Harley-Davidson Motor Company: Enterprise Software Selection

1. Consider Exhibit 10 on page 22 of the case; does it include the factors you consider most important in the selection process? Which factors would you be inclined to weight most heavily?

Quantitative Criteria

1. Design and Foundation

2. Request Definition

3. Documentation

4. Receiving

5. Supply Management

6. Project Tracking

7. Miscellaneous

8. Interfaces

9. Training

10. Other

Yes. It does include the factors which we consider most important.

Out of these factors, Supply Management, Project Tracking and Receiving are the core functionalities which are anyway required. Design and Foundation, Documentation and Request Definition are the supporting requirements which add value and enhance the quality of service or functionality.

Thus our group would like to divide the whole list of quantitative factors into 4 separate groups:

Group 1: Core Functionality

Receiving, Supply Management, Project Tracking

Group 2: Supporting Functionality

Training, Interfaces

Group 3: Value adding functionalities

Documentation, Design and Foundation, Request Definition

Group 4: Others

Miscellaneous, Other

Enhancement

We would also like to add some more factors viz:

Group 1: Core Functionality

Receiving, Supply Management, Project Tracking, Customer Relationships, Business Intelligence

Group 2: Supporting Functionality

Training, Interfaces, Real time support

Group 3: Value adding functionalities

Documentation, Design and Foundation, Request Definition, User Friendliness, Knowledge Management

Group 4: Others

Miscellaneous, Other

Qualitative Criteria

1. Long term relationship potential

2. Research and Development

3. Training approach

4. Implementation/Education/Change Management Methodology

5. Understanding Harley?s requirement

6. Enabling the SMS

7. Out of the box fit

8. Financial Viability

9. Cost

10. Technical Support Offerings

11. Overall functionality

12. Number of partners included in Solution Proposal

13. Architecture Compatibility

14. Platform Portability

15. Web functionality ?to go?

16. Manufacturing Experience

This list too covers the most important factors.

Dividing this list into groups:

Group 1: Relationship and Understanding

Long term relationship potential, Understanding Harley?s requirement

Group 2: Experience and Fitness

Enabling the SMS, Financial Viability, Cost, Technical Support Offerings, Overall functionality, Architecture Compatibility, Platform Portability, Web functionality ?to go?, Manufacturing Experience, Training approach

Group 3: Innovation and Change Management

Research and Development, Implementation/Education/Change Management Methodology, Out of the box fit, Number of partners included in Solution Proposal

Enhancement

The listing can be enhanced as:

Group 1: Relationship and Understanding

Long term relationship potential, Understanding Harley?s requirement

Group 2: Experience and Fitness

Enabling the SMS, Financial Viability, Cost, Technical Support Offerings, Overall functionality, Architecture Compatibility, Platform Portability, Web functionality ?to go?, Manufacturing Experience, Training approach

Group 3: Innovation and Change Management

Research and Development, Implementation/Education/Change Management Methodology, Out of the box fit, Number of partners included in Solution Proposal

Group 4: Standing

Soft issues, Market standing, People compatibility, Previous Customer Feedback

2. Based on the information in the case, which provider would you select (and why)? Argue in favor of and against each vendor before arriving at the final decision?

Arguments:

Provider 1:

+ ve: High on Functionality, Change management and Cultural compatibility

– ve: none

Provider 2:

+ ve: High on functionality

– ve: Low on cultural compatibility, risk of it being just a typical sales pitch

Provider 3:

+ ve: Have engagement with the company, good functionality

_ ve: Poor show and conviction, not outstanding

Change management is a very important factor in changing times. Harley Davidson is not going to stick to present processes or technologies. Similarly cultural compatibility is extremely important. Even best software packages can fail if the people compatibility is not there. Half of understanding is completed when there is cultural compatibility. Also, communication gaps are minimized.

Having previous engagements should not be binding. Similarly the scenario should be looked past the presentation and the ?Genuineness? should be given weightage.

On the basis of this, we would select Provider 1.

3. What is your overall assessment of Harley?s approach to enterprise software selection? What (if anything) would you have done differently?

Enterprise Software Selection

Assessment parameter 1:

There should be involvement of the people in decision making who are actually going to use the software or those who will get affected by the software

Assessment parameter 2:

The company should itself do an analysis of the process and internal aspects of the requirement

Assessment parameter 3:

Study of the environment and other implementation cases

The Harley?s approach towards Enterprise Software Selection was excellent in
parameter 1 and 2. But it was lacking in parameter 3.

While looking inside and towards the suppliers, Harley needed to have a look into the present and future of industry too. It should have looked into the implementation of such software in other organizations and their experiences. Also, the trend in the industry is to be studied with regard to the processes. What if by the time software is implemented in Harley, the processes in industry changes? What if some other bike company or any other manufacturing company had tried linking customer relationships in the system and was successful?

Similarly, Harley totally neglected the additional functionalities which they do not need now but might need in future. They drew a boundary around the requirement and made it rigid. Thus it lacked the vision of future upgradation or fut6ure requirements.

Thus if the parameter of industry case analysis and future vision is included in this approach then it becomes complete.