International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296

ERP dalam tindakan - Tantangan dan manfaat bagi pengendalian manajemen dalam
konteks UKM
Henri Teittinen, Jukka Pellinen, Marko Jrvenp
University of Jyvskyl, Sekolah Bisnis dan Ekonomi, Jyvskyl, Finlandia
articleinfoabstract
Pasal sejarah:
sistem ERP telah fundamental kembali membentuk cara data bisnis diterima 31
Januari 2011
dikumpulkan, disimpan, disebarluaskan dan digunakan di seluruh dunia. Bagaimana-
Diterima dalam bentuk direvisi 7 Februari 2012 Diterima 2 Maret 2012
pernah, penelitian yang ada dalam akuntansi telah disediakan hanya relatif sedikit temuan empiris implikasi untuk kontrol
manajemen ketika perusahaan menerapkan sistem ERP sebagai Keywords plat- teknologi: Tantangan kontrol ERP sistem
Manajemen manfaat
terbentuk. Terutama langka adalah temuan mengenai tahap produksi, setelah implementasi, ketika proses informasi, praktek kerja
terkait dan isi informasi baru dapat dilihat sebagai ditetapkan. Dalam makalah ini kami dieksplorasi dan berteori manfaat,
tantangan dan masalah untuk kontrol manajemen ketika ERP sistematis tem digunakan, empat tahun setelah implementasi.
Temuan kami juga menggambarkan mengapa dan dalam keadaan apa tantangan ini dan manfaat mungkin ada. Untuk pandangan
holistik organisasi temuan kami, berdasarkan studi kasus kualitatif, dibangun dari titik pandangan-orang pada tingkat yang
berbeda dan fungsi organisasi. Manajemen puncak diharapkan sistem pengendalian strategis baru, namun karena banyak
tantangan itu berakhir dengan kontrol berbasis akuntansi hanya keuangan. Pada tingkat operasional, tantangan serius
menyebabkan di- penggunaan yang memadai dari sistem ERP. Kontrol manajemen menghasilkan data dasar keuangan dan harus
bersaing dengan banyak lems masalah.Safe_mode praktis disebabkan oleh implementasi ERP.
2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved.
Kami menerima aturan International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi: Naskah tidak sedang dikaji setiap jurnal lain dan
tidak ada bagian dari naskah telah diterbitkan sebelumnya.
Sesuai penulis di: University of Jyvskyl, Sekolah Bisnis dan Ekonomi, Jyvskyl, Finlandia, PO Box 35, FI-40.014
University of Jyvskyl, Finlandia. Tel .: +358 14 260 2924; fax: 35814 617 194.
alamatE-mail: henri.v.teittinen@jyu.fi (H. Teittinen).
1467-0895 / $ - melihat hal depan 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved. doi: 10,1016 / j.accinf.2012.03.004

Isi daftar tersedia di ScienceDirect International Journal of Sistem Informasi

Akuntansi
279 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
1. Pendahuluan
Meluasnya penggunaan perencanaan sumber daya perusahaan (ERP) sistem pada dasarnya telah kembali berbentuk data cara
bisnis dikumpulkan, disimpan, disebarluaskan dan digunakan di seluruh dunia. Perubahan orientasi pengolahan tion
INFORMATION ini secara fundamental mempengaruhi banyak bidang akuntansi dan kontrol. Namun, penelitian yang ada dalam
akuntansi telah disediakan hanya relatif sedikit temuan empiris berguna. (Sutton, 2006; Granlund, 2011) Penelitian dalam sistem
informasi akuntansi telah terutama terbatas pengambilan keputusan dan isu-isu kontrol manajemen telah mendapatkan hanya
sedikit perhatian (Granlund, 2011). Seperti studi sebelumnya telah difokuskan terutama pada tahap implementasi ERP (lihat
misalnya Poston dan Grabski, 2001; Granlund dan Malmi, 2002; Bradford dan Florin, 2003; CAGLIO, 2003; Lodh dan Gaffikin,
2003; Newell et al, 2003;. Scapens dan Jazayeri, 2003; Scott dan Wagner, 2003) sulit untuk memperkirakan berapa abadi
konsekuensi dari pergeseran teknologi ini untuk pengendalian manajemen akan. Meskipun pengendalian manajemen dan sistem
ERP menjadi tak terpisahkan sebagai semacam standar bisnis baru atau badan Temic sistematis, kita hanya memiliki sedikit bukti
empiris tentang cara-cara di mana sistem ERP yang terlibat dalam praktek manajemen (lihat juga Granlund dan Mouritsen 2003).
Kesenjangan ini telah dicatat dalam studi kontrol manajemen baru-baru ini menyerukan penelitian lebih lanjut memeriksa
penggunaan sehari-hari sistem ERP (lihat misalnya Dechow dan Mouritsen, 2005;. Grabski et al, 2009; Granlund, 2011) dengan
menanyakan apa yang sebenarnya kita ketahui tentang efek sistem ERP pada organisasi, dan terutama pada kontrol manajemen.
2. Sastra review pada ERP dalam kontrol manajemen
2.1. Kontrol manajemen
sistem kontrol manajemen telah didefinisikan dalam berbagai cara dalam akuntansi dan manajemen sastra. Pandangan yang
berlaku adalah bahwa sistem kontrol dalam organisasi terdiri dari satu set bentuk yang berbeda dari kontrol yang dalam interaksi
sistemik dengan satu sama lain. Ada tipologi yang berbeda konseptualisasi unsur-unsur utama dari sistem kontrol secara
keseluruhan, berbeda dengan jumlah elemen dan konseptualisasi (Otley, 1980; Simons, 1995; Alvesson dan Krreman, 2004;
Malmi dan Brown, 2008).
Malmi dan Brown (2008) dianalisis dan disintesis hampir empat dekade kontrol manajemen sistematis penelitian tem. Mereka
membentuk tipologi sistem kontrol manajemen yang terdiri dari tujuh unsur: rencana-ning, kontrol cybernetic, reward dan
kompensasi, administrasi dan kontrol budaya. Ketika menetapkan tujuan untuk bagian yang berbeda dari organisasi, perencanaan
menciptakan kontrol umpan-maju. Trols con cybernetic didasarkan pada efek dari informasi umpan balik dan perbandingan pada
tujuan. Imbalan dan kontrol sation mengkompensasi dioperasikan ketika keputusan tentang manfaat keuangan dan lainnya
didasarkan pada pencapaian tujuan. Kontrol administratif menggunakan struktur organisasi, kebijakan dan prosedur untuk
mendapatkan orang-orang dalam organisasi untuk berperilaku dengan cara yang diinginkan. Sebagai nilai-nilai bersama,
keyakinan dan norma-norma sosial membuat perilaku dan kontrol efek, jenis kontrol disebut kontrol budaya.
(1965) definisi klasik Anthony kontrol manajemen berfokus pada proses informasi formal dimana akuntansi manajemen
pusat, dan juga membedakan antara perencanaan strategis, pengendalian manajemen dan pengendalian tugas. Perencanaan
strategis adalah proses penetapan tujuan organisasi, sedangkan kontrol tugas adalah proses untuk memastikan bahwa tugas-tugas
tertentu dilaksanakan secara efektif dan efisien (lihat juga Anthony dan Govindarajan, 1998). Pengendalian strategis berfokus
pada bagaimana strategi direncanakan dan dilaksanakan dalam jangka panjang, sedangkan kontrol tugas berfokus pada kinerja
jangka pendek tahunan atau. Fungsi pengendalian manajemen dengan demikian untuk mendukung manajer dalam memantau
konsekuensi keuangan dalam jangka pendek, tetapi pada saat yang sama menjaga mata pada isu-isu strategis jangka panjang yang
muncul terkait dengan manajemen perubahan yang berhasil (lihat juga Merchant, 1998; Chenhall dan Euske, 2007; Merchant dan
Van der Stede, 2012). Kemudian dalam penelitian ini kita akan menggunakan kontrol operasi jangka bukannya kontrol tugas,
yang kami percaya menjelaskan lebih tepat kegiatan pengendalian di tingkat operasional.
Dalam makalah ini tujuan kita adalah untuk mengeksplorasi penggunaan dan implikasi dari teknologi ERP untuk
pengendalian manajemen terutama dalam terang Anthony (1965) dan Merchant dan Van der Stede (2012), sementara mereka
analyt- ically membedakan pengendalian manajemen dari kontrol strategis dan operasi . Kami fokus pada proses mation informal
formal dimana akuntansi manajemen dipandang menjadi elemen sentral. Fungsi-fungsi ini berbeda dari kontrol juga biasanya
terletak di bagian-bagian fungsional yang berbeda atau tingkat hirarki organisasi.
