Many problems can be avoided during the implementation of IT systems if certain trends in software engineering are maintained, namely:
• formal (postulates the use of formal methods, such as languages, transformations, etc.)
• practical (postulates methods based on knowledge and experience gained in the process of project implementation).
Modern methods, techniques, and tools used in software engineering allow for the effective and relatively smooth realization of all phases of the software life cycle with the full involvement of both the implementing party and the ordering party.
• practical (postulates methods based on knowledge and experience gained in the process of project implementation).
Modern methods, techniques, and tools used in software engineering allow for the effective and relatively smooth realization of all phases of the software life cycle with the full involvement of both the implementing party and the ordering party.
During the implementation of IT systems – the realization of all phases of the software life cycle – practitioners have pointed to the following risk areas:
• costs “explode” by even 350% due to additional consultations and software
• delays occur, the implementation time drags on even several times over
• practice verifies our order; our requirements did not fully reflect the needs of the company and management
• processes and structures are not sufficiently prepared for new management methods.
In manufacturing enterprises, MRP II class systems have been fully implemented in only 20 – 50% of cases. There are many reasons for this state of affairs, but the most common include: lack of user preparation and expecting too much in a very short time. Other threats are presented by E. Kołodziński in his lectures at the University of Warmia and Mazury. These include:
• delays occur, the implementation time drags on even several times over
• practice verifies our order; our requirements did not fully reflect the needs of the company and management
• processes and structures are not sufficiently prepared for new management methods.
In manufacturing enterprises, MRP II class systems have been fully implemented in only 20 – 50% of cases. There are many reasons for this state of affairs, but the most common include: lack of user preparation and expecting too much in a very short time. Other threats are presented by E. Kołodziński in his lectures at the University of Warmia and Mazury. These include:
• exceeding the deadline and budget in over 50% of projects
• over 25% of programming projects are interrupted.
Furthermore, he includes the following difficulties:
• over 25% of programming projects are interrupted.
Furthermore, he includes the following difficulties:
• ambiguity of “client” expectations
• “client” = ordering party + user + “payer” – each of them has different goals
• many users with different expectations
• terminological ambiguity
• different levels of knowledge about the problem domain
• different levels of awareness of needs and the consequences of satisfying them among “clients”.
The authors of the article “Change management in an ERP class system” present the following difficulties:
• “client” = ordering party + user + “payer” – each of them has different goals
• many users with different expectations
• terminological ambiguity
• different levels of knowledge about the problem domain
• different levels of awareness of needs and the consequences of satisfying them among “clients”.
The authors of the article “Change management in an ERP class system” present the following difficulties:
• complexity – a huge number of parameters and options to adapt, which in large and complex systems can reach even several thousand
• high level of risk – approx. 90% of projects exceed the time and budget limit, and from 1/2 to 2/3 end in total failure
• cost-intensiveness – investment expenditures in the order of millions of USD, while the effect, which is more efficient processes, is barely visible – especially in the initial periods of the software’s life
• long duration – in the case of small and medium-sized enterprises, the implementation period is on average 27 weeks, for large ones – 47 weeks, and the return on investment period most often reaches from 4 to 5 years
• volatility – lack of predictability of the direction of further development
• wide scope of organizational changes – based on a compromise with modifications in the implemented system.
Not only finances are needed for implementation, but also for the realization of the last phase of the software life cycle, i.e., maintenance. These costs include:
• high level of risk – approx. 90% of projects exceed the time and budget limit, and from 1/2 to 2/3 end in total failure
• cost-intensiveness – investment expenditures in the order of millions of USD, while the effect, which is more efficient processes, is barely visible – especially in the initial periods of the software’s life
• long duration – in the case of small and medium-sized enterprises, the implementation period is on average 27 weeks, for large ones – 47 weeks, and the return on investment period most often reaches from 4 to 5 years
• volatility – lack of predictability of the direction of further development
• wide scope of organizational changes – based on a compromise with modifications in the implemented system.
Not only finances are needed for implementation, but also for the realization of the last phase of the software life cycle, i.e., maintenance. These costs include:
• maintaining the database – systematically updated
• data distribution
• maintenance, repair, and over time, replacement of equipment with new ones
• labor costs including overheads
• staff training
• costs of external information and telecommunications services
• costs of material and energy consumption
• other costs, e.g., fees for using services and equipment of other companies.
• data distribution
• maintenance, repair, and over time, replacement of equipment with new ones
• labor costs including overheads
• staff training
• costs of external information and telecommunications services
• costs of material and energy consumption
• other costs, e.g., fees for using services and equipment of other companies.
The article comes from the magazine “Logistyka”, No. 4/2006.