Contracting for implementation of standard software

Abstract

PurposeTraditional contract vehicles do not align well with enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation methodologies. The purpose of this paper is to identify different contract vehicles and how they map to ERP implementation methodologies. Traditional contract vehicles are more process‐oriented than outcome‐focused. Successful standard software implementations are dependent on the outcome. The misalignment of process‐oriented contract vehicles and results‐oriented implementation methodologies leads to many implementation problems with respect to scope creep and ill‐defined interfaces.Design/methodology/approachThe study is based on research from public and private sector contracting documents, interviews and a review of case studies to show that there is a misalignment between contract vehicles, implementation methods and the eventual project plan.FindingsThe research concluded that phased or life‐cycle contracting is the best approach when implementing standard (off the shelf) software in an ERP solution. This approach mimics the recognized life‐cycle approach to product/project management where a large project is broken up into several smaller stages.Research limitations/implicationsThe data analyzed are from primary and secondary sources such as direct interviews, case study and contract reviews. The primary focus is based on US Federal Agency acquisition and planning policies.Originality/valueIdentifies different contract vehicles and how they map to ERP implementation methodologies.