Modeling ERP Academic Deployment via AST

INTRODUCTION

Many educators and industry leaders believe industry-academic collaboration can change learning processes and improve learning outcomes by providing opportunities and resources not otherwise attainable (Sikkel, Spil, & van de Weg, 1999; Wohlin & Regnell, 1999). In the case of deploying advanced information technologies (AITs; e.g., computer-aided software engineering tools, enterprise resource planning systems, and database tools) via industry-academic collaboration, each institution’s culture and unique organizational objectives influence collaborative relationships. The challenge in these relationships is to facilitate mutual understanding and clarify distinctions in addressing each organization’s goals. The aim of these relationships is the appropriation of AITs in a manner that enriches educational experiences while meeting industry needs.
There are many quandaries associated with this phenomenon. How does the deployment of AITs within the educational curriculum facilitate the educational process? To what degree should these resources be utilized in education? What tools and methods should be used to deploy these resources? What should the role of the AIT vendor or consultant be? Can academic independence be maintained within a strong industry collaborative relationship?
Without a framework that identifies relevant variables, it is daunting at best to begin to assess the impact of varying degrees of adoption, identify effective processes of deployment, and move toward assessing costs and benefits. Though some frameworks address industry-academic collaboration (Mead, Beckman, Lawrence, O’Mary, Parish, Unpingco, et al., 1999), none have considered the implications of AITs on the evolution of interinstitutional collaborative relationships. This exposition discusses a framework seeking to address this need. The framework proposes a theoretical model for understanding the forces at work when integrating AITs into educational settings (LeRouge & Webb, 2002).
We begin our discussion by introducing adaptive structuration theory as the foundation for the industry-academic AIT collaboration framework (DeSanctis & Poole, 1994). We then introduce constructs and relationships related to industry-academic collaboration within the context of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems.

BACKGROUND: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK – ADAPTIVE STRUCTURATION

Adaptive structuration theory (AST), an extension of structuration theory, has been used as a framework to study organizational change processes when advanced technologies are adopted. Adaptive structuration is a sociotechnical perspective that introduces human actors and organizational context as moderators of the impacts of technology (Gopal, Bostrom, & Chin, 1993; Poole & DeSanctis, 1992). This perspective posits that the adoption of an advanced technology is a process of organizational change that results from the mutual influence of technology and social processes.
It is our premise that in an academic setting, human actors and organizational context are moderators of the collaborative process in which AITs are appropriated as each entity strives to fulfill its own needs. Such dynamic processes have an effect not only on the outcome of the appropriation, but also on the evolution of the relationship between industry and academia. As the number of academic institutions adopting AITs increase, we feel AITs will serve some groups better than others.
We introduce the framework’s components in the context of ERP systems adoption in academe. We exemplify ERP systems within the specific context of colleges ofbusiness for a number of reasons: market demand, level of commitment required, interdisciplinary functionality, and level of system sophistication. The level of commitment and potential impact implied by the magnitude of ERP systems suggests that the study of ERP systems in business colleges may be associated with a considerable effect size detectable in future research efforts.
Our model of the constructs and relationships is represented in Figure 1. Model constructs and attributes are summarized in Table 1.

Figure 1. Adaptive structuration theory applied to industry-academic collaborations involving AITs (adapted from DeSanctis and Poole, 1994; LeRouge & Webb, 2002)

ADVANCED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRUCTURE

Two ways have been suggested to describe the contributing social structures offered by an AIT. The first, “structural features,” refers to the types of rules and resources offered by the system. The second, “spirit,” can be thought of as the intended purpose and utilization of the system (DeSanctis & Poole, 1994).
With respect to technology spirit, there is a natural gap in appropriation between business use and academic use of ERP systems. The spirit of ERP systems can be described as information technology structures designed to integrate operational-level transaction processing, multilevel decision support, and strategic management of major corporations. However, the goals of ERP use in colleges of business are primarily educational and exploratory in nature, often focusing on discipline-related subsystems. This gap in system goals and values may have implications for academic-industry collaboration.
With regard to structural features, ERPs are a comprehensive suite of applications that support diverse organizational functions and processes. The suites developed by major ERP vendors commonly contain more than 15 modules, each of which is geared toward a different industry process and requires a significant training investment. For example, SAP offers some certification programs requiring over 40 days of classroom training. Accordingly, ERP systems challenge colleges with a level of sophistication that affords flexibility in feature set and appropriation, but requires substantial training to achieve acceptable performance.

