cisco case study

************************************************************************************
Instruction: When you answer any of the following questions, be concise, direct to the point, comprehensive, and make it easy to read. Do not elaborate too much. Do not copy just the sentences from the case.
The answers must be typed, hand written answers are not acceptable. Please hand in a hard copy on the due date, and submit a soft copy to the digital drop box on D2L before class on the due date. Both copies should be exactly the same. You don’t need to sign the soft copy of the report.
When I mark your answer, I will look for the key points, if I see the point, you get the mark. If you miss a point, you lose the mark. In other words, I mainly mark your answer for understanding, logic reasoning, and critical thinking, not about writing. However, if your writing prevents me from understanding your points, you will lose mark.
Please answer the following questions:
Q1a: List each of all major concrete cost items (e.g., adding a data warehouse) that had not been expected or planned in the original plan by using the following table (please add more rows if necessary):
Name of the Cost Item
Explanation about the cost item
Who Covered the Expense
New equipment
For the new software system, they had to buy the relevant hardware to match.
CISCO
New funds for the plan
For organizing the new team. New salaries standards for employees.
CISCO
Entertain cost
Treat the partners and vendors for dinners, such as Moutai wine. CISCO or Partners

Instructions for this question:
Name of the Cost Item: give the cost item a descriptive name. Do not give broad cost categories: such as overtime pay, cost items have to be specific, such as adding a data warehouse.
Explanation about the cost item: Explain what needed to be done and why the cost item was needed. No more than three sentences.
Who Covered the Expense: the expense might be covered by Cisco, by the vendor, or by employees (by working overtime without being paid). If the article does not specify, simply put “not specified”, or “not specified, but I guess…”
The purpose of the question is to see how the project implementation could encounter issues not expected. Listed all items that you could find, marks will be deducted if you missed a cost item,
Q1b: What was the original budget for the project? Did the project overrun the budget?
15 million dollars. No, they had a perfect schedule for the plan and completed the plan in nine months. (From exhibit 2, they only spent nearly 8 months)

Q2: list all major project stages (including selection and after cutover) and time used for that stage by using the following table (please add more rows if necessary): Name of the Stage
Major Tasks
Time Used (in weeks, months)
Stage 1
Repaid iterative prototype
Prototype setup complete
One week
Stage 1 CRP0
Training the implementation team and setting up the technical environment One month
Stage 2
CRP1
Make each one of the team work within their specific area
One month
Stage 3
CRP2
Modification and testing the system, both hardware and software
Half and one months
Stage 4 CRP3
Testing the full system and assessing the company’s readiness to “go live” Half and three months

Q3. Where had the ERP team been “smart”? In another word, what factors had made the Cisco ERP project successful? Use one or two sentences to describe each factor.
The leader made the right strategy. The CEO made a right choice and made the co-leaders very clear what they were about to do.
They organized a great team. They gathered the managers together to solve the problems, who were experienced.
They chose KPMG and ORACLE as partners, who were both big companies in the market and building a practice of people that were also experienced. They had a wonderful cooperation.
They extended the members from 20 to 100, who were the very best for inclusion on the project.
They had a big pocket. As the article says: They are aggressive. So, owning enough capital to run the plan was also an important factor.
They had a very efficient way to execute the plan. For example, from exhibit 2, they made every milestone for the plan, they saved the cost and time.

Q4. Where had the ERP team been just plain lucky?
The right time. They did not wait until their effort would be useless. The competitors were not strong enough to buy their vendors.
The right place. No natural catastrophe such as earthquake to make them postpone the plan.
The right person. The clear-minded CEO, the excellent partners and so on…

Q5: Do you think that the Cisco team could do such a project again if they had to? Why? Or Why not?
No, I do not think so. Personally, I think their success depends some plain lucky. This case reminds me of the old saying in China:” The right time, the right place and the right person.” I am not sure they were going to be in the same situation when that happened again. I mean, the partners might be different and hard to cooperate. Time went by, the competition later would be much stronger than ever, they would not have a chance to revise. Like the anthropoids would never have to chance to evolve to be human today. They might try, but it might be harder.

The following question is not covered by the case, you need to google it.
Q6. Cisco is a company that produces network devices such as routers and switches, what are the major players/competitors in this area? List three other major players, briefly introduce the player no more than three sentences. Please cite the source such as URL that you get the information.
Juniper, who has taken 30% of this market share, with a revenue over 643 million dollars, and is the only competitor to Cisco in Router field.
HP. After purchasing 3com, HP owns 10% of exchange board market share. So far, the second one in the exchange board market share.
Microsoft. They are in that gray area referred to as "coopetition." They compete and collaborate on unified communications. But after Nortel imploded and the ICA died, Microsoft took its UC partnership to Cisco's chief switching and data center rival HP.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/101310-cisco-rivals.html?page=2