The Experts below are selected from a list of 144 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Louis Raymond - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Managing ERP system Risk in SMEs: a multiple case study
Journal of Information Technology, 2011Co-Authors: Placide Poba-nzaou, Louis RaymondAbstract:ERP systems are increasingly accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). If the potential benefits of these systems are significant, the same applies to the Risk associated with their Implementation. A number of authors emphasize that IS Risk management is most effective when it is initiated at the earliest possible moment in the system's lifecycle, that is, at the adoption phase. But how do SMEs actually manage the Risk of ERP Implementation during the ERP adoption process? The research objectives are (1) to identify and describe the influence of the SMEs’ context on their Implementation Risk exposure, and (2) to understand whether and how, within the adoption process, SMEs actually manage the Risk of implementing an ERP system supplied by an ERP vendor, with open source software, or through in-house development. In order to do so, four case studies of SMEs having implemented an ERP system were undertaken.The study shows that to manage Risk at the adoption stage, SMEs can proceed in a rather intuitive, informal and unstructured manner, that is explicitly based however upon an architecture of basic principles, policies and practices.
-
Managing ERP system Risk in SMEs: a multiple case study
Journal of Information Technology, 2011Co-Authors: Placide Poba-nzaou, Louis RaymondAbstract:ERP systems are increasingly accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). If the potential benefits of these systems are significant, the same applies to the Risk associated with their Implementation. A number of authors emphasize that IS Risk management is most effective when it is initiated at the earliest possible moment in the system's lifecycle, that is, at the adoption phase. But how do SMEs actually manage the Risk of ERP Implementation during the ERP adoption process? The research objectives are (1) to identify and describe the influence of the SMEs’ context on their Implementation Risk exposure, and (2) to understand whether and how, within the adoption process, SMEs actually manage the Risk of implementing an ERP system supplied by an ERP vendor, with open source software, or through in-house development. In order to do so, four case studies of SMEs having implemented an ERP system were undertaken.The study shows that to manage Risk at the adoption stage, SMEs can proceed in a rather intuitive, informal and unstructured manner, that is explicitly based however upon an architecture of basic principles, policies and practices.
Placide Poba-nzaou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Managing ERP system Risk in SMEs: a multiple case study
Journal of Information Technology, 2011Co-Authors: Placide Poba-nzaou, Louis RaymondAbstract:ERP systems are increasingly accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). If the potential benefits of these systems are significant, the same applies to the Risk associated with their Implementation. A number of authors emphasize that IS Risk management is most effective when it is initiated at the earliest possible moment in the system's lifecycle, that is, at the adoption phase. But how do SMEs actually manage the Risk of ERP Implementation during the ERP adoption process? The research objectives are (1) to identify and describe the influence of the SMEs’ context on their Implementation Risk exposure, and (2) to understand whether and how, within the adoption process, SMEs actually manage the Risk of implementing an ERP system supplied by an ERP vendor, with open source software, or through in-house development. In order to do so, four case studies of SMEs having implemented an ERP system were undertaken.The study shows that to manage Risk at the adoption stage, SMEs can proceed in a rather intuitive, informal and unstructured manner, that is explicitly based however upon an architecture of basic principles, policies and practices.
-
Managing ERP system Risk in SMEs: a multiple case study
Journal of Information Technology, 2011Co-Authors: Placide Poba-nzaou, Louis RaymondAbstract:ERP systems are increasingly accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). If the potential benefits of these systems are significant, the same applies to the Risk associated with their Implementation. A number of authors emphasize that IS Risk management is most effective when it is initiated at the earliest possible moment in the system's lifecycle, that is, at the adoption phase. But how do SMEs actually manage the Risk of ERP Implementation during the ERP adoption process? The research objectives are (1) to identify and describe the influence of the SMEs’ context on their Implementation Risk exposure, and (2) to understand whether and how, within the adoption process, SMEs actually manage the Risk of implementing an ERP system supplied by an ERP vendor, with open source software, or through in-house development. In order to do so, four case studies of SMEs having implemented an ERP system were undertaken.The study shows that to manage Risk at the adoption stage, SMEs can proceed in a rather intuitive, informal and unstructured manner, that is explicitly based however upon an architecture of basic principles, policies and practices.