280 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
2.2. ERP dan kontrol manajemen
ERP sistem saat ini merupakan suatu infrastruktur teknologi penting untuk sistem akuntansi dan pengendalian manajemen
dalam organisasi. Sistem ERP, sementara sistem akuntansi tidak murni, yang terpusat terikat dan dibangun oleh proses
perencanaan dan pengendalian cybernetic. Dengan cara ini pengendalian manajemen dan teknologi informasi telah diklaim tak
terpisahkan. (Granlund dan Mouritsen, 2003; Chapman, 2005). Dalam makalah ini kita akan fokus pada kegiatan pengendalian
manajemen dasar ini: penggunaan terbuat dari ERP di strategis, manajemen dan kegiatan pengendalian operasi.
Sistem ERP modern yang ini tertanam dengan janji integrasi yang standarisasi operasi dan dengan demikian memungkinkan
manajemen terpusat mereka. Mereka berjanji untuk memecahkan masalah manajemen yang paling mendesak, untuk membentuk
organisasi ke dalam bentuk yang diinginkan, dan, sebagai hasilnya, mencapai tingkat tinggi Mance perfor-. Semua ini akan
dicapai dengan mengadopsi sistem ERP. (lihat misalnya Granlund, 2011) bisnis The harafiah K arakteristik, bagaimanapun,
menjelaskan implementasi yang sangat menantang yang kadang-kadang bahkan melumpuhkan operasional seluruh perusahaan.
Janji integrasi atau manfaatnya tidak dapat direalisasikan dalam praktek. Iman buta dalam kapasitas efisiensi meningkatkan
teknologi baru dapat menyebabkan lems efisiensi masalah.Safe_mode baru. Tergantung pada bagaimana dilaksanakan, TI juga
dapat menghasilkan gambar dibatasi dari (ekonomi) reality (Granlund, 2011, hlm. 10).
Meskipun perusahaan potensi teknologi tidak harus menggunakan kemampuan analisis tertanam dalam ERP dan paket perangkat
lunak lain (Granlund, 2011). Kita bertanya-tanya mengapa: mengapa potensi kinerja improve- ment dari teknologi informasi baru
tidak diwujudkan dalam praktek? Dan selanjutnya, dalam kasus-kasus ketika model operasi diprogram ke dalam ERP tidak sesuai
organisasi, informasi technol- ogy mungkin menjadi perangkap kinerja buruk dari yang sangat sulit untuk menemukan jalan
keluar. Ketika digunakan sistem cenderung mendikte apa yang dapat dilakukan dan apa yang tidak (Dechow dan Mouritsen,
2005; Hyvnen et al, 2009.). Implementasi sistem ERP modern dan sangat kompleks yang tidak jelas seperti yang telah disajikan.
Ini juga telah diamati dalam studi akuntansi manajemen baru-baru ini (lihat misalnya Chapman, 2005; Dechow dan Mouritsen,
2005; Quattrone dan Hopper, 2006; Hyvnen et al, 2008, 2009.). Studi-studi ini berpendapat bahwa implementasi adalah proses
sosial pertama dan terutama. Quattrone dan Hopper (2006) de- juru ERP implementasi sebagai proses perubahan melalui
kustomisasi dan keterlibatan pengguna. Mereka berpendapat bahwa SAP (satu software ERP komersial) tidak akan pernah ada
sebagai objek nyata dengan fitur yang jelas dan itu tidak akan pernah mencapai titik akhir yang stabil. Mereka mempelajari
implementasi SAP dalam satu organisasi multinasional dan melaporkan bahwa bahkan empat tahun setelah memulai
pelaksanaannya, ketika muncul untuk beroperasi dengan lancar, SAP adalah ... tidak lengkap. Fenomena yang sama juga dicatat
oleh Rikhardsson dan Kraemmegaard (2006), yang mempelajari implementasi ERP di enam perusahaan Denmark. Mereka
menyimpulkan bahwa ERP adalah lebih merupakan perjalanan pengembangan ganizational atau- dari proyek implementasi
sistem. Mereka juga berpendapat bahwa ERP adalah mitment com- untuk mengubah organisasi, proses tanpa akhir.
Meskipun ada versi industri yang berbeda dan sistem itu sendiri adalah modular dalam struktur, ERP adalah perangkat lunak
standar. (Hyvnen et al., 2006) Sebagai perangkat lunak standar, ERP menawarkan solusi standar untuk semua perusahaan,
semua situs produksi dan semua tugas. Hal ini diketahui bahwa untuk banyak tugas ada best-of-breed solusi gudang soft dengan
fungsi yang lebih baik dari ERP, tetapi banyak perusahaan yang bersedia untuk berkompromi dengan ERP sebagai pilihan terbaik
kedua untuk tugas individu sementara bertujuan integrasi, manajemen yang lebih terpusat operasi, dan manfaat kinerja
reorganisasi ini. Hal ini juga mungkin bahwa model erations op- diprogram ke dalam ERP tidak sesuai dengan tugas khusus di
tangan. Ini karakteristik larutan standar ERP menimbulkan pertanyaan bagaimana orang membuat teknologi bekerja dalam
praktek sehari-hari meskipun masalah dengan prosedur formal dimaksudkan. (Dechow dan Mouritsen, 2005;. Grabski et al,
2009) ini memerlukan cusing FO pada praktik kebiasaan sekitar implementasi ERP dan penggunaan.
Menurut Dechow dan Mouritsen (2005) (dalam ERP) data mungkin akurat, dapat dibagikan dan tersedia untuk berbagai pihak
tapi hampir tidak menciptakan mimpi panoptic visibilitas dan tindakan dari jauh. Tidak ada tempat untuk semua rincian dari
semua masalah kontrol manajemen. Sesuatu selalu dihilangkan. Bahkan jika sistem ERP membuat akuntansi keuangan kuat,
mereka tidak secara otomatis memperkuat manajemen akuntansi. Dechow dan Mouritsen (ibid.) Menemukan ini paradoks karena
sistem ERP sering disajikan sebagai tech- nologies untuk kontrol manajemen.
Dechow dan Mouritsen (2005) menganalisis bagaimana dua perusahaan dikejar integrasi manajemen dan kontrol melalui
perencanaan sumber daya perusahaan (ERP) sistem. Mereka menyimpulkan bahwa kontrol tidak dapat stud- ied selain teknologi
dan konteks. Sistem ERP tidak mendefinisikan apa integrasi dan bagaimana itu menjadi
281 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
dikembangkan, tetapi mereka menyiratkan techno-logika bahwa kondisi bagaimana kontrol dapat dilakukan melalui representasi
keuangan dan non-keuangan. Mereka mengakui bahwa sistem ERP sangat menarik untuk apa mereka membuat mustahil.
Granlund (2011) kemudian disorot hasil ini dengan menyatakan bahwa konfigurasi sistem informasi dapat mendefinisikan
(mengaktifkan atau menghambat) aspek-aspek tertentu dari kontrol manajemen. Efek tersebut tidak terlihat jelas, dan para
pengambil keputusan sering tidak menyadari konsekuensi dari pilihan mereka diminta untuk membuat selama pelaksanaan
sistem.
Penelitian juga telah menunjukkan bahwa tingkat organisasi yang berbeda mungkin memiliki perspektif yang berbeda pada
sistem ERP (lihat van der Weeken dan Wouters, 2002; Dechow dan Mouritsen, 2005; Rikhardsson dan Kraemmegaard, 2006;.
Hyvnen et al, 2008 dan juga Kaplan, 1988). van der Weeken dan Wouters (2002) berpendapat bahwa penggunaan sistem ERP
bervariasi secara signifikan antara tingkat organisasi. Dechow dan Mouritsen (2005) dan Hyvnen et al. (2008) berpendapat
bahwa orang-orang dalam organisasi berarti hal yang berbeda ketika berbicara tentang sistem ERP yang sama.
Selain itu, kita dapat mencatat bahwa dalam studi sebelumnya telah fokus pada wawancara dengan manajemen puncak (lihat
Dechow dan Mouritsen, 2005; Rikhardsson dan Kraemmegaard, 2006;. Hyvnen et al, 2008). Namun, perspektif manajemen
puncak ini menggambarkan hanya satu, sering aspek yang sangat sempit seluruh ERP. Bagaimana ERP dalam perspektif ini
menjadi sebuah fakta perlu penelitian lebih dari sejauh ini telah dilakukan. Rikhardsson dan Kraemmergaard (2006) juga
menekankan bahwa manajemen puncak hanya yang tampak argumen positif pada ERP di sebagian besar perusahaan.
Menurut literatur sifat standar sistem ERP juga bermasalah. Sebagai Dechow dan Mouritsen (2005) dan Quattrone dan
Hopper (2005) menggambarkan, sangat menantang untuk mengkonfigurasi ulang sistem ERP setelah sekali telah diinstal. Rom
dan Rohde (2007) menyatakan bahwa sistem ERP dan proses yang dapat direncanakan namun penggunaan tidak bisa. Granlund
(2011) menyimpulkan bahwa sistem ERP mempromosikan standarisasi praktik akuntansi di organisasi, tapi kami tidak tahu
bagaimana.
Tantangan solusi perangkat lunak standar yang penting dalam organisasi global tetapi juga di perusahaan-perusahaan kecil.