Table 1. Constructs of interest (LeRouge & Webb, 2002)

EXTERNAL SOURCES OF STRUCTURE

A report of the American Accounting Association determined that “the markets for accounting students will drive the ‘models’ of education, including delivery, content and pedagogy” (Lea, Berlin, Butterwick, Carpenter, Flaherty, Glazerman, et al., 1998). However, ERP systems have found new avenues of opportunity to continue past growth through such channels as e-commerce and service-firm-oriented modules (Stedman, 2000; Wilson, 2000). As such, the ERP market seems strong as is the demand for graduates to work with such systems (Watson & Schneider, 1999). Examples of sources of structure are detailed curriculum guides for computer science (Lidtke, Stokes, Haines, & Mulder, 1999) and information systems (Gorgone & Gray, 2000), as well as documented industry needs for trained graduates and focused ERP research that are driving vendor alliance programs (SAP, Inc.,2001).

TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE

A practical component in any study of the appropriation of AITs is a basic cost-benefit analysis. Are the total costs and commitments in deploying these systems rewarded with an enriched educational experience and increased marketability?
Technology infrastructure can be a major cost consideration. ERP systems are large-scale AITs requiring a significant commitment of academic resources (Becerra-Fernandez , Murphy, & Simon, 2000; Watson & Schneider, 1999). These systems typically cannot be deployed or maintained without support from ERP vendors or consultants. Industry may facilitate appropriation through donated services; however, colleges may face additional costs. Hence, some form of collaborative relationship seems a precursor for the existence of these systems in academic settings.

EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

The philosophies of appropriating ERP systems among educational entities vary widely. The overall philosophic quandary involves balancing conceptual technology education and the development of technology skills. ERP exposure may be used to emphasize the informational aspects of various topics via conceptual illustration rather than dwelling on the technology. Conversely, ERP systems can be used to create the learning environment necessary for experiential learning where students work through business problems via scenarios using a system running training data. The degree of centralization and support in an academic department and the degree of coupling existing between courses included within the curriculum can affect the adoption of ERP systems.
This educational organization structure also impacts the appropriation of technology and the collaborative relationship. If constraints mandate deploying only one ERP system within the curriculum, could the college be transmitting a product endorsement message that constrains the scope of the curriculum? Are there positive or negative connotations, from a student or industry perspective, for a college of business known as an Oracle, SAP, or Sybase “shop”? Accordingly, do companies place any implicit or direct pressure on colleges to exclusively employ their software?

APPROPRIATION AND EDUCATION PROCESS

Structuration has at its core motivated and practical actions. Rules and resources embodied in social institutions are appropriated by participants and enter into the production and reproduction of the social system (Poole & DeSanctis, 1992). Industry-academic collaborative interaction is embodied in the appropriation of the AIT into the educational process.
Educators determine the curriculum strategy and the degree of appropriation for these mammoth ERP systems. The degree of appropriation has been addressed by academic institutions in a variety of ways ranging from inclusion of exemplary material within courses to new course creation, to establishing new degree programs.
The appropriation structure leads to choices regarding strategies for integrating the learning model(s) and supporting technologies within an instructional design. ERP systems are adaptable to many models of learning depending upon the educator’s objectives. The model of learning chosen may affect the instructor’s approach and utilization of these tools. To illustrate, conceptual presentation and demonstration may adequately support knowledge-level learning objectives, while experiential learning models may better support higher order learning objectives (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1995). One example of educational process is the case-based learning approach for ERP system development in undergraduate classes (Stewart & Rosemann, 2001), while another is the integration of vendor training materials into an existing college course (SAP, Inc., 2001).

EMERGENT FORMS OF EDUCATIONAL METHOD

Educational approaches discussed in the research on collaboration among software engineering programs and vendors that potentially influence collaboration with ERP system vendors include the following.
• Accelerated internship programs providing hands-on experiences (Powell, Diaz-Herrera, & Turner, 1997; Wohlin & Regnell, 1999)
• Independent study support by vendors and institutions
• Industrially experienced teachers (Wohlin & Regnell,1999)
• Educational credit for vendor-sponsored training programs (Beckman, Coulter, & Mead, 1997)
• Jointly developed courses (Wohlin & Regnell, 1999).
• Participation in upgrade and maintenance efforts
• Case studies inspired by industry (Dawson & Newsham, 1997; Sikkel et al., 1999)
• Research within industry settings (Wohlin & Regnell, 1999)
An example of emergent forms of ERP-related education is the use of problem-based learning in which graduate students work with industry partners to design ERP solutions to solve a business problem. The completed solutions are then used as the basis for the development of teaching cases to support learning in undergraduate ERP-related courses (Stewart & Rosemann, 2001).

