Successes And Failures Of Executive Information Systems

Successes And Failures Of Executive Information Systems The Executive Information Systems (EIS) was facing a high risk of failures, these estimates 70% of the failures. Organizational psychological, technological and educational issues make the implementation of the system difficult. Although it was an EIS but there were only little users of executives and the majority of the executives never rate the EIS advantages highly. The majority users of the system are middle management level. Based on this fact, implementation success cannot be taken for granted. The failure and success of other system cannot be applied to EIS. More organizations are using EIS and their derivatives and this make the system important. But there is less additional research about EIS although the model of critical success factors (CSF) for EIS already exists 10 years. There do not have any prove that show CSFs are universal in the application in different situation. System success There are some difficulties to define system success. Based on combination suggestions from many researchers, the article researchers had chosen 5 evaluation creations and introduce with the explanations. Access : the EIS is made available and users are given access to the system The development team should make the system available for the entire user. Use : the EIS is used by the intended users If the system cannot provide any benefit to the users, the system is facing failure. The development team also needs to make sure that EIS is using by the potential users. Satisfaction : users are satisfied with the EIS The satisfaction of user is important. If the user is satisfied with the system, it means the system successful. Positive impact : the EIS has positive impact the executive and the organization If the system can bring benefits to the user then the system is success. Diffusion : the EIS tends to spread The number of users also can show the successful of EIS. When an EIS user gains impact from the system, he will promote it to other colleagues. This will increase the number of users of EIS. CSFs reviewed Based on Rocket and DeLong (1988), they had mentioned that there are 8 areas that appear to be the important factors to EIS success. Other researches prove that the factors will influence the EIS success and the researchers add on two factors that will influence the EIS success. Committed and informed executive sponsor The committee that invests time and effort in development of EIS will have more understanding about the capability and limitation of the system. Operating sponsor They need to have operating sponsor to design the details of implementation from the user side to leverage the executive sponsor. Appropriate IS staff Senior executive need a quality staff to support the IS. This can make sure that the top management can interact with supporting staffs to make the system success. Appropriate technology The acceptance of system is based on the choice of hardware and software. The specifically designed product has solved the problem of lack of hardware and software. Management of data The internal and external sources, ability to access the data are the issues in system development. Some factors will block the implementation information systems (IS) for executives. Clear link to business objectives The system must have a clear link to business objective and clear benefits in using the technology. The system must provide something that other system does not have in order to add value to the data. Management of organizational resistance The political resistance is the factor that causes failure in using system. The reason is because executive can change information and shift the power inside the company. Management of system evolution and spread This is to fulfill the users demand and identifying all the needs of user and take it into account when expend the system. Evolutionary development methodology Evolutionary development methodology find the way on how the system can give value to the executive, and keep the executive hopefully and aware of the project. Carefully defined information and system requirements Fulfill the executive need is the key of successful system. Methodology This research studied the basic EIS success model. This model shows that CSFs will influence the system success. To get the 10 CFSs, the researchers study the six Hong Kong organizational cases. The researchers used face to face interview. They used a series of personal interviews with the key person in organizational. The questionnaires include open-end questions, and all the questionnaires send out before the interview. This was to make sure all the interviewee would provide more information. There are two sets of questionnaires; company still using the system and company stop using the system. Results After the results for all six organizations were analyzed, three success cases emerged (Major railway, international airline and health care provider companies), two failed cases (Utility and shipping companies) and one unresolved case (Large University). The two failures cases are categories as true failures by the decision to terminate the EIS and deficiency of benefits derived by the firm. The unresolved case was happen where the system was actually used, but it has no met its initial expectation, only a small fraction of its functionally, the benefits were not conceive and that no future expansion plan were planned. There are ten CSFs. The first one is a committed and informed executive sponsor. In success cases, top management always ensures resources and political support, provide direction and feedback, keep constant pressure on EIS project team and communicate strong and put continuing interest to the EIS developers and data providers. In unresolved case the president applies hands off approach to manage EIS project but he ensures the resources support needed for EIS. However, the failed case never set deadlines for EIS project and faced loss on sponsorship after loss of interest and direction from top management. The second CSFs are an operating sponsor. In success cases, operating manager have commit resources and time, participate and promote and help match business needs with technological capabilities. In unresolved cases, operating manager has