Dec. 004 Journal of Electronic Science and Technology of China Vol. No.4 A Requirements Analysis Model Based on QFD TANG Zhi-wei, Nelson K.H. Tang (. School of Management Science, UESTC Chengdu 60054 China;. Operation and Information Management Group Aston Business School, Aston University Birmingham B4 7ET United Kingdom) Abstract The enterprise resource planning (ERP) system has emerged to offer an integrated IT solution and more and more enterprises are increasing by adopting this system and regarding it as an important innovation. However, there is already evidence of high failure risks in ERP project implementation, one major reason is poor analysis of the requirements for system implementation. In this paper, the importance of requirements analysis for ERP project implementation is highlighted, and a requirements analysis model by applying quality function deployment (QFD) is presented, which will support to conduct requirements analysis for ERP project. Key words ERP; requirements analysis model; QFD; BSC; VCA The enterprise resource planning (ERP) system has evolved from material requirements planning (MRP) and manufacturing resource planning (MRPII), and combines both the business processes of the organization and IT into one integrated solution []. The ERP system can help enterprises alleviate incompatibility issues by making disparate computer hardware and software systems communicate with one another, shift from a traditional functional mode to a business process mode and can optimize the resultant business process to take full advantage of the technology []. Those enterprises that have successfully adopted ERP systems to manage their operations view them as one of the most important innovations that have lead to the realization of substantial tangible and intangible improvements in a variety of areas [,4]. But, while companies such as Cisco Systems, Eastman Kodak, and Tektronix have reaped the expected benefits of ERP systems, many other enterprises are discovering that their ERP implementation is a nightmare, (for example, FoxMeyer Drug, a $5 billion pharmaceutical company, filed for bankruptcy [5,6]. It is reported that three quarters of ERP projects are judged to be unsuccessful by ERP implementing enterprises, and at least 90% of ERP implementation ends up by being late or over budget [7,8]. Some problems of failed implementation are: ) starting the ERP implementation effort with automation; ) omitting the critical steps of understanding its business implication; ) simplifying their business processes [5] ; 4) underestimating the human resources elements in change; 5) insufficient resources, especially manpower and finance; 6) lack of cultural preparation for change [9]. Thus, enterprise requirements are neglected or at least underestimated, and this is a major cause why many implementations fail or last longer or cost more than expected. That is to say, poor requirements analysis is an important reason for ERP implementation failure. However, there is little academic research on requirements analysis for ERP project implementation, and this has motivated the present authors to study ERP requirements analysis, a topic which is important for both academicians and practitioners [0]. In section of this paper the authors present a requirements analysis model to support requirements analysis for ERP project implementation. At the same time, the authors demonstrate how to use the model through a case study. Finally, conclusions and suggestions further research are presented. Received 00-09-9
No.4 TANG Zhi-wei et al: A Requirements Analysis Model Based on QFD 89 A Model for ERP Project Requirements Analysis As discussed and analyzed above, ERP project requirements analysis is very important, and is directly related to ERP system selection and to the effectiveness of an ERP project. Should enterprises carry through their requirements analysis for an ERP project? An ERP project is not only a project of a information system, but also system engineering. If enterprises can only acquire local requirements analysis, and cannot provide an organizational overview, successful implementation of any ERP project is problematic. The present authors believe that the most important task of the requirements analysis should provide a clear explanation of what should be expected from the ERP system when the enterprise carries out the requirements analysis. Only when the requirements analysis has been finished can business process analysis and ERP system analysis be done under the direction of the requirements analysis for ERP project; these should be consistent with the enterprise s vision and strategy. Therefore, this paper presents a requirements analysis model to help and direct enterprise to perform a requirements analysis for an ERP project. The model is inspired by, and is a further extended vision of an e-business planning model according to the