JOINT OUTCOMES

The purpose of ERP appropriation and industry-academic collaboration is to achieve mutually beneficial joint outcomes for both academia and industry (SAP, Inc., 2001; Stewart & Rosemann, 2001). The desired joint outcomes may include facilitating the educational mission, gaining competitive advantage, accessing educational resources, enhancing reputation, increasing revenue, and providing a staffing source (Mead et al., 1999). The academic institution, industry, or both may desire each of these goals. However,just as success is not guaranteed in implementing these systems in an industry setting, desired joint outcomes from academic appropriation are not guaranteed.

STRUCTURE OF ACADEMIC-INDUSTRY COLLABORATION

The collaborative system is not a recognized organization, but a structured social practice of interdependence that has broad spatial and temporal extension (Giddens, 1982). There are no global, formalized standards for the appropriation of ERP systems in educational settings or specifications for industry’s participatory role in this phenomenon. Though some industry alliance programs may require agreements regarding the fees, donations, or support of AITs, educational methods and processes are guided by practice and choice (SAP, Inc., 2001). Certain practices, or implied dynamic rules, are embodied in the collaborative relationship created between industry and academia. The existence of ERP alliance programs may be considered a representation of social practices affecting the structure of academic-industry collaboration. Representations of the implied social practice may also be found in such documents as curriculum guides that encourage industry participation and the study of ERP system concepts in academic programs (Gorgone & Gray, 2000; Lidtke & Stokes, 1999; Lidtke et al. 1999).
Practices suggested for a successful collaboration based upon case study experience (Powell et al., 1997) include the following.
• Central coordination point
• Right mix of knowledge and experience
• Cooperative planning and scheduling
• Flexibility to change curriculum
• Communication to build teamwork
• Balance to maintain objectivity
Mead, Unpingco, Beckman, Walker, Parish, and O’Mary (2000) provide examples of how the academic-industry collaboration process could work. Based on a study of 21 collaborations, this article discusses four alternative collaboration models in use, varying governance structures observed, and the need to establish metrics to monitor and modify the collaborative process.

FUTURE TRENDS

The appropriation of AITs in colleges of business is a modern phenomenon that aspires to bridge the industry-academic gap while fulfilling educational goals. From a practical perspective, industry and consumers of academic education often desire opportune, practical training and education from academic institutions (SAP, Inc., 2001; Stewart & Rosemann, 2001). However, the costs of appropriation may be high and the impact of appropriation on educational processes and collaborative relationships may be either minor or dramatic. Thus, thejoint outcomes of AIT appropriations and collaboration are uncertain. Stakeholders should recognize the potential influence of structure and social context on desired outcomes when embarking on the process of industry-academic collaboration. AIT appropriation and associated collaboration decisions may affect the educational foundation and career prospects of the technological workforce. These changes are already underway in both industry and academe (SAP Inc.; Stewart & Rosemann). As such, further research is needed to investigate relationships among the constructs and attributes identified in the framework and their effect on both academe and industry.

KEY TERMS

Advanced Information Technology Structure: The rules and resources offered by systems such as computer-aided software engineering tools, enterprise resource planning systems, and database management systems that support the intended purposes and utilization of those systems.
Appropriation and Delivery Structure: The rules and resources that determine the choices made by educators regarding strategies for integrating the learning model(s) and supporting technologies within a selected instructional design.
External Environmental Structure: The rules and resources offered by outside interests including academic standards bodies, technology developers and vendors, industrial organizations, employers, and end users.
Educational Organization Structure: The rules and resources offered by the internal educational institution that are derived from how it is organized as well as program requirements, curriculum, and course objectives.
Education Process: The use of learning models and supporting learning technologies to deliver the learning experience and/or training with students.
Emergent Forms of Educational Method: New methods and techniques that may be employed or used in the education process related to the deployment of AIT in academe.
Joint Outcomes: The direct output and by-products of the education process including student learning, an employable work force, AIT market exposure, and contributions to industrial and academic research.
Structure of Academic-Industry Collaboration: The representation of social practices among the stakeholders affecting academic-industry collaboration that result in the establishment of rules of practice and the provision of resources.
Technology Infrastructure: The required supporting activities and facilities including network, hardware, software, development, and maintenance.