Section A - Group 1

Cisco Systems, Inc.: Implementing ERP

•

•
•
Why did Pete Solvik initially want to avoid an ERP solution?
Pete Solvik avoided ERP solution as the implementation of ERPs become “Mega-Projects” which
consume lot resources like time, labour and money. Hence, Cisco let each functional area make its own
decision which corresponded with organisational and budgetary structures that were installed by Solvik.

What was done to address the concerns of Solvik and Redfield regarding
ERP projects?
● The outage in January, made fixing of IT as a priority
● They addressed the time constraint by making 9 months as the total duration of the project
● The team used impact approach instead of the financial analysis method to convince the board
During ERP implementation, what did Cisco emphasis on: Speed and Action OR Analysis
and Planning? What is the justification?

The implementing team of Oracle had the strategy of “Rapid Iterative Prototyping”. The
name itself clearly states that the team’s focus is on speed and action, the team is willing to
take rapid actions then improve on the mistakes in the course of the action itself rather than
long analysis and planning. Some evidences of the same are:

1-the implementation team got to know during the course of implementation process that one
of its earlier decided goals of avoiding modification of the ERP software will not be possible
with Oracle.

2-Cisco did not test the software with big enough database compared to the actual size of
the database of Cisco.

3-they have tested the software for the processes one by one rather than simultaneously (as
it usually functions in the company). as a result of this the program was not stable during first
2 months after implementation it used to shut down at least once in a day.
Advantages of ‘ Big Bang’ ERP implementation approach

● Phased implementation of modules

● Fast implementation
● Accuracy
● Authorised access to all the teams-avoid malfunction
● Better handlers and Team set-up
Disadvantages of ‘ Big Bang’ ERP implementation approach

● Final testing-Failure at combined functional system

● Unable to handle the required load
● Inefficient operation
● Stalling of functions
Was Cisco smart or lucky with the ERP implementation project?
Cisco was smart enough in its implementation of ERP as it is evident from the facts:

● Cisco’s objectives were clearly defined which was followed by a structured approach
● Cisco cautiously chose their business partners - KPMG, Oracle and Hardware vendor
● It deployed numerous committees and a team of best and brightest personnels
● It incorporated “Rapid Iterative Prototyping” and implemented the ERP in a sequential phases of CRPs
(Conference Room Pilots)

Cisco was lucky in the sense that its prime vendor, Oracle was highly committed to the project and was
involved in continuous retrospection and improvisation. Also, the hardware vendor’s contract was
based on promised capability. Hence the onus of fixing any issues were bore by the vendor itself.

Why was there a performance dip after cutting over to the ERP system?
● The system crashed and was unstable because of problems in the hardware architecture and sizing
● The system was not tested with a big enough database (actual size of the database) attached to it
● The system was tested for individual processes rather than all the processes at once.