characteristic of ERP project requirements analysis. The e-business planning model is proposed by Tan and Tang []. These requirements analysis model is based on the application of quality function deployment (QFD), by also incorporating balanced scorecard (BSC) and value Chain analysis (VCA). Fig. is a graphical depiction of the requirements analysis model for ERP project implementation. The authors have developed a structured approach to help an enterprise understand how to use this model. The structured approach can be described in the follows steps: ) To use the four perspectives of BSC as a guideline in developing the measurable objectives. These objectives will be used as whats in the QFD erpmatrix I; ) To rank these whats obtained in step ; ) To use VCA to develop key business processes, which used as hows for QFD erpmatrix I; 4) To identify the interrelationship between hows in QFD erpmatrix I; 5) To identify the strength of the relationship between whats and hows, and analyze subtarget of key business processes; 6) To identify critical business processes and analyze the targets of key business processes; Step 4 interrelationships Step 9 interrelationships Processes Requirements Step Value Chain Analysis Weights Processes Requirements Step 8 ERP modules Weights Step Balanced Scorecard Step 5 Completing QFD erpmatrix I: Relationships and subtarget Step Importance Step 7 Critical processes identified Step 0 Completing QFD erpmatrix II: Relationships and subtarget Impor-T ance (see above) from step6 Absolute imp Step 6 Absolute imp Step Relative imp Identification of critical business processes. Relative imp Identification of critical ERP modules Prioritising and target value Prioritising and target value Fig. Proposed requirements analysis model based on QFD
No.4 TANG Zhi-wei et al: A Requirements Analysis Model Based on QFD 89 7) To input critical business processes and corresponding targets as whats for QFD erpmatrix II; 8) To list ERP modules as hows for QFD erpmatrix II ; 9) To identify the interrelationship between hows in QFD erpmatrix II; 0) To identify the strength of the relationship between whats and hows, and analyze subtarget of ERP modules; ) To identify critical ERP modules and analyze the targets of ERP modules; To explain the usability and feasibility of the requirements analysis model, the authors analyzed these steps as follows. Step : To use the four perspectives of BSC as a guideline in developing the measurable objectives. These objectives will be used as whats in the QFD erpmatrix I. company s objectives [4]. QFD erpmatrix I can be seen in Fig.. Step : To rank these whats obtained in step. The importance weighting of whats can be analysed by many ranking methods, such as survey, expert consultation, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), Delphi, etc. The importance of whats can be expressed on a scale from (not very important) to 0 (very important), all the range can be modified in the actual use. Step : To use VCA to develop key business processes,which used as hows for QFD erpmatrix I. Once the whats for QFD erpmatrix I are identified, the next step would be the identification of hows for QFD erpmatrix I with the VCA. Administration and infrastructure Human Resource Management Product technology /development Value Delivery Inventory Scheduling Inbound Operatio Procurement Outboun Marketin After Sales growth Fig. Value chain analysis Product profit High retention Cost growth Complaints Importance Targets 4 9 9 5 9 I-H I-H I-H Fig. QFD erpmatrix I BSC helps organizations view their strategies in a cohesive, integrated and systematic way, and can translate a company s strategies into specific measurable objectives []. The four perspectives (customer, financial, internal business process and learning and growth) of BSC can be used to translate the organization s vision and strategy into planning guildlines and ultimately into delighting stakeholders []. Kuplan & Nortan presented a strategy map that provides a visual representation of a Porter s VCA structures business operations into five primary activities (from inbound logistics to service) and four support activities, as shown in Fig. [5]. Depending on the organization s size, it is useful to break down each element of the VCA into the core operational processes and assess the customer value added by these processes. Step 4: To identify the interrelationship between hows in QFD erpmatrix I. To check and tradeoff the possible inconsistence between targets of how, the strength of the relationship between hows should be decided and analyzed. These tasks need the directors of operational departments, together with correlative expert to discuss together, and some reliable results about interrelationship between hows can be produced. Step 5: To identify the strength of the relationship between whats and hows, and analyze the subtargets of key business processes.