handling day to day issues of development and translates users needs to design team. However, in failed cases, no clear single operating sponsor role are assign so the top management operating focus cannot be communicate to users. The third CSFs are appropriate IS staff. In success cases, companies applied team approaches which include external consultants, sponsors and data providers. In unresolved cases, internal staff confronted problem after external consultant left, company not have enough competence internal staff. Companies cannot development new EIS to meet users new requirements. However, in failed cases, there are no inheritor after the departure of IS staff. Company staffs are lack experience with EIS development. External consultants are lack understanding of the executive environment. The fourth CSFs are appropriate technology. In success cases, the capability, capacity and response time of technology are pleased with users. Vendor-supplied EIS software is used and a custom-built system is developed in management. The system supports for rapid screen design and maintenance. Users are pleased with it because this system is ease to use, always updated with new user needs and it is more flexible and faster. In unresolved case, users are facing the problem with accessing the system as there are complicated and slow response time. However, in failed cases, management felt difficult to write their own software as there is no prototype provided and need a long time to build the system. The fifth CSFs are management of data. Data that produced by system is in novel format consists of hard and soft data, internal and external data which add value to existing reports. Data are timely, accurate, reliable and consistent. Manager will verify the feasibility of obtaining information before committing to incorporate into EIS. In unresolved cases, duplication of works is occurred. Data are not being updated and incomplete in system. Moreover, they do not provide external data too. In failed cases, manager unable or taken a long time to obtain information for EIS. Data are not provided on time and presented in desired formats. Duplication of works is occurred too. The sixth CSFs are clear link to business objectives. For success cases, management is able to identify the key performance indicator, focus on business opportunity and then define the benefits by using EIS. They will define the critical success factors before the commencement of EIS project. For unresolved cases, value of EIS clearly defined and linked directly to users information needs. However, in failed cases, EIS do not have clear link to business objectives as executives are undervalued the importance of EIS. In succession, they do not convey clearly the objectives and benefits of EIS to users. In the seventh CSFs, it discuss about management of organizational resistance. There are few reasons make the factors successes which are EIS developers report that organizational resistance is not significant, majority of users are willing to use the system also make the factors success, resistance is handled by education and negotiation and relief which make IT is an important tool to help staff achieve business objectives. On the other side, there are some reasons make the factors become unresolved case. First, resistance is found initially due to the unfriendly user interface and slow response time. Second, resistance is less since training is provided and the technology is enhanced. Then, the reasons make the factors fails are data providers and middle management do not cooperate with the EIS project manager. There is also no action to manage the resistance. Corporate culture is not ready for the EIS and reluctant to embrace the technology also make the factors fail. After that, in the eighth CSFs which is good management of system evolution and spread. To be success in EIS new modules or refinements and enhancements are carried out following their comments. Then, new features and functions are added to meet increasing user requirements and also they are also encouraging user participation to express their needs. The reasons of no evolution due to the inadequate human resources and EIS cannot be enhanced quickly enough to capitalize on the newfound requirements make the case become unsolved. If there is no planning for EIS spread and evolution is not made to respond to users needs make the case fails. In the ninth CSFs, it discuss about the evolutionary or prototyping approach. Without using evolution or prototyping approaching make the case become unresolved. If the user only using prototyping approach without using evolution approach then it would make the case fails. Then in the tenth CSFs, it discusses about information and system requirements are carefully defined. The factors which help to achieve the EIS succeed are defined a view of what EIS is intended to achieve, review the existing management reports, interview executives and personnel who work for executives, the design is capable of meeting the requirements of different executives, arrange on-site meeting with EIS users at each output for meeting the information requirements of each output manager, ask personnel who support management and encourage users to devote time to try the EIS prototype. For some unsolved case, the users just review the existing reports to define information requirements and not carefully defined real users needs. Then, reasons like executive cannot devote time to the EIS project, information and system cannot be clearly defined, unable to articulate information requirements, users do not have time discuss with consultants and external consultants have problems t o understand users needs because of a lack of familiarity with the business make the case fails also. Discussion The three success cases seem to manage the CSFs well but the other two cases fails to do so. A well-managed of meta-CSFs can either result in a good or bad way. However, without such CSFs, it increases the difficulty in identifying the success and failures in an EIS. It was uncertain to identify the meta-CSFs as only six cases are analyzed. However, based on the analysis, the unresolved case, even though that had well championship from executives and operating sponsors, they miss the fundamental factor. This refers to the resources of the