Title: Presentation of my Bachelor
1Presentation of my Bachelors thesis on Key
success factors of small software firms and an
overview of articleImplementing enterprise
resource planning and knowledge management
systems in tandem fostering efficiency and
innovation complementarity
- Presentation for ITK B54 Research Seminar on
Software Business - By
- Peter Törnroos
- 20.5.2003
2Key success factors of small software firms -
Outline
- Introduction
- Identifying key success factors
- Importance of small businesses
- Key success factors of small software businesses
- Flexibility
- The importance of leadership and software talent
- Networking
- Customer relations
- Operational efficiency
- Challenges of small software businesses
- Uncertainty
- Internationalization
- Corporate venturing
- Literature and research of small businesses
- Conclusions, Criticism and Discussion
3Key success factors of small software firms -
Introduction
- This part of the presentation is based on my
bachelors thesis of the same topic - In this presentation I will also bring up issues
that I had to left out from my bachelors thesis
and give an overview of small businesses
4Identifying key success factors
- In my thesis key success factors are defined as
factors that are critical for best performance,
rather than performing good enough to keep alive
(critical success factors) - There are many buzz words that have in some
extend the same meaning - sticky factors vs. key success factors (same
meaning according Ketelhöhn) - essential competencies, plain competencies, core
competencies, spillover competencies, protective
competencies, parasitic competencies - are all these buzz words really needed?
- There are KSFs for everything
- product launch
- brand management
- anything that challenges an organization
- In my thesis the context is small software
businesses
5Importance of small businesses
- Many governments see small software firms as
important employers and builders of international
competitiveness of future and therefore support
their efforts (Ireland as a good example for
supporting high-tech start-ups) - Small software businesses
- Bring healthy competition
- Introduce markets new ideas and solutions
- Software embedded in the products and services of
other industries - Can occupy positions that larger firms cant
economically enter or dare not go, expect by
corporate venturing - The importance of small software companies is
indicated by an Austrian study which states that
micro enterprises account for 55,7 per cent and
small-to-medium enterprises 32,2 per cent of the
Austrian software organizations
6Nature of software business
- Fierce competition
- Technologies change fast, industry evolves
rapidly and in unexpected ways - High uncertainty over markets and technology
7Key success factors of small software firms
81. Flexibility
- One main reason for the success of small
companies - Possibility to adapt rapidly to new circumstances
and tap opportunities - Identifying new opportunities and market niches
- When focusing on market one has to be able to
change the direction of the company when things
go wrong
92 The importance of leadership and software talent
- small firms core employees consists of managers
that usually own the company - Low hierarchies between employees
- Important characteristics of business leaders
- previous experience on technology
- knowledge of the industry
- experience on entrepreneurship
- Successful leaders identify opportunities that
others can consider as too high risks or do not
believe in them - developing new innovative ideas one must take
risks - Downside of taking risks are mistakes
- mistakes can be corrected and they need to be
corrected fast to steer the company in more
successful direction
103 Networking
- The most important challenge for SMEs is their
lack of resources - Resources can be gained through networking and
partnering - Previous working relationships, families, friends
and acquaintances are important sources of advice
and information - There is great number of mechanisms of how to
relate to external organizations
11Other key success factors
- Importance of customer relations
- The research of tiger SMEs in Singapore
identified good client and customer relationships
as the sixth important KSF - Frequently satisfying customer needs (identifying
and meeting) - Alliances and concentrating on few customers for
better communication - Operational efficiency
- Any system, like any argument, is as strong as
its weakest link (Ketelhöhn in What Is a Key
Success Factor? ) - The resources that small software businesses have
offer the opportunity to grow and perform well,
but they have to be exploited thoroughly in order
to achieve good results
12Challenges of small software firms
13Uncertainty
- The uncertainty of markets presents challenges
for high-tech SMEs and larger enterprises
respectively - Uncertainty can be derived into two categories
- The buyers can be uncertain, because they dont
have experiences on the product and - Certain market circumstances such as
heterogeneity and chancing technologies set
requirements for customers ability to handle
information
14Sources for market uncertainty
15Sources for technological uncertainty
16Internationalization
- Internationalization is brings both opportunities
and a threats for small software businesses - Opportunities
- Larger market share
- More sources for revenuethicker skin against
market ups and downs (European companies face