Dalam studi sebelumnya telah fokus pada implementasi SAP di perusahaan MNO global. Studi kami akan melihat sebuah
organisasi satu derajat lebih kecil, yang juga menggunakan solusi ERP alternatif (yaitu IBS) bukan yang biasa dipelajari SAP.
Singkatnya, penelitian sebelumnya telah menunjukkan bahwa sistem ERP standarisasi bisnis, tetapi apa yang terjadi,
khususnya untuk pengendalian manajemen, jika operasi di unit bisnis yang sangat berbeda, dan jika tujuan dari orang yang
menggunakan ERP sangat berbeda? Temuan penelitian terutama yang tersedia di organisasi tinational besar global dan
multitafsir, sementara sedikit perhatian telah dibayarkan kepada perusahaan-perusahaan kecil meskipun juga mereka telah sangat
aktif dalam menerapkan sistem ERP. Temuan ini hanya tersedia pada manajemen puncak, yang biasanya telah sangat positif
mengenai sistem ERP, karena mereka telah merencanakan visi penggunaan ERP dan cenderung tidak mau mengkritik keputusan
sendiri. Studi sebelumnya juga telah dibuktikan bahwa orang-orang dalam organisasi dapat memahami ERP dalam berbagai cara.
Meringkas semua ini atas- disebutkan hasil penelitian dan kesenjangan mencatat, tujuan kita dalam penelitian ini adalah untuk
mengeksplorasi dan berteori apa yang manusia-agement kontrol manfaat, tantangan dan masalah telah datang untuk tinggal
sebagai akibat dari implementasi ERP: apa, mengapa, dan di yang keadaan dalam konteks tidak perusahaan yang sangat besar
dan dari inisiatif-inisiatif perspec- dari semua tingkatan organisasi.
Tujuan dari penelitian kami adalah untuk mengeksplorasi dan berteori manfaat, tantangan dan masalah untuk kontrol ment
mengelola- empat tahun setelah pengenalan sistem ERP. Kami juga mencoba untuk menemukan penjelasan mengapa dan dalam
keadaan apa tantangan ini dan manfaat mungkin muncul. Untuk mencapai pandangan holistik organisasi temuan kami dibangun
dari sudut pandang orang pada tingkat yang berbeda dan dalam fungsi organisasi.
3. Metode Penelitian dan Metodologi
Fokus dalam penelitian ini adalah dalam analisis mendalam dari penggunaan sistem ERP untuk tujuan pengendalian
manajemen dalam sebuah organisasi berukuran menengah. Untuk mencapai pemahaman yang mendalam dari fenomena tersebut
kami mengadopsi metode studi kasus kualitatif dan eksploratif, mendasarkan argumen kami temuan dari kehidupan nyata.
(Ahrens dan Dent, 1998; Ahrens dan Chapman, 2006; Ahrens et al, 2008;. Vaivio, 2008) Studi kasus dan lapangan kerja lapangan
empiris sering disarankan untuk mempelajari lebih lanjut tentang efek zational-lembaga yang kompleks ERP (misalnya Sutton
2006; Rom dan Rohde, 2007; Granlund, 2011) dan untuk mempersoalkan apresiasi konsultatif dan buku teks dari kegunaan
sederhana nya (Vaivio, 2008) dari sistem ERP.
282 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
organisasi kasus kami, Grup Aluminium, merupakan pemasok terkemuka komponen pengecoran di Eropa. Omset kelompok
adalah 130 juta Euro dan memiliki lebih dari 1400 karyawan. Grup Aluminium beroperasi secara global dan memiliki pabrik
produksi di enam negara yang berbeda: di Finlandia, Swedia, Cina, India, Estonia dan Rusia. Perusahaan juga memiliki kantor
penjualan di Perancis, Denmark dan Amerika Serikat. Tomers cus- utama aluminium adalah dalam industri telekomunikasi dan
otomotif. Semua fungsi kelompok utama ed locat- di kantor pusat di Finlandia. Manajer pabrik pabrik bertanggung jawab secara
finansial.
Grup Aluminium terpilih sebagai perusahaan kasus kami karena: 1) sistem ERP mereka sudah bangun dan berjalan selama
beberapa tahun; 2) mereka telah menerapkan semua modul ERP utama; 3) mereka memiliki berbagai jenis usaha di unit bisnis
yang berbeda, tetapi sistem ERP yang sama diterapkan di semua unit bisnis; dan 4) ukuran perusahaan memungkinkan kita untuk
membentuk konsepsi organisasi secara keseluruhan. Kami dianggap menarik untuk menyelidiki sistem selain SAP. Itu juga
sangat penting bahwa agement manusia-atas memberi kami akses penuh dan dukungan untuk melakukan studi pada ERP dalam
tindakan.
Sistem ERP diterapkan di Grup Aluminium pada tahun 2003, dan semua modul ERP utama yang digunakan aktif (Financials,
Penjualan dan Dukungan, Manufaktur, Distribusi, Sumber Daya Manusia) dan juga beberapa modul tambahan yang mendukung
modul inti tersebut. Sistem ERP diterapkan di 10 tanaman duction pro berbeda di 5 negara yang berbeda. Di Finlandia dan di
Swedia semua karyawan menggunakan sistem ERP, sedangkan di negara-negara lain yang dipilih pengguna kunci menggunakan
sistem. Pengguna akhir mencapai 235. Sistem ini juga termasuk lebih dari 1200 bahan baku dan membeli item, lebih dari 1600
item semi-diproduksi dan lebih dari 4000 produk akhir. Lini produksi memiliki total 50 menampilkan di mana para pekerja bisa
membuat mencoba en- ke dalam sistem ERP.
Pemeriksaan empiris kami dilakukan pada tahun 2006, dan termasuk 24 wawancara, yang semuanya direkam dan ditranskrip.
Biasanya wawancara berlangsung dari satu sampai satu setengah jam. Selain itu kami memiliki beberapa diskusi informal dan
pertemuan di perusahaan kasus, dan kami juga bertemu dengan manajemen perusahaan beberapa kali selama kerja lapangan.
Selain itu, kami mengumpulkan informasi dari berbagai bahan seperti brosur sistem vendor.
Kami menggunakan wawancara semi-terstruktur sebagai tujuannya adalah untuk menciptakan sebuah diskusi terbuka,
sehingga juga memungkinkan diskusi tentang aspek negatif dari ERP. Wawancara dimulai dengan pengenalan pose pur-
penelitian. Kami melihat bahwa sebenarnya banyak dari yang kami wawancarai sangat senang bahwa seseorang ingin mendengar
bagaimana ERP bekerja dalam praktek. Banyak tampaknya memiliki kebutuhan untuk melampiaskan pikiran mereka tentang
ERP untuk orang luar. Sering wawancara sebenarnya mulai tanpa pertanyaan bidang kita: Bagaimana ERP bekerja dalam
prakteknya, bagaimana Anda menggunakannya dalam tugas-tugas Anda?
Selama wawancara tema yang tak terduga dan masalah juga muncul. Kami berusaha untuk mengatasi masalah ini secara lebih
rinci, dan kadang-kadang ada kebutuhan untuk sebuah wawancara tambahan. Sebagai contoh, kami tertarik bagaimana perubahan
dalam jalur produksi dan dalam kelompok mesin akan mempengaruhi laporan akuntansi biaya dan kontrol manajemen.
Wawancara dilakukan dengan narasumber dari tiga tingkat organisasi yang berbeda: 1) manajemen puncak, 2) keuangan,
orang administrasi dan penjualan, dan 3) manajemen produksi, supervisor produksi dan lantai toko orang. Pandangan karyawan
pada tingkat yang berbeda dan dalam fungsi yang berbeda dari organisasi memberi kami, gambaran rinci kaya penggunaan sistem
ERP.
Data dianalisis dengan membaca data wawancara dan mengamati manajemen ERP terkait yang berbeda con trol manfaat,
tantangan dan masalah. Untuk tujuan analisis kita mendefinisikan manfaat sebagai keuntungan atau keuntungan ac- cruing dari
sesuatu, dan didefinisikan tantangan sebagai sengketa, mempertanyakan sesuatu, atau tugas yang sulit atau menuntut seseorang.
Namun, manfaat bagi seseorang mungkin secara bersamaan menjadi tantangan bagi orang lain. Dengan demikian definisi
manfaat atau tantangan tergantung pada diwawancarai dan kami harus membuat analisis kami dengan tingkat al organisasi-.
Dalam menganalisis data, pertama kita dikategorikan tantangan dan manfaat. Semua temuan itu bernomor total 108 temuan
yang relevan, yang 81 adalah tantangan dan 27 manfaat. Setelah ini kami menganalisis data dengan subdivid- ing tantangan dan
manfaat dan memvisualisasikan hubungan antara mereka (lihat analisis data tantangan dalam Lampiran 1).