90 Journal of Electronic Science and Technology of China Vol. To describe exactly the relationships between the whats and hows, an enterprise should make use of the survey or take expert advice. A score of 9 being a strong relationship, 6 being average and weak. No entry represents no relationships; the relationships between the whats and hows can be found in Fig.. To meet the needs and demands, especially customer needs that are ranked highly, the key business processes should be further analyzed to acquire their subtargets, which are quantified as far as possible. These subtargets can mainly be acquired through the survey or from expert advice. Because these subtargets cannot be filled into QFD erpmatrix I, the paper present a method to solve this problem as follows: Every subtarget is assigned a tab. For example, in QFD erpmatrix I, a subtarget of a how inventory meeting a what costs growth, can be assigned the tab I-H-W4. I expresses the subtarget belongs to QFD erpmatrix I, H expresses inventory, which is located at the position of hows, W4 expresses costs growth, which is located at the 4 position of whats. At the same time, the corresponding subtarget is written in another table, named as I-subtarget table. According to this method, an enterprise can easily find the subtargets of every key business process through the tab. Step 6: To identify critical business processes and analyse targets of key business processe The more relevant the business process will be in meeting the requirements of the higher ranked whats, the higher will be the ranking of the business process. On the other hand, the targets of every key business process can be acquired by collecting the subtargets achieved by step 5. Further, the result of step 4 should be considered for tradeoff for possible confliction between targets. It must be emphasized that these target will be important factors for ERP project requirements analysis. The target of every key business process can be expressed by a similar method of expression of subtargets described in step 5. Step 7: To input critical business processes and the corresponding target as whats for QFD erpmatrix II. The next step in the model would be to integrate this list of prioritised business processes by inputting it as the next list of whats in QFD erpmatrix II, which can be seen in Fig.4. The rationale of this is to transform the business processes into whats in order to measure the relationships of these processes with available or proposed ERP system modules and to find out which are the ERP system modules that can help to streamline and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the business processes, and every ERP modules subtarget. Delivery(I-H) Inventory (I-H) Scheduli-ng (I-H) Importance Targets Delivery 9 Inventory Fig.4 QFD erpmatrix II To express conveniently the corresponding target of every critical business process as a part of whats, the tab of the target is positioned at the right side of the critical business process. Thus, the critical business process and its corresponding target will be used as detailed requirements that ERP modules must meet. Step 8: To list ERP modules as hows for QFD erpmatrix II. Due to the style and emphasis of different vendor s ERP system, not all ERP modules of different vendors are identical. This list of ERP system modules can therefore either be of those already available in the enterprise or these proposed by ERP system experts. 9 Order II-H II-H II-H
No.4 TANG Zhi-wei et al: A Requirements Analysis Model Based on QFD 9 Some resources of ERP system modules can be obtained from vendors (SAP, ORACLE, PEOPLESOFT, J.D.EDWARDS,BAAN and others) or through researching for information online. In the opinion of the authors, it is better to acquire a more complete list of ERP modules through the analysis of ERP system experts and consultants. The list of ERP modules is inputed as hows for QFD erpmatrix II. Step 9: To identify the interrelationship between hows in QFD erpmatrix II. This step is similar to step 4. The tasks of this step need expert and the IT professionals of the enterprise to analyse jointly in order for a better result can be obtained. Especially when the relationship of these hows is negative, these analysed results will greatly affect the requirements analysis of an ERP project. Step 0: To identify the strength of the relationship between whats and hows, and analyze subtarget of ERP modules. The method of completing this step is similar to the method described in step 5. Every key business process and corresponding target value is used as customer needs of ERP modules, and helps to produce the subtargets of ERP modules, which should be as measurable and detailed as possible. Step : To identify critical ERP modules and analyze the targets of ERP modules. The results of this step include two parts, one is the ranking list of critical ERP modules, the other