Transitioning to ERP: Organizational Development and Change

Transitioning to ERP: Organizational development and change Summary of the case The DuPoint Chemical Company is in the middle of changing its software implementation system by transferring to an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. The DuPoint Chemical Company, being a large organization and the complexity of the scheme being massive, the organization took its project piece-meal dividing it into four consecutive terms starting with January 2004 and ending with August 2004. The change management and communications itself were conducted in three steps so as to ensure smooth incorporation of the system.

The three steps involved appointing individuals to responsible positions; trips to each of the 15 major plants in order to communicate the importance of the project to plant personnel; and precautions to deal with potential negative implications of change. Statement of the problem Transition to ERP involves a tremendous amount of work, specifically since ERP is a software system that integrates internal and external information and concerns with the gamut of the organization from accounting to manufacturing, sales, customer relationship service, and so forth.

ERP aims to effectively facilitate flow of communication both between internal employees of organization and external individuals such as stakeholders. Transitioning to REP can, however, involve tremendous change for the organization, and the larger the organization the greater the magnitude of potential disturbance other company. DuPoint attempted to handle its change sensitively and gradually so that minimal upset would be felt. Nonetheless, DuPont would, of course, welcome minimal disturbance caused by the massive change.

Proposing a solution Change can be best managed by applying the organizational development (OD) framework to the case. OD sees the organization as a holistic system, with the leader or change agent applying some sort of catalyst from the outside to move it in a certain direction. The change agent is usually a behavioral scientist employed to assess and ascribe change to the organization. He or she attempts to implement this change in as easy and persuasive a manner as possible (French & Bell, 1973).

In this case, the change agent would be the plant manager of each of the 15 plants, with the global operations director applying the overarching catalyst from the outside. The change agent would use some metaphor to encourage his or her team as a whole to see the change in appositive light and to accept the training and implementation of the system as a positive step in the organization's direction.

The change metaphor that the agent uses is a concept that the team are familiar with and that is in sync with the company's cultural perspective since OD views the organization as a complete system rather than as a distinctive aggregate of individuals (French & Bell, 1973). Only when it is viewed as a whole, can the organization be more feasibly moved forward. Viewing the company in terms of its distinct employees may make the prospect more complex, and more possibly create and reinforce conflict.

OD is ideal for dealing with this situation since OD aims to improve overall organizational effectiveness. In an OD scenario,.