4. ERP mendukung pengendalianstrategis
manajemen Topterutama ditemukan ERP menjadi fantastis alat kontrol manajemen. Semua eksekutif senior diwawancarai,
CFO, CIO dan COO menekankan bahwa ERP telah menambahkan transparansi dan itu mudah untuk mengontrol semua unit
bisnis dan kegiatan pada saat itu.
283 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
Ini telah berhasil bahwa segala sesuatu adalah transparan pada saat ini. Jika saya melihat dari perspektif manajemen resmi dalam
hal keuangan, itu adalah alat yang fantastis. Aku bisa melihat penjualan dan rekening mana-faktor tory saya inginkan. Aku bisa
melihat perintah. Aku bisa melihat semua yang saya butuhkan untuk melihat, piutang, kewajiban, apa pun yang saya inginkan,
dan semua transparan dan real time.(CFO 10.11.2006)
Sebuah memutuskan keuntungan juga bahwa manajemen keseluruhan perusahaan itu difasilitasi oleh sistem ERP yang baru.
Aksi global membutuhkan pendekatan yang koheren. Selain itu, ERP tersebut berisi bentuk standar yang mudah untuk
menerapkan di baru (dibeli atau didirikan) tanaman.
Dari sudut pandang saya itu benar-benar baik, bahwa kita hanya memiliki satu sistem, ketika itu sangat mudah untuk memeriksa
apa yang terjadi di pabrik kami. Kakak yang mengawasi mereka. (Tertawa)(COO 2006/11/13)
Manajemen puncak juga dirasakan manfaat utama dari ERP dalam manajemen strategis. ERP telah menjadi alat untuk
mengubah perusahaan dan operasi di pabrik menjadi bentuk yang diinginkan. Top agement manusia-yakin bahwa logika dalam
sistem ERP akan meningkatkan kinerja Aluminium. Sistem ERP didefinisikan bagaimana kelompok akan dikembangkan di masa
depan.
Kami mencoba untuk menemukan cara untuk mengoperasikan sistematis, dan beberapa cara kita merasa bahwa logika dalam
sistem ERP ini sangat pintar. (COO 2006/11/13)
The COO mencatat bahwa sistematisasi akan dicapai terutama oleh sys informasi baru - tem, karena sistematisasi adalah
'built-dalam' sistem ERP:
Kami bertujuan mode sistematis operasi. Dan itu beralasan untuk bekerja sebagai sistem ERP membutuhkan, karena
sistematisasi yang dibangun ke sistem tersebut. Dan tentu saja kita mencoba untuk setiap tanaman untuk beroperasi dengan cara
yang sama (COO 2006/11/13)berikut:.
The CIO menggambarkan rasionalitas di balik ERP diaktifkan sistematisasi dan harmonisasi antara tanaman yang berbeda
sebagai
Setiap tanaman melakukan tugas-tugas mereka di mereka sendiri cara. Namun, karena kita memiliki lebih dari 10 tanaman yang
berbeda, jika kita mencoba untuk menganalisis dan mengelola tanaman yang terpusat, kita harus mengumpulkan fakta-fakta
secara sistematis. Dasar-dasar harus dilakukan dengan cara yang sama jika Anda mencoba untuk membuat beberapa keputusan
umum. Dan salah satu cara untuk menempatkan mereka dalam bentuk yang sama adalah salah satu ERP umum.(CIO
2006/09/20)
Manfaat memutuskan juga tampaknya jumlah sistem. Pada saat wawancara hanya ada satu sistem kontrol utama, ERP, dan
tidak perlu untuk belajar dan menggunakan satu set yang berbeda dari terbaik-of-breed atau sistem pabrik-spesifik. Semua upaya
pengembangan dapat difokuskan ke dalam ERP seluruh perusahaan.
Hal ini sangat baik bahwa kita hanya memiliki satu sistem, yang adalah sama untuk semua orang dan yang dapat digunakan oleh
semua orang. Hal ini juga baik bahwa ada ada lagi sistem yang terpisah di setiap unit bisnis, yang, di samping itu, digunakan
dengan cara yang berbeda di masing-masing unit bisnis.(Bisnis Pengendali 2006/09/25)
Dalam manajemen puncak tujuan utama dalam memanfaatkan ERP adalah untuk melakukan sistematisasi dan standarisasi
fungsi dan metode kerja antara tanaman produksi yang berbeda. Lingkungan operasi berubah radi- Cally, pelanggan menjadi
lebih global dan tekanan untuk meningkatkan efisiensi operasi con- tinuously menantang manajemen puncak. Produksi harus
direncanakan dengan cara yang lebih komprehensif, sebagai CFO menggambarkan titik awal dari sistem ERP:
Kami telah (mulai) untuk belajar, bagaimana kita akan beroperasi sebagai nyenyak dan seefisien mungkin. Seperti beberapa
dokumentasi, tahapan dalam proses dan kekisruhan melalui mungkin, dan setelah itu bahan mengalir lancar melalui
organisasi.(CFO 10.11.2006)
manajemen Tengah dan staf kantor melihat manfaat utama dari ERP dalam tugas-tugas rutin sehari-hari. Sebagai contoh, data
berkumpul untuk keuntungan bulanan dan rugi dari seluruh unit bisnis sangat mudah dan bisa dilakukan dengan sangat cepat.
284 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
Untuk mengumpulkan informasi keuangan bulanan itu sangat cocok. Kadang-kadang cek kecil yang diperlukan dalam penilaian
dari gudang, tetapi terutama informasi akuntansi yang dihasilkan au- tomatically.(Bisnis Pengendali 2006/09/25)
Seorang akuntan menekankan bahwa sistem yang baik, tapi itu keunggulannya tergantung pada penggunaannya.
Ini menjelaskan banyak tugas. Namun, banyak kali, orang akan masukan ke dalam sistem angka dan angka apapun. Mereka
harus lebih berhati-hati ... Sebelumnya, ketika pembukuan itu di tangan saya sendiri, saya tahu bagaimana pembukuan bekerja.
Namun saat ini, saya merasa bahwa saya telah menjadi controller yang bertugas untuk mengontrol, hati-hati dan mempertanyakan
bahwa mengapa, mengapa dan mengapa?(Akuntan 2006/11/13)
4.1. Meringkas manfaat ERP
Seperti yang bisa dilihat, manajemen puncak menggunakan ERP untuk pengendalian strategis. ERP terlihat dalam cahaya
yang sangat positif. ERP tidak hanya digunakan untuk mempersiapkan bulanan laba rugi, tetapi juga untuk menciptakan dan
melaksanakan visi strategis perusahaan. Ini juga merupakan salah satu temuan utama kami dan kami dapat meringkas bahwa
manfaat utama dari ERP dalam kontrol manajemen dapat disimpulkan untuk: 1) memungkinkan visi strategis, 2) menerapkan
standar di seluruh dunia dalam perusahaan, dan 3) memungkinkan transparansi dalam mengendalikan anak perusahaan .
Studi kami menunjukkan bahwa salah satu manfaat utama dari sistem ERP adalah transparansi dicapai. Sistem ERP
ditemukan 'alat yang fantastis' untuk manajemen puncak memungkinkan transparansi dan kontrol. Secara khusus, sistem
menyoroti manfaat dalam kecepatan untuk mengumpulkan dan menciptakan bulanan laporan laba rugi. Laporan tersebut dapat
disusun dengan sangat cepat dari beberapa unit yang berbeda dalam organisasi, dan cukup mudah, karena tidak ada sistem yang
terpisah untuk pengumpulan data, tetapi hanya satu ERP.
Manfaat lain utama, terutama dari perspektif manajemen senior, adalah pelaksanaan visi strategis dengan ERP. Hal ini
mengacu pada integrasi beberapa unit usaha menggunakan sistem ERP. Hal ini memungkinkan untuk menggunakan barang-
barang umum, laba umum dan pernyataan kerugian dan laporan, dan prinsip-prinsip akuntansi umum. Hal ini memungkinkan
kontrol terpusat.
Selain itu, penggunaan sistem ERP terkait dengan reformasi dalam modus operasi. Hal ini dapat terkait dengan potensi
perubahan dalam budaya organisasi dicapai oleh satu sistem ERP standar. Manfaat utama yang dihasilkan dalam organisasi kasus
kami disajikan pada Tabel 1.
5. ERP menciptakan konflik dan kontradiksi dalam kontrol manajemen
Tantangan utama dalam menggunakan sistem ERP adalah bahwa entri (dalam lini produksi) harus dilakukan AB- solutely
dengan benar. Ini berarti, sesuai dengan sistem ERP yang sebelum pengguna dapat bergerak di dalam tion produc-, tahap proses
sebelumnya harus dicatat. Sebaliknya, fase proses selanjutnya tidak dapat direkam sebelum rekaman fase proses sebelumnya
telah dilakukan dengan benar karena sistem ERP mengharuskan item harus seimbang.
Supervisor di pabrik J melaporkan bahwa proses produksi selalu sama di pabrik ini, tak ada perubahan. Perubahan besar yang
sekarang terjadi sebagai proses produksi itu harus di- tegrated ke dalam proses didefinisikan dalam sistem ERP.