problems derived from small markets and cultural
issues) - Low barriers
- Threats
- Brings competition to local markets from foreign
companies
17Corporate venturing
- Can be seen as way for larger companies to
compete against smaller players - Ventures have the same structure as a small
company would have - Can compete in the same markets, which are
usually niche markets - Develop software for small market, can be highly
specified user group, such as professional
software - Brings a high threat to smaller companies,
because ventures have the financial and other
resources to back their business by the big
corporate
18Literature and research of small businesses
- There isnt much research done from the small
businesses point of view even though there is no
arguing that small firms are important for the
development of software business and economy - The issue of lack of previous literature is
stated in many research articles that I have
studied - Perhaps my masters thesis will give a
contribution to the field of small businesses - Preliminary topic Networking of high-technology
firms A technology and resource based view
19Conclusions
- There are KSFs for everything industry,
strategies and company itself - KSFs have a substantial impact on the success of
a company - The most important KSF of small software firms is
their ability to adapt to no new circumstances
rapidly - Small software firms encounter challenges derived
from their limited resources - Can be tackled by networking (gaining resources)
- Mastering only KSF isnt enough for a company to
be successful they just prepare the company for
the fierce competition
20Criticism on the thesis
- KSFs that are identified are universal in nature
and dont reflect software SMEs in depth - KSFs are drawn from a wide variety of literature
and they have a major impact on the way issues
are discussed - literature of KSFs from other industries
- nature of software business differs greatly from
traditional industries - I have only theoretical base to understand
software business and I cannot in depth compare
how these KSFs would be adopted to practical
level of doing business
21Criticism on the thesis (cont.)
- I identified an important KSF that is flexibility
and adapting rapidly to new circumstances - literature I reviewed didnt address this factor
directly and this is why that issue wasnt
discussed in depth in the thesis - As the emphasis was on identifying KSFs the
number of these factors made it impossible to
discuss each factor in depth - Internalization is left out in order to keep the
information manageable for this sized thesis - Keeping the talent in house can be a major
challenge for a small software firm, but the
current situation in Finland seems to be that
there are a lot professionals out there in the
field of IT
22Discussion
- Even though it is widely identified that SMEs are
flexible there are also researchers that dont
agree - Naumanen, M., 2002. Nuorten teknologiayritysten
menestystekijät - Current situation of economy and the shape of IT
field - more small businesses
- more possibility to tap
23Implementing enterprise resource planning and
knowledge management systems in tandem fostering
efficiency and innovation complementarity
- Authors
- S. Newell, J.C. Huang, R.D. Galliers and S.L. Pan
- The paper examines the simultaneous
implementation within a single organization of
two contemporary managerial information systems - Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and
- Knowledge Management (KM)
- The study is done through interpretative single
case method
24Introduction
- In this part of the presentation I will discuss
the conceptual framework and findings, leaving
out the case description - I will emphasize the findings on organizational
efficiency and flexibility of the study - Implementation of multiple systems is likely to
produce effects that differ from implementing a
single system - The focus of the paper is to investigate the
simultaneous implementation of IS/IT concepts - ERP and KM
- As both ERP and KM systems are currently being
widely implemented across organizations in all
probability they are implemented simultaneously
or at least their implementations are overlapping
25Characteristics of ERP
- Enterprise-wide packages that tightly integrate
business functions into a single system with a
shared database - Comprehensive software solutions that integrate
organizational processes through shared
information and data flows - ERP systems can play an important role in
increasing organizational competitiveness through
improving the way in which strategically valuable
information is produced, shared and managed
across functions and locations - ERP systems are promoted as systems that will
improve organizational efficiency through both
enhanced information capture and organizational
redesign around defined best practices
26Characteristics of KM
- KM systems emphasize how firms can enhance
competitive advantage through more effective
utilization of their knowledge assets - Achieved by free flow of knowledge across
organizations - Different approaches to KM
- Personalization and codification strategy
- Firm cannot be strong in both (80-20 rule)
- Personalization face-to-face communication
- Codification transferring documents through IT
- Cognitive and community approach
- Cognitive transfer of explicit knowledge where
users have common understanding - Community approach sharing of tacit knowledge in
case of multi-disciplinary teams
27Characteristics of KM (cont.)
