Before You Invest: An Illustrated Framework to Compare Conceptual Designs for an Enterprise Information System

  • Authors:

  • Mohammed Arif;Dennis J. Kulonda;Michael Proctor;Kent Williams

  • Affiliations:

  • The British University in Dubai P.O.Box 502216 Dubai, UAE (Tel.: +1 971 4 391 3626/ Fax: +1 971 4 366 4698/ E-mail: mohammed.arif@buid.ac.ae or marif@carthage.edu);Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd, Orlando, FL, USA;Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd, Orlando, FL, USA;Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd, Orlando, FL, USA

  • Venue:
  • Information-Knowledge-Systems Management
  • Year:
  • 2004

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Post-implementation analysis on Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems has drawn attention to many structural shortcomings. Yet, no framework exists to compare the different structural features of the ERP system. This paper develops a framework to compare different enterprise-wide systems at the conceptual design level using size, coupling and architectural complexity as criteria. Since, metrics used to measure these criteria are subjected to individual interpretation, a statistical technique using repeated measures design is used to validate the results of multiple evaluators. The framework was applied to the comparison of two enterprise-wide system implementations at the conceptual design level. One was a typical ERP, and the other was a document- based system. A conceptual model was developed for the two methodologies using Unified Modeling Language (UML). Ten evaluators, all graduate students with the knowledge of UML were given the conceptual models of both systems and were instructed to apply the metrics. The evaluators performed the evaluations separately and were under no time restriction. Their results were used in the repeated measures design. Based on the results, TDM was smaller in size, more loosely coupled and less complex as compared to the ERP model. The framework successfully demonstrated that it can differentiate between two different implementations on the basis of their size, module coupling and architectural complexity. This framework presents a quantifiable technique that helps in informed decision making prior to a major financial commitment.