The (produksi) proses belum berubah. Produk telah diproduksi selama bertahun-tahun dalam proses yang sama. Tapi sekarang
proses-proses tersebut telah dibangun ke sistem ERP dan masalah oc- skr, terutama dalam membuat entri dalam rantai produksi.
Jika rekaman tidak benar-benar benar, tahap berikutnya adalah dalam kesulitan.(Supervisor di pabrik J 2006/10/09)
Pada tingkat lantai toko sistem ERP bekerja jika rekaman entri bekerja. Jika membuat entri tidak bekerja, maka sistem ERP
tidak berhasil, sebagai real time dan sistem pengendalian manajemen yang transparan telah direncanakan. Prasyarat adalah bahwa
kesalahan seharusnya tidak terjadi. Bahkan tunggal kesalahan, rekaman lengkap atau rekaman tidak dilakukan dalam proses entri,
bisa membawa sistem ERP berhenti.
285 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Sistem Informasi Akuntansi 14 (2013) 278-296
Tabel 1 Manfaat Utama dihasilkan dari sistem ERP.
Manfaat
Keadaan Manfaat Apa dan mengapa (dampak Tentatif pada kontrol manajemen)
puncak
Manajemen
Mengaktifkan visi
ERP memungkinkan untuk menerapkan strategi baru.
ERP enables strategic control: logic of the ERP is perceived to be also the logic of the company. Growing and globalizing
business needs new kind of control systems.
ERP enables strategic control: standardized management control systems will be implemented in all the new plants and acquired
companies. Transparency ERP system is a good control tool. In
particular it makes business transactions transparent.
ERP enables operative control: ERP works as a management control tool.
Routine tasks Top management perceives that ERP system
works well in routine tasks, but only nega- tive things will be discussed openly. Administration Transparency/
bookkeeping
Accounting and book keeping work well. Monthly profit and loss statements will be gathered very quickly.
ERP enables operative control: ERP works as a management control tool.
Possibilities In ERP systems are numerous functions
(some not utilized). One system Only one system. Knowledge and support
will be focused on the ERP system. There is no need to support other systems. Production Transparency/
bookkeeping
Accounting and book keeping work well. Monthly profit and loss statements will be gathered very quickly.
ERP enables operative control: ERP works as a management control tool.
Routine tasks Basic and simple things can be done by ERP. ERP works if things happen as predefined in the system.
This system requires that everything has to be done exactly, spot-on, as the system requires, or the system goes down. It does
not tolerate any mistakes. (Production planner at factory J 22.8.2006)
Entries were sometimes made long after the concrete production phase, and mistakes and errors in making entries caused
continuous confusions in production. The official way of thinking on the shop floor was that production processes should move
on in a certain pace and entries to the ERP system should be done according to the production activities as they occurred.
However, the workers empha- sized that working would become slower when entry failed or balances had to be checked
manually. In production lines the workers did not in practice follow the official mode of operation presented by the ERP system.
Making changes to the ERP system seemed very troublesome. The basic data in the ERP system were based on some rough
estimates and plans, but when these plans changed, the system was unable to follow.
It can never follow, and that it is the problem. If you worked by the rules of the ERP, you would lose your flexibility, and you
would work in a very rigidly planned way. That is also possible, but there- after you can unlearn your flexibility. You can't do
many tasks at the same time, you cannot change the machine by occasion, you have to do it in one predefined way. (Plant
manager at factory J 18.10.2006)
Making changes was apparently impossible, which meant that not all entries could be made. This led to faulty cost and
profitability reports on products and customers.
If some of our volume products are ordered for fast delivery, we try to serve our major cus- tomers as best we can. We use all
possible machines, all possible routings and capacity for that kind of fast delivery orders of volume products. And for the rest we
try to find alternative
286 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
routings, possibly outsourcing. Our world at the factory changes all the time, which can be also seen in our cost accounting. The
system just works like that. (Plant manager at factory J 24.11.2006)
Our case company operated in two different industries. The main difference between these industries was the customer's mode
of operation. Factory J operated in the telecommunications industry and the mode of action was 'from order to make'.
The starting point here is what the customer wants. We do all we can to execute that (produce and deliver the order as soon as
possible). In that case we will respect no system. We will put all our ef- fort into the production, so that the customer will get the
order when they need it. That is our work- ing philosophy. We try to be very flexible. And nobody ever asked if the order was
done according the ERP system, but they have asked if the delivery was on time and if the quality was as agreed. Well, you can
imagine how this kind of flexibility can be built into the ERP system. (Plant manager at factory J 18.10.2006)
The reality in plant J seems to be anything but systematic, as the plant manager describes:
Unfortunately that is the role of the subcontractor. If we think a bit, how systematic we should be if we worked according the
systematic ERP system, we should release our production orders for the next week by Wednesday, so that men, supervisors and
workers could plan their coming week. Un- fortunately there has never been a situation where the planning holds to the next
week. (Plant manager at factory J 24.11.2006)
In practice this means that production orders will be prioritized according to customers' wishes.
Our life is such that we often discontinue production orders (processes) and start on more urgent ones, and thereafter continue
with the older orders. And in practice the routings may change so that normally the order goes through one pipe, but now it goes
through three pipes (through our sub- contractor and other pipes and machines in our factory). Routings change all the time. Tell
me who has time, when you notice that we are not working according the ERP system, to make the changes into the ERP system,
and try to get the ERP work. The factory in practice does not work in that way. (Plant manager at factory J 18.10.2006)
Traditionally factories have been managed by financial accounting information. However, radical and rapid changes in the
environment mean that the management control of factories requires more detailed information. In our case, the flexibly changing
machine (entry) groups seem to be both obstacles to work according to the ERP system and obstacles to utilizing cost and
profitability analyses. Production at the fac- tories is managed according to customers' wishes, not according to the ERP system.
According to the philosophy of the ERP system all changes should be done in the ERP system and pro- duction should follow
thereafter. Note that the product is in focus in production. Management and control in their entirety are based on producing the
product. From the management control perspective cost and profitability analyses are essential in the factories. However, in
practice factory management does not trust the cost and profitability reports of products and customers printed from the ERP
system at all. The main difference between external financial accounting and managerial cost and profitability reports is that the
financial information is based on facts like invoices and salaries. Cost and profitability analysis is then based on entries in
production lines, the correctness of which is highly suspect. As the supervisor pointed out, product profitability analysis was not
based on ERP reports because these are known to be faulty. This is because each step is not be signed into the ERP system.
The product profitability analysis is wrong, but the reason is that we are using the system wrong. We have agreed that it is not
worth entering each minute detail on each product as it takes time away from production. (Supervisor TP 13.11.2006)
Production management and staff saw very little benefit from using the ERP. The system worked, but only when the
prerequisites and situations in production fitted together. In practice, situations in
287 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
production were constantly changing and in SMEs there were no resources to add these changes into the ERP system. This
created challenges to make entries. It was also time consuming and frustrating to correct the mistakes. All these affects task
performance and satisfaction in production. Making basic entries could be done easily, but when a complicated entry was needed,
challenges arose immediately. At the moment in the production, the monthly profit and loss statement was the main financial
control tool.
Supervisors on the shop floor emphasized the role of production line workers in the use of the ERP system. The supervisors in
particular criticized the system as no substitute for the human thinking and experience needed in production management. For
them the ERP system was just an instrument, and the real production planning and management were done elsewhere.
It is continuous interaction. People in production planning and production discuss all the time. The ERP system suggests
producing something with detailed routings, but that does not work in practice. That would be fantastic, if we just input basic data
and orders and everything goes right. But our world changes daily, the order book changes, prioritizations change and so on.
Customers largely determine what we do. (Supervisor at factory J 9.10.2006)
It is noted that in practice it was the supervisor who outlined the situation at shop floor level in fac- tories: how many workers
were needed and which machines were to be used. Workers might be ill and machines might be undergoing maintenance.
Supervisors made the routing decisions in practice, de- spite what the ERP system suggested. Supervisors emphasized that the
ERP system did not outline the environment and situation in practice. The ERP did what it was commanded to do. The ERP
worked by the parameters inputted to the system. The supervisors reported that the ERP worked in its own re- ality as supervisor
at factory P reported:
The system does not understand the situation in that way, how many machines are available and so on. That is our job to divide
the order among different machines, so that the customer will get the delivery in time. (Supervisor at factory P 28.11.2006)
A real challenge is also the predictability of the production processes.
Working according to the ERP system requires that the processes are predictable. The system does not understand breakdowns.
It would be easy if you set up the machine at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, the setup time is 4 hours and thereafter there will be
produced 70 units per hour and the process ends the next day at 2 o'clock in the afternoon as predefined in the ERP system, no
matter how many units have been produced in practice. In practice it may be that nothing will be none produced (because the
production process is so challenging). (Operational manager at factory J 24.11.2006)
Challenges in the operational environment in production were due to the long and complex pro- duction chain. There were
many phases where changes might occur. Thus, in production they used the ERP system as they see it possible. Minor changes in
production were not entered into the ERP sys- tem. Very challenging cases were outsourcings to subcontractors. The central
management required that all basic data be inputted into the system. Only then could the entries in the production line follow
correctly.
