Fijación de los cromosomas para microscopía electrónica

The identification, adoption and implementation of a suitable IS/IT system, involves a number stages which will be discussed below as adapted from (Yang et al., 2015a, Sun et al., 2015). The five action case IS/IT adoption steps follow the recommendations from (Sun et al., 2015) and are as follows:

Stage 1 – ERP organisational readiness: In this early stage, the aim is to assess the advantages

and disadvantages of adopting the proposed IS/IT system (Labay and Kinnear, 1981). Also in this stage, a clarification of long term priorities of system features is made based on the strategy of the organisation, why an organisation wants to adopt a specific IS/IT system and whether it is achievable or not. The purpose of this stage is to identify gaps of business strategy and IS/IT infrastructure (Ofoegbu et al., 2011) and the result from this stage is used to ensure that there is a genuine need for the system as well as suggest based on structured analysis which potential systems to consider.

Stage 2 - ERP selection: At this stage, the organisation commences the process of selecting an

appropriate IS/IT system as well as the implementation partner. A number of authors have focused on implementation from a technical perspective only (Sudhaman and Thangavel, 2015, Jovicic et al., 2012) however, for an SME without in-house technical expertise, the selection of the software is equally as important as the knowledge of the implementation partners (Griffiths et al., 2013). As the pre-adoption stage, this stage involves a number of sub-stages following Yang et al. (2015a) and they are as follows:

Decision to adopt or reject: Using a structured process of analysis, IS/IT systems identified as

potential systems are analysed to closely map each potential system to the feature requirements of the organisation. The more structured this stage is the more likely an optimal system will be identified (Pan and Jang, 2008), however because of the nature of an SME, the role of the owner/manager and their commitment to a solution is critical to the final decision (Griffiths et al., 2013). To make this process structured and consistent, a feature analysis grid

55

which each potential system meets each of the features can then be measured accurately to ensure that there is consistency when assessing how potential system meets each of the required features. The cost associated to each potential system is also analysed on the feature analysis grid to ensure a cost effective solution is proposed (Son et al., 2014). Data from the structured process is used, by the analysing team, to make a decision to adopt or reject each potential system. Result from this stage aids the identification of the most optimal system which is presented to management for confirmation (Nwankpa, 2015, El-Mashaleh et al., 2015).

Confirmation and sign off: It is important to identify the IS/IT systems process owners (Kilic et

al., 2014), an example is the managing director, as in the case of SMEs, who is the overall owner and has the final sign off (Mahato et al., 2006). In this stage the proposed system is presented to the various departmental process owners for approval and sign off (Almahamid and Awsi, 2015). These departmental process owners observe how the potential system meets their requirements and based on the information provided decide whether to sign off or reject the solution (Umble et al., 2003, Langenwalter, 2000). If rejected, then the process returns to the evaluation stage but if signed off, then the potential solution is presented to the overall system owner.

Evaluation of implementation partner: Although the evaluation stage considers IS system

suppliers, an assessment of the possible IS/IT systems is also carried out to ascertain the level of knowledge each implementation partner has with regards to the organisation’s business processes (Efe, 2016). This is of particular interest for an SME which does not have an in-house technical support team therefore outsources the main IT support to a third party IT provider (Yang et al., 2015b). At this stage if a solution is perceived as suitable but the implementation partner fails to demonstrate adequate knowledge of the SME processes, the system could be rejected (Yadav and Sharma, 2015).

Stage 3 – ERP Implementation: After the sign off, the next stage is the planning of the

implementation to ensure it causes little or no disruption to the business (Umble et al., 2003). A number of implementation methods are considered such as ‘big bang’ and ‘phased’ implementation (Nagpal et al., 2015). The implementation of a new IS/IT system such as an ERP

56

system also presents an opportunity to cleanse existing data before they are transferred into the adopted ERP system to ensure the organisation adapt to the system (Benders et al., 2006). Upon implementation and customisation of the adopted system, system users are trained on how to use the system to accomplish their various duties.

Stage 4 – ERP final preparation: This stage importantly ensures that the processes, system and

stakeholders are prepared for the system go-live. According to Gulledge and Simon (2005), the final preparation stage is intended to cover major risks such as integration and stress tests. The reason for the tests above is to ensure system capabilities, system availability in the event of a disaster, user confirmation of system functionalities, user training and go-live cutover plan.

Stage 5 – ERP Live run: An assessment of system performance is conducted through

performance monitoring and stakeholder feedback. Sun et al. (2015) suggests that performance should be monitored on a continuous periodic interval. This stage includes the repairs of identified system issues and ensures the continuous improvement concept so that system performance can be monitored and improved (Robey et al., 2002). This stage also allows the further customisation of the solution to achieve added benefits from the adopted system. The above stages are based on the stages that reflects on those applicable within the system pre-adoption process.

2.4.1 Organisational Information processing theory and application to present