- Distinction between personalization/community
approach promote either efficiency or flexibility - First generation KM
- Emphasize on dissemination, imitation, and
exploitation - Second generation KM
- Emphasize on education, innovation, and
exploration - Focus shifts from the supply of knowledge to
creation and maintaining knowledge - The case company was very much within the frame
of the second company
28Background on efficiency and/or flexibility
- The trade-off between efficiency and flexibility
is perhaps the most enduring in organization
theory - Mechanistic structures are characterized by high
degrees of standardization, specialization and
hierarchy organic structures structures are
characterized by low degrees of each of these
aspects of structure - These opposing structures have formed the idea
that organization either had to focus on
efficiency or flexibility - There are now a few writers who haw suggested
that it is possible to be both efficient and
flexible at the same time - Term used ambidextrous (using both hands)
29Mechanisms for ambidextrous organizations
- Metaroutines
- Routines to standardize internal processes that
focus on flexibility or innovation - Non-routines to more specified processes
- Job enrichment
- Motivation potential is increased
- Through increased autonomy and responsibility
- Giving flexibility to routine tasks
- Switching
- Person is given time to spend on non-routine
tasks and then switched back to routine tasks - Partitioning
- Divisions of tasks that are defined to certain
group of the organization - E.g. RD focuses on innovation while production
department focuses on efficiency
30Objectives of the company
Objectives and characteristics of the ERP and KM in Company A Objectives and characteristics of the ERP and KM in Company A
Objectives and characteristics of ERP Objectives and characteristics of KM
Replacing diverse legacy systems, so creating a common IT structure Creating innovation communities including suppliers and retired staff
Creating a common productivity measure Continuous learning and training
Restructuring production, logistics and warehouse divisions Creating an intranet for storing and sharing information and knowledge
Centralized procurement Building strategic partnerships with suppliers
Efficiency improvement through improved information sharing Improving innovation and flexibility through improved knowledge sharing and creation
31Research findings
- Both systems were judged by organizational
members to be successful - Within Company A the ERP and KM initiatives were
complementary rather than contradictory - Each system was designed and implemented for
clear managerial purpose - Managing organizational information to improve
efficiency or knowledge to improve innovation
32ERP and KM initiatives
- Implementation of SAP (the selected ERP system of
the company) has drastically improved the time to
produce and gather critical information for
strategic decision making - Help in effective coordination activities from
SAP - The implementation of KM was found to facilitate
the effective and systematic exploitation and
exploration of knowledge - Both intra- and inter-organizationally
- Improved continuous learning from past actions
- Organization of innovation communities created an
environment where products and processes were
constantly under evaluation - Involvement of retired engineers and suppliers
33Organizational efficiency and flexibility
- Impact of implementation of ERP and KM to
suggested mechanisms (transparency) in Company A - Partitioning
- Pre-existed in Company A and had not really been
influenced by the ERP and KM initiatives - On the other hand efficiency and flexibility were
achieved achieved simultaneously by different
divisions - The KM initiative had opened up opportunities for
improving flexibility even in divisions where
efficiency was the primary goal
34Organizational efficiency and flexibility (cont.)
- Metaroutines
- Both ERP and KM appeared to promote the enactment
of metaroutines - Adoption of ERP enabled standardized activities
of information processing and management - New organizational processes were designed and
implemented to maximize the potential of ERP - The KM initiative transformed continuously
non-routines to routines while ERP stopped this
process once the system was implemented and
solidified processes
35Organizational efficiency and flexibility (cont.)
- Job enrichment
- The ERP system hindered enrichment because it
encouraged process dependencies on pre-defined
routines - The ERP system did not take into account
non-routine tasks - Maximized efficiency with the cost of flexibility
- The KM initiative encouraged innovative
communities to generate knowledge on non-routine
basis - Forming of various pilot teams for process and
product innovation
36Organizational efficiency and flexibility (cont.)
- Switching
- The ERP system also hindered switching activities
in some divisions - E.g. The Product division has to have
standardized activities to accomplish following
advantages - Predictability
- Feasibility
- Efficiency
- The KM initiative encouraged switching in
particular through involvement in training and
participation in innovation communities - Ability to exchange, reassess and refine what he
had learned in routine work
37Conclusions
- The study has demonstrated how a particular
organization was able to promote both
flexibility/innovation as well as efficiency - ERP and KM initiatives revealed that the two
systems can be successfully implemented in tandem - While ERP emphasizes the improvement of
information processing efficiency, KM can
facilitate the simultaneous development of
organizational knowledge exploration and
exploitation capability
38Criticism
- The study did not discuss in more depth that
should different divisions implement both ERP and
KM - E.g. is there any use for KM in the production
department and if it is implemented, what should
be the proportion between the use of ERP and KM
in daily routines and activities (80-20 rule)