Middle management and office staff related the main challenges to making entries but also to per- sonnel resources. The main
challenge arose whenever people made entries incorrectly. This was re- portedly due to pressure and haste in business processes,
trying to make their job faster and because of the complicated system. However, this delayed the processes in the supply chain.
If everybody followed the system, and made their orders from the system, everything in ac- counting would work. But many
times, people hurry when they feel that their tasks can be done much faster if they don't touch the system at all. This way they cut
corners, and then it is my job to ask manually these things afterwards. (Accountant 13.11.2006)
The accountant emphasizes that correcting the incorrect entries is time consuming and frustrating.
288 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
We are required to get the information from the people somehow. As an example, prices may vary be- tween the invoice and the
order, and then it is my job to check and ask these things, and correct them in the system. (Accountant 13.11.2006)
In practice, all major mistakes and errors had to be corrected in the system or it would not work. The entering process and
various functions in the ERP system were interdependent. In practice there had to be a person with the required knowledge to
correct those daily errors.
I correct errors. One of my tasks is to run around there in the factory, asking what is correct. For example, this morning I have
been running there since 7 o'clock with pencil and paper asking if these entries are correct. Isn't it a good system? Laughing!
(Production planner at factory J 22.8.2006)
Middle management and office staff emphasized that ERP included numerous options which had not yet been used because of
understaffing. ERP was seen as a good option, but insufficient personnel had so far been assigned to the usage of ERP. Middle
management was willing and able to use the ERP for business improvement but at the time of the interviews there was only time
for basic use.
You can do almost whatever you want if you have ability to use the system. (Accountant 13.11.2006)
Middle management and office staff named understaffing as the main challenge. They emphasized that it was a real challenge
in SME companies when the key user left the company. In our case study the main user in accounting, the person who was
implementing and determining the ERP for the company moved to another firm. This left a real gap in knowledge about using the
ERP.
We have not been able to develop the system because we lack resources. Especially after our main user in accounting left. At the
moment our task is to keep this system working. There is no time to develop it. (Business Controller 25.9.2006)
And he continued:
When the person who was implementing this system left the company, at the same time that created a big gap in our knowledge
of how to use the ERP in our organization. (Business Controller 25.9.2006)
Middle management and office staff perceived the main challenges to be understaffing and technical problems.
The real challenge experienced by top management was also that employees did not feel that making entries was the part of
their job. Top management understood that operational environments were different in different plants, and that making entries in
ERP, sometimes under high pressure was demanding and might lead to human error. But in every plant the same ERP logic had
to be followed. This was the top management perspec- tive on how things would happen using ERP. These requirements focused
especially on the people on the pro- duction lines, where the entries in ERP were to be done. The CFO emphasized the central
role of these production line ERP users as follows:
This is part of your job, when you start (the job), you sign it, when you stop it, you sign it; or when you take material and put it
forward, you sign it. It is your job to do it (to make sings)! (CFO 10.11.2006)Au- thor help here!
The CIO also reported that people still feared for their jobs when ERP was used. The employees did not understand what
would happen when ERP was introduced and this created some reluctance to use ERP in business development. Top management
was aware that negative attitudes to ERP persisted, but felt and emphasized that only negative aspects of ERP were discussed
among employees, never positive things. It is noteworthy that top management was mostly positively disposed to ERP and
mainly em- phasized the positive effects of ERP. In addition, employees still did not know what the processes really were and
how individual processes were linked to the overall production system of the plant. This meant that employees did not understand
why they needed to make entries in the system and how that benefited the business.
289 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
5.1. Summarizing the challenges of ERP
The main challenges faced by using the ERP system in our case organization are 1) making entries and 2) understaffing.
Challenges in making entries can be divided into several subchallenges. One of these is internaliz- ing the processes of the
organization. Nevertheless, three years after ERP startup the employees did not know what the processes were and how they were
related to the functioning of the company. Thus the employees did not understand why it was important to make entries into the
ERP system in different processes in the organization.
Another challenge in making entries was the excessively burdensome entry process. This took time in production and was a
source of error. Incorrect entries seemed to create frustration among the em- ployees. We also recognized that in some situations
it was not possible to make correct entries in the ERP system. This challenge occurred when production lines were changed but
new lines were not cre- ated in the ERP. All transactions should be signed, but while it was not possible, it also added frustra-
tion among the employees.
In addition, a real challenge which consumed a great deal of time and resources was correcting in- correct entries. Most of the
employees had basic skills in making entries, but no skills in rectifying mis- takes. Sometimes the source of the mistakes was
untraceable, making it even more difficult to correct these incorrect entries.
We also observed that shop floor workers especially were very critical of the ERP system. ERP was not accepted as part of
their job. They were interested in producing physical products, and most reluc- tant to use the ERP system, which exposed them
to the risk of error.
Another main challenge in our case organization was understaffing, in particular of those skilled in using the ERP system. Our
study shows that there were not enough people with have experience and skills to use ERP system at the case site. Firstly, the
modern and complex ERP system needed special skills. Secondly, there was no time to use other than basic functions of the ERP
system. And thirdly, if a key ERP person left the company, it created a big gap in knowledge and support in the usage of ERP.
The main challenges are presented in Table 2.
6. ERP in management control
At the strategic management level of the organization the ERP-centered business model (ie mode of operation) is taken as a
prerequisite for management control in Aluminium. It was expected that the implementation of the ERP-centered, highly
formalized, standardized and rigid planning and feedback processes enabled systematized and centralized control. However, it
required of the whole organiza- tion very strict compliance with the ERP system's work standards and the standard business
model. Managerial disciplinary processes were therefore crucial in order to maintain the work standards that the functioning of
the ERP system required.
Although the organization had different plants, all working in different ways, and operating in different operating
environments, according to top management one common information system was still the best possible solution for the
development of management control throughout the organization. This meant that different kinds of businesses were expected to
be harmonized with one business model presented in the ERP system. It also meant that the organization culture and work
practices should be harmonized, and that strategic management should accept that the fit with the business processes and control
system with the environment where the plant operates would not be optimal in all cases.
Production management called into question how one, common and standard ERP system can be used in different plants and
in different technological, work process and business contexts. In produc- tion the business model in use was based on
understanding the nature of production. Serving cus- tomers was top priority and a starting point for the whole business. When
the mismatch was the most striking, there were two parallel control systems in use. One was the formal ERP centered control,
maintained with minimum effort and only because it was required by top management. The other was the cultural control on
which the production staff relied in running the plant to serve customers.
In order for the ERP system to be a tool for management and control in production, the obstacle of making detailed and
correct entries into the system had to be overcome. The initial assumption was
290 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
Table 2 Main challenges faced by ERP system.
Challenges
Circumstance Challenge What and why (Tentative impacts on management control)
Top
management
Making entries
ERP is based on processes, but employees do not know what the processes are.
Challenge for operative and strategic control, if employees do not understand/internalize, that Employees do not understand why
it is required logic of the business is based on processes. to make entries in processes. Too many steps included in the entry
process. It takes time and generates incorrect entries.
Challenge for operative control if employees make errors in making entries, then reports will become faulty. Employees perceive
that making entries is not part of their job.
Challenge for operative control if employees do not use the ERP. If supervisors use the ERP reluctantly, shop floor workers
follow their lead. Administration Making
entries
It is not possible to make correct entries. Such problems occur when there are different kinds of machines or production lines
than predefined in ERP system.
Challenge for operative control if the data cannot be entered into the ERP. This leads to the faulty reports.
Employees will take a short cut and in this way speed up their tasks.
Challenge for operative control if employees do not use the ERP. Personnel resources
Key person leaves the company. In that situation knowledge is lost away from the company.
Challenge for operative control if employees cannot use the ERP. There is time to utilize only the basic functions of the ERP,
even if people perceive that there are a lot of other utilizing possibilities.
Challenge to develop management controlling if there are no personnel resources.
There are no experienced people to use ERP. There is a lot of data for different kind of management control purposes, but there
are no people to do that. Technical problems
ERP system breaks down or it is very slow. Challenge for operative control if ERP cannot be
used. Production Making
entries
Employees do not know what processes are and how they relate to the whole.
Challenge for operative and strategic control, if employees do not understand/internalize, that logic of the business is based on
processes. Employees do not understand why it is required to make entries. Rapid changes in production. Production lines are
required to changes (by the customers), but there is no time and no personnel resources to make these changes into ERP system.
Challenge for operative control if the data cannot be entered into the ERP. This leads to the faulty reports.
Too many phases included in the entry process. It takes time and generates incorrect entries.
Challenge for operative control if employees make errors in making entries, then reports will become faulty. The ERP system is
very complex. Making entries is required to be done in many different screens. Complex system takes time away from physical
production, which cause that people do not want to use the system.
