1.

At the beginning of the case, it was clear that the legacy UNIX-based system was not
able to provide the degree of redundancy, reliability and maintainability Cisco needed for
its exponential growth. Systems outages became routine and other negative consequences
like a two-day shutdown happened. However, no steps forward had been taken to lead the
effort to replace the system and no managers were eager to take on the project for the
reasons listed as below.
Governance policies of Cisco. Most IT expenditures were delegated to individual
functional areas, while core IT infrastructure spending was centralized and
budgeted out of general overhead accounts. With a replacement system that would
cost millions of dollars and months to implement, it would be unconvincing for
any individual business unit to raise it to the board, as it was stated by Pond in the
case: None of us was going to throw out the legacies and do something big.
ERP as a mega-project. Implementing ERP system would need tremendous
time and effort that mandate change in many areas of the organization, including
heavy reengineering focus and existing hardware replacement. Preliminary
research on different packages, strategic plans and reasonable project budget need
to be done before presenting to the board members. Support from top-level
management is crucial in the process. It requires the very best, most
knowledgeable employees who would be pulled out from their former position to
work to define the future operating practices of the organization. Thus, the
divisional performance may suffer as the firm loses key employees in areas where
they formerly excelled.
Unknown outcome of the replacement. As it is stated by Michael Hammer in the
article Reengineering Work: Dont Automate, Obliterate, reengineering is an
all-or-nothing proposition with an uncertain result. While Cisco sustained an 80%
annual growth rate, the change would have substantial effects on the continued
success of the company. The surveys cited in the article Enterprise Resource
Planning also show consistently that many executives think ERP may not change
or actually damage their business. If a complete new system was adopted, it was
uncertain that it might worth all the effort or not.

1
2. After stabilization, people thought highly that the new system would fulfill the
promise of supporting the magnitude of growth that the company was expecting.
Cisco was highly successful with its ERP effort because of the following reasons:
Recognized the problem and developed a realistic plan. Although Cisco did
not take the effort to replace the old system at previous outages, the company
finally decided to take the ERP project after the company shutdown due to the
incompetency of the UNIX-based system. Thorough researches and analysis
were made during the vendor selection process. Cisco narrowed the field to
five packages within two days and two candidates were selected after one
weeks high-level evaluation. Vendors were asked to respond to Ciscos RFP
and invited to a three-day software demonstration.
Diligent consultant and vendor selection. KMPG as a critical partner, had
brought in people with experiences in the industry, and valued the opportunity
to actually build a business around putting in these applications. This
cooperation was extended through the end of system implantation. With
KMPGs assistance and the efficient selection process mentioned above,
Oracle was selected as the vendor because of its better manufacturing
capability, long-term functional development of the package, its flexibility
and motivation.
Targeted implementation plan and initial project budget were met. Target
dates were set pragmatically with 12 milestones in 9 months. Five tracks
including Order Entry Track, Manufacturing Track, Finance Track,
Sales/Reporting Track and Technology Track with business and IT leaders
and consultants from Cisco, KMPG and Oracle were appointed, which
represented all aspects of the company. The organized and well functioned
team structure and reporting system had provided Cisco with the fundamental
basis for success. Three phases of CRP were carried out during the
implementation with each CRP was built on previous work to develop a
deeper understanding of the software and how it functioned within the
business environment. The CRP was a well-organized and step-by-step plan,
2
which allowed the problems to be discovered and solved before each phase,
and thus advanced the efficiency.
High priority of the project in the company. All areas of the company was
involved and upper management supported the project. It was emerged as one
of the companys top seven goal in the year. And everybody in the company
knew this was happening and it was a priority for the business. A variety of
most seasoned personnel were engaged in the project.
Above all, the most important things that Cisco did correctly were its willingness
to adopt change and its selection of team. Instead of continuing to modify the old
system, Cisco made to decision to take the 15 million, 9-moths project. More
importantly, team members were carefully selected to represent all aspects of the
company and outside supports. The implantation team of five tracks and from
both KPMG and Oracle was a critical part for its success.

3. Although the project was a huge success, there were few mistakes Cisco should
avoid during the process. The initial cutover to the Oracle system was unstable
and system went down nearly once a day. The primary problem was with the
hardware architecture and sizing. Thus, the overall business performance
plummeted. The hardware issue should have been noticed during the CRP2. The
second problem was that the software was not able to handle the transactions
volume required in the Cisco environment. During the CRP3, individual processes
were operated and only a partially loaded database was used. Thus, the system
showed incompetency after the cutover when all processes were running together
over a fully converted database. The other thing Cisco should do better was the
regular audit during the implementation process. CRPs were built on previous
work, which would leave the possibility of misleading for the subsequent process.
A review and audit process should be put in place from the beginning.

4. Cisco has a strong tradition of standardization where all functional areas would
be required to use common architecture and databases. Standardization is more
efficient, speeding up operation processes and improving organizations
3
performance. However, standardization can cause inflexibility. Some aspects of
business may needs to be tailored and standardization will make the process and
modification more complicated. First, when a standardized process is to be set up,
it should suit the needs of all the function areas. While a modification is made, the
same sequence needs to be gone through again. A good decision for one sector
may be problematic for others. Thus, it will risk the entire organization.
For a standardized system, competitive advantage cannot be obtained because its
competitors also have the opportunity to implement it. And employees skill and
companys documentation process are built around the standardized system. If
further changes or upgrades of the system are made, the company will need to
take a lot of effort and money to follow the standardized change, and any failure
in doing so may negatively influence the responsiveness of business operations.
Moreover, a standardized system does not necessarily mean it is the best system
in all the functional areas. Some vendors may provide better separate software
packages. It may be cheaper and efficient to select for each process and integrate
as a whole.

5. When we recognize a problem in the company, we should first analyze the
problem thoroughly, and then propose possible solutions with supporting reasons.
Solutions can be conservative like making modification, or progressive like
replacing the whole system in this case, as long as it is supported with
justification. After a decision is made, complete and realizable plans should be
made. For a mega-project in this case, commitment from the leadership and
everyone in the entire organization is essential to have the best people in place.
Moreover, both internal and outside resources needed to be utilized in the project.
Outside experts can be extremely helpful with their past experiences. Once a plan
is set, it shall be carried out in time and reviewed carefully to make sure the
success of the project.