is the target of every ERP module. These results are what are to be expected by an enterprise for an ERP project, namely, an ERP project requirements analysis. The ranking list of critical ERP modules is rather useful during the process of an ERP project. Enterprises can assign different resources to different ERP modules according to their critical degree. Especially when there are limited resources or limited time, an enterprise can first or mainly implement the most critical ERP modules in order to obtain optimal effect. In Fig.4, the top three ERP modules can be identified for United Printing: production, purchase order, sales order. That is to say, the top three ERP modules are mainly considered during the implementation process of the ERP project. On the other hand, it should be noticed that the targets of ERP modules are not only acquired by the simple sum from subtargets of ERP modules (obtained in step 0), but are also analyzed by considering the relationship between them which achieved in step 9. Conclusion and Possible Further Research An ERP system has been a widespread IT solution, adopted by many large enterprises and SMEs. Because many enterprises cannot acquire a requirements analysis for ERP project implementation which truly meets their enterprise vision and strategies, there still exist many failure cases in enterprises where ERP systems are, or have been implemented. Research about requirements analysis for an ERP project is rather limited compared with other aspects of ERP systems. However, requirements analysis is arguably the most important aspect. This paper makes a contribution to the on going research by providing a requirement analysis model for ERP project implementation. We have discussed the requirements analysis for an ERP system through a case study, and get a detailed and a better result that is of benefit to ERP implementation. Because the model has not completely put in more true cases, the authors intend to apply the model into more enterprises and evaluate and modify it in order to get an improved model for further ERP project requirements analysis research. Acknowledgements The paper is funded by the Youth Science and Technology Foundation of UESTC (No.L0800YF000) References [] Chung S H, Snyder C A. ERP Adoption: a technological evolution approach[j]. International Journal of Agile Systems, 000, (): 4- [] Rajagopal P S. An innovation-diffusion view of implementation of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems and development of a research model[j].
9 Journal of Electronic Science and Technology of China Vol. Information & Management, 00, 40: 87-4 [] Davenport T H. Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system[j]. Harvard Business Review, 998,76(4): - [4] Markus M, Tanis C. The Enterprise Systems Experiencefrom Adoption to Squccess[A]. Framing the domains of IT Research: Glimpsing the Future through the Past[Z]. Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex Educational Resources, 999, 7-07 [5] Chen I J. Planning for ERP systems: analysis and future trend[j]. Business Process Management Journal, 00, 7(5): 74-86 [6] Bicknell D. SAP to Fight Drug Firm s $500M Snit Over R/ Collapse[N]. Computer Weekly, 998-09-0 [7] Griffith T L, Zammuto R F, Aiman-smith L. Why new technologies fail[j]. Industrial Management, 999, 4: 9-4 [8] Martin M H. An ERP strategy[j]. Fortune, 998, 7: 95-97 [9] Al-Mashari M, Zairi M. Information and business process equality: the case of SAR R/ implementation[j]. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 000, (4): -5 [0] Alves C, Finkelstein A. Negotiating Requirements for COTs-Based Systems[Z]. Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, Essen, Germany, 00 [] Tan B L, Tang N K H. Application of QFD for E-Business Planning[Z]. 5 th International Conference on Managing Innovations in Manufacturing, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, 00. 9- [] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance[j]. Harvard Business Review, 99, 70(): 7-79 [] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Transforming the balanced scorecard form performance measurement to strategic : part [J]. A Commentary in Accounting Horizons, 00, 5 (): 87-07 [4]Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Having trouble with your strategy? then map it[j]. Harvard Business Review, 000, 78(5): 67-76 [5] Porter M E. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance[M]. New York: Free Press, 985 Brief Introduction to Author(s) TANG Zhi-wei ( 汤 志 伟 ) was born in 969. He is now a Ph.D. and an associate professor in School of Information Management, UESTC. His research interests focus on information and information system. Nelson K.H. Tang is now in Operation and Information Management Group, Aston Business School, Aston University, He is a Ph.D. and senior lecture. His research interests focus on information and electronic business..