Challenge for operative control if employees do not use the ERP.
Mistakes occur (incorrect entries) and it takes lot of time to find and correct these incorrect entries. People who have only basic
skills to use ERP, cannot solve this kind of problems.
Challenge for operative control if employees cannot use the ERP.
Technical problems
ERP system breaks down. Data which is required in production cannot be obtained from the ERP system.
Challenge for operative control if ERP cannot be used.
Standard nature of ERP
There are predefined processes in ERP system, but production is many times unpredictable: machines will break down,
production lines will be changed, and the output of the machines is many times not known.
Challenge for operative control if the data cannot be entered into the ERP. This leads to the faulty reports.
Lost focus ERP will attract all the focus away from
development of production. Resources will be
291 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
Table 2 (continued)
Challenges
Circumstance Challenge What and why (Tentative impacts on management control)
used to develop the ERP system and ERP pro- cesses, which is time away from the develop- ment of production.
Challenge for operative control in production if the time is used for developing ERP, not devel- oping physical production.
that the amount of time required for making entries would decrease. In practice the time used due to errors and mistakes was
many-fold.
Mistakes and errors were apparently due to a lack of basic computer skills. Making basic entries does not require any specific
skills, but lack of general computer skills was emphasized in making more compli- cated entries and in correcting mistakes.
Errors and mistakes made by oneself, by some other user, or untraceability of the error sometimes impaired motivation to use the
ERP system. Continuously correcting errors is very time consuming and entails a risk of the focus shifting from the customer to
the ERP system. The most critical actors for the functioning of the ERP system were the support users, who were able to correct
all kind of errors.
Supervisors at factories emphasized that without workers entry processes would not work. And with- out an entry process the
ERP system could not be used in management and control functions. Supervisors at shop floor level thought that the most
challenging task in the use of the ERP system was the integration of production processes with the ERP system. In practice this
merely added to the need for making entries and changes to the system, manifest in an increased number of errors and mistakes.
It was crucial for using the ERP system even one mistake or error was enough to stop the entry process in ERP. This did not
usually stop the production, but might delay it or give rise to new complications.
The real problem in the entry process was that errors and mistakes tended to cumulate. There were no skills available or no
time enough to correct these on the spot, but the production continued regardless. This meant that errors and mistakes persisted
and the entry process did not keep pace with the production process. These errors and mistakes became apparent at the latest in
the administration, when they could not print out the shipping documents.
In a rapidly changing environment product profitability analysis is deemed essential for management and control of
operations. However, the plant managers emphasized that the product profitability analysis of the ERP system could not be used
due to faulty data. The problem was particularly evident in the pro- duction process incompatibilities with the entry process.
Therefore management and control at factory level were based on the monthly, quarterly and yearly financial information
available. However, this was not sufficient for the needs of proper management control in production.
The grand intermediary role of management control that Anthony (1965) and management accounting textbooks (like
Merchant and Van der Stede, 2012) maintain, in the ERP context, is apparent merely in a brave struggle to keep the technological
and human parts of the system in operation. Faulty information is deleterious for the system. But when production people whose
role is to input information are too occupied with production operations do not understand the essential meaning of their
information input role for the system as a whole, and no-one does not have enough time for guidance or learning the system
usage at an adequate level, constant problems in system maintenance are inevitable. Faulty information input, in practice, makes
cybernetic control at the production level difficult and sometimes impossible. And the situation is even worse when production
operations demand great flexibility of planning. For strategic planning and control, however, this seems to be fine as long as the
financial information is substantially correct at the aggregate level and comparable between the production plants. This situation
is next visualized in Fig. 1.
7. Concluding discussion
ERP systems have attracted a lot of interest in accounting research. Much of this interest has been directed to various aspects
of ERP system implementation. The results of these studies have revealed many complexities and
292 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
challenges in the implementation processes (Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005; Quattrone and Hopper, 2006; Rikhardsson and
Kraemmegaard, 2006; Hyvnen et al., 2008). The effects of new ICT on accounting work and the organizational roles of
accountants have also been of great interest (Granlund and Malmi, 2002; Caglio, 2003; Scapens and Jazayeri, 2003; Hyvnen et
al., 2009).
Due to the novelty of the ERP technology centered phenomenon there is a lack of studies on the systems in use. It is noted
that implementation processes may be very lengthy and the systems may be unstable for years. Despite this, we think it is still
worth making a conceptual distinction between system implementation and use (Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005; Quattrone and
Hopper, 2006). Our study tries to fill this gap by making observa- tions and an analysis of a system that had been in use for a few
years, and the organization which had found some kind of stability in its existence.
In light of the findings of this study, the argument evinced by Dechow and Mouritsen (2005) about what ERP makes
impossible proved especially valid. ERP made it possible to gather financial accounting data in a standardized manner from all
business units and to provide top management with a set of basic financial accounting reports that are comparable between
production plants. This reporting was enough to give a feeling of transparency and control for top management at the level of
strategic control, but did not yield much useful information for the management of business units or any detailed profitabil- ity
analysis of the production. It proved impossible to conduct decent cost variance or product profitability analyses for the
managerial purposes of the business unit. This is especially due to the lack of resources in the maintenance of ERP systems and
the rigidity of ERP in planning when production flexibility was called for. In general, the lack of information systems skills and
time resources severely limited the opportunity to develop management accounting in the ERP context. Thus we may end up with
the proposition that very basic financial accounting, mainly income statement and balance sheet reports, will represent the
strategic control or strategic management accounting, and management control in SMEs using ERP sys- tems will be
characterized by a lack of advanced cost accounting and other management accounting tech- niques. Control, which was
considered as strategic control was actually restricted to the much narrower financial control based on periodical financial
statements.
Instead of allegedly contributing to integration, ERP has quite the opposite effects. As the ERP makes information
technologies more integrated, it simultaneously makes the long-term strategic control and short-term operative control within the
organization more disintegrated. In this sense our study
Fig. 1. The role of management control in ERP context.
293 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
supports earlier research showing that an ERP system may lead to functional barriers and contradictions in control rather than to
their breakdowns (see also Quattrone and Hopper, 2005). Moreover, and more significantly, the ERP did not fulfill top
management's expectations related to cultural integration at all.
In top management the ERP-centered running of the business is seen as a prerequisite for efficient management control. The
implementation of the ERP-centered, highly formalized and standardized communication processes makes systematized and
centralized control possible to some extent. This, however, requires very strict compliance from the whole organization with the
ERP system's standards and mode of action. On the shop floor, however, the main challenge is how a single, com- mon and
standard ERP system can work in different contexts, like plants, work processes and business contexts. On the shop floor the
business is always based on understanding the nature of production and serving the customer as top priority. As Mouritsen (1999)
found in his case study, here, too, the formal top-down driven system tends to replace the customer centered and flexible factory
with rigid bureaucracy. Thus ERP systems may have demoralizing effects on the culture of business organizations.
We argue that this disintegration may be caused by too burdensome production control logic embedded in the ERP systems
(see also Elmes et al., 2005) and by the rigidity of the ERP system whence changes in the production and business environment
are difficult to model in the system (see also Quattrone and Hopper, 2005). Thus the ERP system makes it very challenging
(Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005) to manage the strategic control and operative control in an integrated way. Some of the problems
are due to insufficient personnel resources and the vulnerability of the complex system. The functioning of the system as well as
the use of new analytical possibilities (including management accounting techniques) that it offers seem to depend on the main
user of the system, often just one person in the SME context.
Our analysis of the data from different levels of the organization shed light on the differences in how performance and
management control are understood. On the shop floor the performance is about being able to deliver the right kind of product to
the customer in time. The benefit of the ERP is evaluated on the basis of whether it helps the production to better perform their
task today. The top management time perspective is much longer because ERP for them is a means of strategic planning and
control, the results of which can possibly be evaluated only in a few years' time. For middle management and administrative staff
the incorrect data in the system causes annoying problems with the cybernetic control and financial information processes they
are involved in. Thus the major roles for management control were to struggle to keep the technological and human parts of the
system somehow operational, and to produce the financial accounting information.
We have also shown that the 'endless implementation' is due to a predefined ERP system, which is supposed to retain its form
unchanged (see Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005, Quattrone and Hopper 2001, Dillard and Yuthas, 2006; Quattrone and Hopper,
2006; Rikhardsson and Kraemmegaard, 2006). In the implementation defined processes and routings in ERP system are not long
valid in the fast changing business context. We have illustrated that at strategic level ERP standardizes and systemizes, but at
operational level, it needs to be adapted to the changes in business and customer requirements.
