccring. As a final issue, the role of post-implementation auditing has to be addressed by both practitioners and researchers. The lack of models for post-auditing can be related to the lack of appropriate performance measures and organizational practices that may exclude audits duc to political and time considerations. Clearly, the lack of audits and auditing practice and the relationship of future implementation success of integrated enterprise technology needs to be researched. CAIE 2gi3~G

510

Joseph Sarkis et al. 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this paper we have described an environment and strategies that manufacturing enterprises will imminently face. This environment will make these enterprises reliant on integration of integrative computer based technologies to remain competitive. An EE framework developed and supported through field research to help in the management and introduction of these technologies for enterprise improvement was presented. At the heart of this framework is a general systems based EE methodology. This integrated framework links technology management into an overall enterprise management scheme, including explicit consideration of corporate strategy, cultural requirements and process improvements. The steps for the successful implementation of integrated enterprise technology are simplification and improvement of an enterprise's processes, integration of these processes, and finally automation. These activities need to be guided by the strategic plans and objectives of an enterprise. We have also identified a number of issues that need to be addressed by both practitioners and researchers that will greatly impact the development of the EE and the management of technology field. Acknowledgements--This work was supported in part by funding from the U.S. Small Business Administration and the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program (No. 003656-078). REFERENCES 1. M. L. Ebner and T. E. Vollmann. Manufacturing systems for the 1990's. In Intelligent Manufacturing (Edited by M. D. Oliff). The Benjamin Cummings Publishing Co., Menlo Park, N.J. (1988). 2. lacocca Institute. 21st Century Manufacturing Enterprise Strategy, Vols I & 2. Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pa (1991). 3. H. Noori. Managing the Dynamics of New Technology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1990). 4. L. S. Flaig. Integrative Manufacturing. Business One Irwin, Homewood, III. (1993). 5. S. L. Goldman and R. N. Nagel. Management, technology and agility: the emergence of a new era in manufacturing. Int. J. Technol. Mgmt g, 18-38 (1993). 6. R. H. Hayes and R. Jakumar. Manufacturing crises: new technologies, obsolete organizations. Harvard Business Rev. 66, 77-85 (1988). 7. J. Sarkis. The evolution of strategic justification of advanced manufacturing systems. In Economic and Financial Justification of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies (Edited by H. R. Parsaei). Springer, Berlin (1992). 8. D. Leonard-Barton. Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Research Policy 17, 251-267 (1988). 9. J. R. Meredith. The implementation of computer based systems. J. Opns Mgmt 2, 11-21 (1981). 10. J. H. Mize. Success factors for advanced manufacturing systems. In Success Factors for Implementation of Change: A Management Perspective (Edited by K. M. Blacke). Society of Manufacturing Engineers, Dearborn, Mich. (1988). 1I. A. B. Shani, R. M. Grant, R. Krishnan and E. Thompson. Advanced manufacturing systems and organizational choice: sociotechnical approach. California Mgmt Rev. 34, 91-111 (1992). 12. S. J. Udoka and J. W. Nazemetz. An empirically based analysis of the requirements for successful implementation of advanced manufacturing technology (AMT). Comput. ind. Engng 19, 131-135 (1990). 13. C. A. Voss. Implementation: a key issue in manufacturing technology: the need for a field of study. Research Policy 17, 55-63 (1988). 14. C. A. Voss. Success and failure in advanced manufacturing technology. Int. J. Technol. Mgmt 3, 285-297 (1988). 15. P. S. Adler. Managing flexible automation. California Mgmt Rev. 30, 34-55 (1988). 16. J. Bessant. The lessons of failure: learning to manage new manufacturing technology. Int. J. Technol. Mgmt 8, 197-215 (1993). 17. S. C. Fleming. Using technology for competitive advantage. Res. Technol. Mgmt 34, 38-41 (1991). 18. J. Teresko. CIM: not technology, but the management of technology. Industry Week/,40, 57-60 (1990). 19. P. Weill, D. A. Samson and A. S. Sohal. Advanced manufacturing technology: an analysis of practice. Int. J. Technol. Mint 6, 335-353 (1991). 20. Automation & Robotics Research Institute. Operate a Small Manufacturing Enterprise. Technical Report, Automation & Robotics Research Institute, Fort Worth, Tex. (1990). 21. Automation & Robotics Research Institute. A Consensus Process Model for Small Manufacturers, an IDEF3 model. Technical Report, Automation & Robotics Research Institute, Fort Worth, Tex. (1991). 22. C. F. Bloodgood and R. M. Thacker. A computer-integrated enterprise information strategy. The Executive Journal 44-48 (1989). 23. CAM-I. Computer Integrated Manufacturing: Guidelines & Methodologies. CAM-I, Inc. (1990). 24. ESPRIT Consortium AMICE. Open Systems Architecture for CIM. Springer, Berlin (1989). 25. National Center for Manufacturing Sciences. Strawman Enterprise Reference Model. National Center for Manufacturing Sciences, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1992). 26. C. M. Savage. Fifth GeneratDn Management: Integrating Enterprises Through Human Networking. Digital Press, Bedford, Mass. (1990). 27. Automation & Robotics Research Institute. Perform Continuous Enterprise Improvement. Technical Report, Automation & Robotics Research Institute, Fort Worth, Tex. (1991)

Enterprise Engineering

511

28. P. Anderson. Toward exemplary research in the management of technology--an introductory essay. J. Engng Technol. Mgrnt I0, 7-22 (1993). 29. J. K. Liker, A. Majcharzak and T. Choi. Impacts of programmable manufacturing technology: a review of recent studies and contingency formulation. J. Engng Technol. Mgmt I0, 229-264 0993). 30. C. L. An8. Planning and implementing CIM. Computer-Aidtd E~ J. 167-176 (1989). 31. E. S. Buffa. Meeting the Competitive Challenge. Dow Jones-lrwin, Homewood, IlL (1984). 32. E. A. Haas. Breakthrough manufacturing. Harvard Business Rev. 65, 75-81. 33. D. Samson. Manufacturing and Operations Strategy. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,N.J. (1991). 34. W. Skinner. The productivity paradox. Harvard Business Rev. 64, 55-59 (1986).