people, financial and appropriate technology. Another factor that influenced the unresolved case is the link to business objectives. Executives have a strong orientation but limited time to search for benefits. System with clear benefits demonstrated, linked to business objectives, and has a higher user acceptance. Temporal consideration is reflected as strong sponsorship of resources before EIS is launched. Little usage is achievable if the system cannot establish clear benefits. The two failure cases provide some evidence of the critical failure factors yearning in failing the EIS, top management prefer informal personal reporting, fear of losing influence by the employees, uncooperative data provider and middle management with EIS project manager and unprepared corporate culture. Both failed organization apparently implemented the Chinese management system. The characteristic of this management is that all strategic and major personnel decision is made by the owners and direct supervision of work and personal reporting rather than formal information system. Critical failure factors are different from the CSFs clear link to business objectives and management of organization resistance. Management system weighted the peoples experiences and beliefs rather than formal written rules for the sake of the organization, may be opposed to business objectives. Strong opposition causes the failure of the IS or vice versa. Mismatch of IS with the organizations managem ent system should be differentiated from normal organization resistance to avoid fear-based culture. However, in these two failure cases, the existence of letting the system fail is higher than the success of the system. Conclusion Understanding system failure and success is important. The on-line analytical processing (OLAP) associated with the EIS trend is a way of looking beyond transactions to forces driving them. It helps organization to have accurate forecast sales to have better planning in inventory, production, advertisement expenses and product pricing. In this study, Rockart and Delongs application of the eight CSFs and the additional of two factors are confirmed. Hence, it is important to have championing, resources and system link to business objectives. Unsuccessful system may result from disagreement with management system. Organizations that translate the needed information with business goals to a good system are likely to success than solving problems with an IS. Student Expectations In this case, EIS is not function perfectly because there is limited functionality, high implementation costs, less reliable and less secure data. IS project team should give pressure to the company as they are creating and maintaining the system, to receive resources that should have been received. This means that resources will be received at the time when it is needed and not after. The encouragement by the IS staff is important after the system has been done (creating/maintaining) as they need to demonstrate the benefit in sense of it ease in accessing the system and so on. Less time is needed to produce information that is needed as time is gold to the executives. Proper and specific training shall be given by external consultants to internal IS staffs, especially when a new system was created. This is to make sure that are a backup of the system in case external consultant leave. Nowadays, there is a lot of business systems which are more useful compare with EIS. For example, International Business System (IBS), which is a leading provider of distribution management solutions. IBS focuses on industries such as automotive, electrical components, paper packaging, pharmaceutical distribution and so on.

Government Budgets on Inflation :: Economics Economy Essays

Government Budgets on Inflation Problems with format ?Since Greece and Italy are in the European Union and have both joined the European Monetary Union, one might think that they would have fairly stable economies, and Turkey would be the unstable one of the three.? But that is not necessarily true.? Although Turkey does have more of an unsteady economy, Italy and Greece?s were not doing so well in the recent past.? Looking at each country separately then comparing the three is the best way to see how the government budgets affect the inflation rates of Greece, Italy and Turkey.? Greece Greece joined the European Union (EU) in 1981, but that did not solve all of its internal problems.? They still had a high inflation rate through the 1980s and into the early 90s.? ?The average annual rate of price inflation was 17.4% in 1984-93.?[1]? There were many reasons for this elevated rate, like the public sector dominating the economy, the informal Greek economy, and the weak political leadership, but Greece knew they had to lower their inflation rate to join the European Monetary Union (EMU) and in turn converting their currency over to euros. In 1994, the EU along with Greece?s ruling government PASOK (Panellinion Socialistikon Kinima) set goals for Greece?s journey towards entering the EMU.? Along with many other objectives, the inflation rate had to be lowered before entering in to the monetary union.? Greece reduced it public spending, restricted the public sector wage increases, and attempted to increase their budget revenues by setting a minimum level of income tax payable by all employees.[2]? By doing these things, ?in April of 1995 the annual rate of inflation was less than 10% for the first time since 1973.?[3]? Also during this time of gradual progress to lower the inflation rate, the gross domestic product (GDP) rose.? The economy grew by an average of 2.8 percent per year between 1994 and 1999 and there was a recorded real growth in GDP of 4.1% in 2000.