سیستم های برنامه ریزی منابع سازمانی (ERP) و کنش ارتباطی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|1128||2006||22 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9900 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Volume 17, Issues 2–3, February–April 2006, Pages 202–223
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems represent a quantum leap in integrated, entity-wide information systems. Managers are implementing these enterprise-wide systems in organizations of all sizes and types. Ironically, by implementing such all-encompassing and prespecified systems, organizational managers in effect lose control of the strategic and operational processes and models that frame and instantiate the enterprise's management information system and ultimately their actions. These systems are designed and developed by the software vendor and the “best-practices” are embedded in the standardized software by the vendor's system developers. We develop a framework grounded in Habermas’ theory of communicative action that provides a description of the context within which ERP systems are developed and implemented. The framework also facilitates a critique of the underlying ideologies and assumptions associated with, and incorporated into, the ERP system design. The presentation opens with a discussion of ERP systems and the extent of their proliferation over the organizational landscape. The implications for the management and control of work organizations are also considered. Next, a Habermasian framework is developed and used in analyzing the cultural and social context within which ERP systems are developed and implemented. The efficacy of the system is illustrated using a reported system implementation.
The application of computer-based information systems has steadily developed over the past several decades following, and motivating, advances in scientific and administrative technology. The first wave of computer-based management information systems were designed to facilitate formal financial accounting functions. Next, other stand-alone systems were developed to carry out both accounting and nonaccounting functions such as production scheduling, product design, inventory management, and human resources. Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems represent the latest and most ambitious application of administrative and computer-based technologies in developing management information systems. This inclusive software integrates each of the separately focused information systems into one core software system designed to be the complete database and information system for an organization at the local, regional, national, and/or international level. An integrative architecture and relational database provide organization-wide access and analysis capabilities by standardizing data capture and providing seamless interfaces across functions, responsibility centers, and locations. As ERP systems become more widely implemented in organizations of all types and sizes, our enquiries and understanding must extend beyond the technical aspects of development and implementation. Following a developing body of accounting research,1 frameworks grounded in Habermas’ ideas have been applied in the accounting literature in a variety of domains with a good deal of the work addressing issues faced in the public and/or not for profit section.2 Several studies use Habermas’ ideas for addressing accounting information systems issues.3 Recently, ERP systems are getting some attention in the accounting literature,4 but to date none have considered ERP systems in the light of Habermas’ social theory.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
ERP systems are viewed by top managers and other organizational constituents as objective responses to technological conditions and economic competition. These systems are widely viewed as politically neutral instruments that can be abstracted from consideration of the fundamental issues of exploitation and control. Because these instruments are viewed as politically neutral, their effects on the background knowledge and communal interests of ERP users and other affected parties are often overlooked. This preceding discussion uses Habermasian principles to explore the forces that lead to ERP adoptions and to examine their consequences. The institutionalization of ERP systems among most large firms and major industries is a result of a combination of complex and powerful forces. Firms in capitalist environments face continual pressure to maximize profits and enhance wealth. ERP systems are viewed as mechanisms that rationalize processes, reduce workforce, and enhance productivity, among other benefits. They are viewed as inevitable technological advances that must be adopted by firms seeking to remain at the forefront in the modern business environment. Institutional forces that reward firms for mimicking the most successful firms in their industries and industrial forces that reward firms which use standard transactional protocol also promote ERP use. Alliance partners, especially professional service firms, play on psychosocial factors promoting ERP systems as a management advancement that is both rational and progressive. All of these forces combine to promote continual growth in ERP use among new adopters as well as expansion among existing users. ERP systems are adopted by top management with the objective of imposing a variety of changes upon the organization. These administrators seek personnel and cost reductions and associated improvements in productivity and profits. ERPs promise to deliver these outcomes by integrating systems, standardizing processes, and providing organizations access to the best practices in the industry. In actuality, the consequence of ERP systems is that processes which evolved over time following unique historical paths and trajectories are being replaced by new processes. In general, adoption of the ERP framework and the associated mindset more emphatically imposes administrative interests on to the organization. However, the new ERP processes, and the policies and structures driven by them, embody the beliefs and interests of actors who developed the software and are not part of the organization. The use of consultants to help choose from among available processes and configuration options further embeds outside interests (or disinterests) into the organization's operations and systems.