ERP System at an Ivy League University: Case Study
Introduction
Accounting information systems are often implemented into companies due to the advance in technology and competitive global markets. In the case study which is given, a new ERP system (Enterprise Resource Planning System) was introduced at an Ivy League University. Companies use software-based accounting tools to enhance the efficiency of working with its financial matters, however we may found out there are some practical problems that we have to face during the implementation.
At the first part of this essay, mains issues in the case study in relation to management control and accountability will be outlined. Moreover, this essay will be analysing the case study using contingency and institutional theory perspectives, and also comparing and contrasting these two perspectives. This essay will also discuss about the interpretation of the case differ from each perspectives.
Main Issues in the case study
Enterprise Resource Planning system integrate internal and external management information across an entire organisation to improve the transaction processing capabilities, co-ordinate record keeping, enable centrally stored information, making it easier to generate different types of financial reports and improve fiduciary control (Wagner and Newell, 2006). The paper used the case of Ivy to indicate the linkages between accounting and information architectures.
At the beginning, people realised the incompatibility in practices logics once the system rolled-out. Technology alone cannot force practice change, especially when the original design logic is misaligned with the legacy practice logics. Where such incompatibility exists resistance is often encountered (Berente et al., 2007). The system was not able to carry out legacy functions and satisfy the flexibility that management accounting demanded. People may not be able to get the accounting information that they need or expected to be able to get via the ERP system. When the users can no
Accounting information systems are often implemented into companies due to the advance in technology and competitive global markets. In the case study which is given, a new ERP system (Enterprise Resource Planning System) was introduced at an Ivy League University. Companies use software-based accounting tools to enhance the efficiency of working with its financial matters, however we may found out there are some practical problems that we have to face during the implementation.
At the first part of this essay, mains issues in the case study in relation to management control and accountability will be outlined. Moreover, this essay will be analysing the case study using contingency and institutional theory perspectives, and also comparing and contrasting these two perspectives. This essay will also discuss about the interpretation of the case differ from each perspectives.
Main Issues in the case study
Enterprise Resource Planning system integrate internal and external management information across an entire organisation to improve the transaction processing capabilities, co-ordinate record keeping, enable centrally stored information, making it easier to generate different types of financial reports and improve fiduciary control (Wagner and Newell, 2006). The paper used the case of Ivy to indicate the linkages between accounting and information architectures.
At the beginning, people realised the incompatibility in practices logics once the system rolled-out. Technology alone cannot force practice change, especially when the original design logic is misaligned with the legacy practice logics. Where such incompatibility exists resistance is often encountered (Berente et al., 2007). The system was not able to carry out legacy functions and satisfy the flexibility that management accounting demanded. People may not be able to get the accounting information that they need or expected to be able to get via the ERP system. When the users can no
Bibliography: Atkinson, A.A., Kaplan, R.S., & Young, S.M. (2004). Management accounting (4th ed.).Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Bryman(2006). Business Research Strategies, 20:38, Ch. 1, pp. 1-37. Available at: http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199284986/bryman2e_ch01.pdf Fiedler, F Hopwood, A. (1976) Accounting and Human Behaviour, Contemporary topics in accounting. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Hopper, T., Northcott, D Meyer, John W. (1977). “The effects of education as an institution,” American Journal of Sociology 83:55-77. Rob, G., Dave, O. and Carols, A. (1996). Accounting and Accountability, Essex: Pearson Seal, W., Garrison, R.H Scott, W. Richard (2004.) “Institutional theory” P408-14 in Encyclopedia of Social Theory, George Ritzer, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Vroom, V.H. and Yetton, P.W. (1973). Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press WagnerE, Moll J., Newell S