In small and medium sized companies, as in our case, this may be a problem, because there are no resources to make those
continuous changes and constantly adjust the ERP system to the changing envi- ronment. This may lead to conflicts and
contradictions in management control. If these reconfigurations are not done, it may result in incorrect usage of the system in the
form of making incorrect entries or not making them at all. Quattrone and Hopper (2006) state that ERP is homogeneous
information system (information system in a highly standardized form), which is used heterogeneously, in a very inconsistent
way in an organization. In our study the 'heterogeneous usage' of ERP is due to the large number of errors in making entries, but
especially because it is structurally impossible to use it in the intended way, particularly in factory J. What ERP renders
impossible is therefore important (Dechow and Mouritsen, 2005). In our study, we demonstrated that the heterogeneous use of
ERP may lead to problems in manage- ment control, particularly in the form of incorrect data and missing management
accounting techniques, and this is partly due to a lack of personnel resources in SMEs, and partly to the activities rendered
structurally impossible.
294 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
We can conclude that in this study we examined the everyday usage of an ERP system instead of the implementation phase
(see Granlund, 2011). We focused our attention on one manufacturing compa- ny which is not very large, and gathered our data
from all organizational levels instead of interviewing only top management or management accountants. We have demonstrated
that there are apparently massive challenges in companies of that size in using an ERP system, and showed that people who input
data into the system have a key role in the usability of the ERP system for management control purposes. Especially at the week
and day level of production planning (ie operative control) the tasks and the logic in ERP are in stark contrast with the resource
planning and the formal business model in use. Despite this contradiction, experienced and skilled people will always find their
ways in the everyday survival game of coping with the demands of ERP and business.
Finally we may argue that there was a certain connection between the benefits and challenges. The anticipated benefits were
in many ways conditioned by the issues, which really proved to be the challenges. Major benefits expected by top management
concerned strategic control related issues of 1) transparency and 2) strategic vision related to integration, ie standardized working
practices.
However, several challenges emerged and practically impeded the expected benefits. Scarce resources limited the
development and utilization of the ERP system and difficulties in making entries further limited the opportunity to use
management accounting information. This meant that the transparency in practice included only standardized 'financial
accounting transparency', no more. Moreover, difficulties in making entries and the structural inadequacy of the ERP also led to a
situation in which the working practices were little standardized in practice, but remained heterogeneous, while people in the
units tried somehow to 'survive' with the ERP system in order to keep the production process running and serve the customer
properly.
Whether this proposition holds only in our case study or whether it has wider empirical implications remains to be resolved in
further studies, including various field study settings or using statistical empirical data as the effects of heterogeneous plants or
scarce IT-resources to the use of ERP in SME context.
Appendix A. Interviews
Position in organization Date Duration of the interview
Application specialist SN 17.8.2006 1.0 h Production planner TO 22.8.2006 1.0 h Chief information officer JP 20.9.2006 1 h 15
min Business controller PK 25.9.2006 1.0 h Sales officer KS 6.10.2006 1.0 h Supervisor KP 9.10.2006 1.0 h Worker A 9.10.2006
15 min Supervisor TN 11.10.2006 1.0 h Worker B 11.10.2006 15 min Worker C 11.10.2006 15 min Plant manager at factory J
MK 18.10.2006 1.0 h Chief financial officer MT 10.11.2006 1.0 h Chief operative officer AN 13.11.2006 45 min Accountant IK
13.11.2006 45 min Plant manager at factory P MN 13.11.2006 45 min Supervisor TP 13.11.2006 1.0 h Worker D 13.11.2006 15
min Worker E 13.11.2006 15 min Business controller PK 27.11.2006 1.0 h Plant manager at factory J MK 24.11.2006 1.0 h
Development manager JV 28.11.2006 1.0 h Plant manager at factory P MN 28.11.2006 1 h 15 min Supervisor HV 28.11.2006 1.0
h Supervisor MT 28.11.2006 1.0 h Total 24 interviews
295 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
. txetnoc PRE nisegnellah C
296 H. Teittinen et al. / International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 14 (2013) 278296
References
Ahrens T, Becker A, Burns J, Chapman CS, Granlund M, Habersam M, et al. The future of interpretive accounting research. Crit
Per-
spect Account 2008;19:84066.
Ahrens T, Chapman C. Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: positioning data to contributing the theory.
Ac-
count Org Soc 2006;31:81941. Ahrens T, Dent JF. Accounting and organizations: realizing the richness of field research. J
Manag Account Res 1998;10:1-39. Anthony RN, Govindarajan V. Management control systems. Ed ke-9. Boston: Irwin; 1998.
Alvesson M, Krreman D. Interfaces of control. Technocratic and socio-ideological control in a global management consultancy
firm.
Account Org Soc 2004;29:42344. Anthony RN. Planning and control systems. A framework for analysis. Boston: Harvard
University; 1965. Bradford M, Florin J. Examining the role of innovation diffusion factors on the implementation success of
enterprise resource plan-
ning systems. Int J Account Inf Syst 2003;4:20525. Caglio A. Enterprise resource planning systems and accountants:
towards hybridization? Eur Account Rev 2003;12:12353. Chapman CS. Not because they are new: developing the contribution
of enterprise resource planning systems to management con-
trol research. Account Org Soc 2005;30:6859. Chenhall RH, Euske KJ. The role of management control systems in planned
organizational change: an analysis of two organizations.
Account Org Soc 2007;32:60137. Dechow N, Mouritsen J. Enterprise resource planning systems, management control and
quest for integration. Account Org Soc
2005;30:691733. Dillard JF, Yuthas K. Enterprise resource planning systems and communicative action. Crit Perspect
Account 2006;17:20223. Elmes MB, Strong DM, Volkoff O. Panoptic empowerment and reflective conformity in enterprise
systems-enabled organizations. Inf
Organ 2005;15:1-37. Grabski SV, Leech SA, Sangster A. Management accounting in enterprise resource planning systems.
CIMA Publishing; 2009. Granlund M. Extending AIS research to management accounting and control issues: a research note. Int
J Account Inf Syst 2011;12:
3-19. Granlund M, Malmi T. Moderate impact of ERPS on management accounting: a lag or permanent outcome? Manag
Account Res
2002;13:299321. Granlund M, Mouritsen J. Introduction: problematizing the relationship between management control and
information technology.
Eur Account Rev 2003;12:7783. Hyvnen T, Jrvinen J, Pellinen J. A virtual integration the management control system
in a multinational enterprise. Manag
Account Res 2008;19:4561. Hyvnen T, Jrvinen J, Pellinen J, Rahko T. Institutional logics, ICT and stability of
management accounting. Eur Account Rev 2009;2:
24175. Hyvnen T, Jrvinen J, Pellinen J. The role of standard software packages in mediating management accounting
knowledge. Qual Res
Account Manag 2006;3:14560. Kaplan R. One cost system isn't enough. Harward Bus Rev 1988;66:618. Lodh S, Gaffikin
M. Implementation of an integrated accounting and cost management system using the SAP system: a field study.
Eur Account Rev 2003;12:85-121. Malmi T, Brown DA. Management control systems as a package opportunities,
challenges and research directions. Manag Account
Res 2008;19:287300. Merchant K. Modern management control systems: text and cases. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall;
1998. Merchant K, Van der Stede W. Management control systems. Performance measurement, evaluation and incentives. 3rd
ed. Harlow:
Prentice Hall; 2012. Mouritsen J. The flexible firm: strategies for a subcontractor's management control. Account Org Soc
1999;24:3155. Newell S, Huang JC, Galliers RD, Pan SL. Implementing enterprise resource planning and knowledge
management systems in
tandem: fostering efficiency and innovation complementarity. Inf Organ 2003;13:2552. Otley D. The contingency theory of
management accounting: achievement and prognosis. Account Org Soc 1980;5:41328. Poston R, Grabski S. Financial impacts
of enterprise resource planning implementations. Int J Account Inf Syst 2001;2:27194. Quattrone P, Hopper T. What does
organizational change mean? Speculations on a taken for granted category. Manag Account Res
2001;12:40335. Quattrone P, Hopper T. A 'time-space odyssey': management control systems in two multinational
organisations. Account Org Soc
2005;30:73564. Quattrone P, Hopper T. What is IT? Inf Organ 2006;16:21250. Rikhardsson P, Kraemmegaard P.
Identifying the impacts of enterprise system implementation and use: examples from Denmark. Int
J Account Inf Syst 2006;7:3649. Rom A, Rohde C. Management accounting and integrated information systems: a literature
review. Int J Account Inf Syst 2007;8:
4068. Scapens R, Jazayeri M. ERP systems and management accounting change: opportunities or impacts? A research note.
Eur Account Rev
2003;12:20133. Scott SV, Wagner EL. Networks, negotiations, and new times: the implementation of enterprise resource
planning into an academic
administration. Inf Organ 2003;13:285313. Simons R. Levers of control. Boston: Harvard University Press; 1995. Sutton
SG. Enterprise systems and the re-shaping of accounting systems: a call for research. Int J Account Inf Syst 2006;7:16. Vaivio J.
Qualitative management accounting research: rational, pitfalls and potential. Qual Res Account Manag 2008;5:6486. van der
Weeken H, Wouters M. Using accounting information systems by operations managers in a project company. Manag Account
Res 2002;13:34570.