Martin White - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
nhs diabetes prevention programme in england formative evaluation of the programme in early phase Implementation
BMJ Open, 2018Co-Authors: Linda Penn, Angela M Rodrigues, Anna Haste, Marta M Marques, Kirsten Budig, Kirby Sainsbury, Ruth Bell, Vera Araujosoares, Martin WhiteAbstract:Objectives Evaluation of the demonstrator phase and first wave roll-out of the National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Programme (DPP) in England. To examine: (1) intervention design, provision and fidelity assessment procedures; (2) Risk assessment and recruitment pathways and (3) data collection for monitoring and evaluation. To provide recommendations informing decision makers on programme quality, improvements and future evaluation. Design We reviewed programme documents, mapping against the NHS DPP specification and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) public health guideline: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) prevention in people at high Risk (PH38), conducted qualitative research using individual interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders and examined recruitment, fidelity and data collection procedures. Setting Seven NHS DPP demonstrator sites and, subsequently, 27 first wave areas across England. Interventions Intensive behavioural intervention with weight loss, diet and physical activity goals. The national programme specifies at least 13 sessions over 9 months, delivered face to face to groups of 15–20 adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia, mainly recruited from primary care and NHS Health Checks. Participants Participants for qualitative research were purposively sampled to provide a spread of stakeholder experience. Documents for review were provided via the NHS DPP Management Group. Findings The NHS DPP specification reflected current evidence with a clear framework for service provision. Providers, with national capacity to deliver, supplied intervention plans compliant with this framework. Stakeholders highlighted limitations in fidelity assessment and recruitment and retention challenges, especially in reach and equity, that could adversely impact on Implementation. Risk assessment for first wave eligibility differed from NICE guidance. Conclusions The NHS DPP provides an evidence-based behavioural intervention for prevention of T2D in adults at high Risk, with capacity to deliver nationally. Framework specification allows for balance between consistency and contextual variation in intervention delivery, with session details devolved to providers. Limitations in fidelity assurance, data collection procedures and recruitment issues could adversely impact on intervention effectiveness and restrict evaluation.
M L Markus - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
tailoring erp systems a spectrum of choices and their implications
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2001Co-Authors: Lars Brehm, Armin Heinzl, M L MarkusAbstract:The IS literature distinguishes between custom-built and off-the-shelf software. Enterprise resource planning (ERP) packages are often viewed as off-the-shelf software, because adopters implement them by setting parameters (called configuration), rather traditional programming. Making changes to ERP software code (called modification) is usually strongly discouraged by vendors and Implementation consultants. Nevertheless, field research has shown that many companies have had to modify ERP software in various ways to meet essential business needs. This suggests that ERP packages do not fit cleanly into the custom/off-the shelf distinction. The authors describe a portfolio of tailoring options between configuration and modification, with important implications for Implementation Risk and the difficulty of ERP system upgrades. They discuss the implications of their framework for practitioners and for further research on ERP systems.
Patrick Mader - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
estimating the Implementation Risk of requirements in agile software development projects with traceability metrics
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, 2015Co-Authors: Patrick Rempel, Patrick MaderAbstract:[Context and Motivation] Agile developments follow an iterative procedure with alternating requirements planning and Implementation phases boxed into sprints. For every sprint, requirements from the product backlog are selected and appropriate test measures are chosen. [Question/problem] Both activities should carefully consider the Implementation Risk of each requirement. In favor of a successful project, Risky requirements should either be deferred or extra test effort should be dedicated on them. Currently, estimating the Implementation Risk of requirements is mainly based on gut decisions. [Principal ideas/results] The complexity of the graph spanned by dependency and decomposition relations across requirements can be an indicator of Implementation Risk. In this paper, we propose three metrics to assess and quantify requirement relations. We conducted a study with five industry-scale agile projects and found that the proposed metrics are in fact suitable for estimating Implementation Risk of requirements. [Contribution] Our study of heterogeneous, industrial development projects delivers for the first time evidence that the complexity of a requirements traceability graph is correlated with the error-proneness of the implementing source code. The proposed traceability metrics provide an indicator for requirements’ Implementation Risks. This indicator supports product owners and developers in requirement prioritization and test measure selection.
-
REFSQ - Estimating the Implementation Risk of Requirements in Agile Software Development Projects with Traceability Metrics
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, 2015Co-Authors: Patrick Rempel, Patrick MaderAbstract:[Context and Motivation] Agile developments follow an iterative procedure with alternating requirements planning and Implementation phases boxed into sprints. For every sprint, requirements from the product backlog are selected and appropriate test measures are chosen. [Question/problem] Both activities should carefully consider the Implementation Risk of each requirement. In favor of a successful project, Risky requirements should either be deferred or extra test effort should be dedicated on them. Currently, estimating the Implementation Risk of requirements is mainly based on gut decisions. [Principal ideas/results] The complexity of the graph spanned by dependency and decomposition relations across requirements can be an indicator of Implementation Risk. In this paper, we propose three metrics to assess and quantify requirement relations. We conducted a study with five industry-scale agile projects and found that the proposed metrics are in fact suitable for estimating Implementation Risk of requirements. [Contribution] Our study of heterogeneous, industrial development projects delivers for the first time evidence that the complexity of a requirements traceability graph is correlated with the error-proneness of the implementing source code. The proposed traceability metrics provide an indicator for requirements’ Implementation Risks. This indicator supports product owners and developers in requirement prioritization and test measure selection.