[4]By the middle of 2000, Greece?s inflation rate had reached a stable level at 2.0%, which was the requirement for entry into the EMU. ?In January [2001] Greece became the twelfth member of the European Monetary Union after a sustained effort to reduce inflation and the budget deficit to levels required for adopting the Euro. Government Budgets on Inflation :: Economics Economy Essays Government Budgets on Inflation Problems with format ?Since Greece and Italy are in the European Union and have both joined the European Monetary Union, one might think that they would have fairly stable economies, and Turkey would be the unstable one of the three.? But that is not necessarily true.? Although Turkey does have more of an unsteady economy, Italy and Greece?s were not doing so well in the recent past.? Looking at each country separately then comparing the three is the best way to see how the government budgets affect the inflation rates of Greece, Italy and Turkey.? Greece Greece joined the European Union (EU) in 1981, but that did not solve all of its internal problems.? They still had a high inflation rate through the 1980s and into the early 90s.? ?The average annual rate of price inflation was 17.4% in 1984-93.?[1]? There were many reasons for this elevated rate, like the public sector dominating the economy, the informal Greek economy, and the weak political leadership, but Greece knew they had to lower their inflation rate to join the European Monetary Union (EMU) and in turn converting their currency over to euros. In 1994, the EU along with Greece?s ruling government PASOK (Panellinion Socialistikon Kinima) set goals for Greece?s journey towards entering the EMU.? Along with many other objectives, the inflation rate had to be lowered before entering in to the monetary union.? Greece reduced it public spending, restricted the public sector wage increases, and attempted to increase their budget revenues by setting a minimum level of income tax payable by all employees.[2]? By doing these things, ?in April of 1995 the annual rate of inflation was less than 10% for the first time since 1973.?[3]? Also during this time of gradual progress to lower the inflation rate, the gross domestic product (GDP) rose.? The economy grew by an average of 2.8 percent per year between 1994 and 1999 and there was a recorded real growth in GDP of 4.1% in 2000.[4]By the middle of 2000, Greece?s inflation rate had reached a stable level at 2.0%, which was the requirement for entry into the EMU. ?In January [2001] Greece became the twelfth member of the European Monetary Union after a sustained effort to reduce inflation and the budget deficit to levels required for adopting the Euro.

Classroom †debate Essay

What methods can teachers / trainers use to establish ground rules with their learners? I currently teach in a â€Å"Category C, Male Populated Prison† and I am employed in education to deliver a broad spectrum of hospitality qualifications to class of 10 learners. In turn I have an obligation to mentor to a minimum of 25 guided learning hours per week, to include numeracy, literacy, and ICT. Therefore it is essential for me that establishing ground rules are fundamental for ensuring classroom management in any learning environment; understanding the needs and views of those contributing, will have a greater appreciation from the group. Atherton, J. S (2005) defines ground rules as† The minimum necessary conditions for getting learning work done in the class. † By setting boundaries for learners, they will help to create a safe and relaxed environment that will ultimately promote transparency, underpin behaviour and mutual respect for each other. Three distinct options could be utilised; * The teacher who can take a very autocratic attitude and dictate the required behaviour expected. * The learners set the agenda, with little guidance, giving limited structure to the classroom. * Open and honest discussion between the teacher and the learners to allow individuals to highlight what they feel is important to the group. This leads towards everyone living with group decisions and refraining from articulating their own personal reservations outside that group. There are several ways of establishing ground rules through consensual agreement and negotiation: Small group method; Breaking the group into smaller units to think about a limited number of suggestions that they feel are important to them. Go around the room to discuss these ideas, while also trying to elicit an understanding behind their submissions. Ensure that the group is happy about their input, but make certain that any missed and basic rules are incorporated Allow the group to openly discuss the suggestions and allow them to debate the value and worth to the classroom. The group can then vote to stipulate what rules the class should adhere too. By recording the rules, you will have a reference point for the class to focus should individuals fail to abide. Periodic revisiting and re-evaluation will highlight any deviation from those â€Å"Ground Rules† Ground rule poster; There can be issues regarding the level of understanding from a group who may have poor literacy standard. A Ground Rule Poster may be more applicable in these circumstances; a pictorial significance can have the same emphasis as a written statement. The Acronym method; Utilise the ground rules to invent a short inventive statement: AAchieve goal LLearner participation EElicit perfection XXcel Brookfield & Preskill’s method Ask the students to think about the best group discussions, they have been involved in. What happened that made these discussions so satisfying? Next, ask the students to think about the worst group discussion in which they have been involved. What happened that made these discussions so unsatisfactory? For each of the characteristics, have the students suggest three things that the group might do to ensure that these characteristics are present or not present as the case may be. Use the students’ suggestions to draft a set of ground rules on which you all agree. Record the guidelines. Copy the list and bring it to section the following week. This way all students have copies that they can refer to over the semester. Periodically, have the class take a moment to evaluate whether the guidelines established at the beginning of the semester are being followed, and whether they work. The kind of behaviour and respect you would aim to achieve by negotiating and establishing the ground rules with the learners will ultimately define and underpin the success of the learning experience. Tutor name: Sally Welsh Word count: 633 Ashley Robson Bibliography Adapted from Brookfield, S. and Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic Classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Atherton, J. S (2005) defines ground rules as† The minimum necessary conditions for getting learning work done in the class. †