| Course | BUS 721 Issues in Optimizing Operations (BUS/721) |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Doctoral ERP analysis |
| Length | about 1,153 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | DBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUS 721 Week 3
Replacing a 20-Year-Old System Across Three Plants: An Enterprise Resource Planning Decision for Tri-State Cabinet
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
BUS/721: Issues in Optimizing Operations
Week 3 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Tri-State Cabinet Company and all figures are composites written for a model paper.
Tri-State Cabinet Company, a composite cabinet maker with three plants and $280 million in revenue, runs a 20-year-old enterprise system that handles orders and accounting but not plant scheduling, which lives in spreadsheets. Week 2 showed that business intelligence needs integrated data, and Week 1 showed that integrated planning across plants is essential for the delivery strategy. Leadership is considering a new enterprise resource planning system. An ERP system promises one version of the truth, but delivering it requires an organization to agree on one way of working. This paper evaluates the ERP decision.
What ERP Systems Do
ERP systems integrate core business processes, including order management, planning, purchasing, inventory, production, shipping and finance, in a shared database. For a multi-plant manufacturer, ERP allows planning across plants, real-time inventory visibility and consistent data for decisions.
Evidence on Business Value
Hitt et al. (2002) studied firms that implemented ERP and found that adopters had higher performance across several measures than nonadopters and that financial markets rewarded adoption, but that productivity and performance often dipped shortly after implementation before improving. Benefits take time and depend on how systems are used, which shifts attention from installation to adoption and process change.
The Post-Implementation Dip
The dip arises as employees learn new processes, data problems surface and old workarounds no longer work. For Tri-State, a dip during peak building season could damage builder relationships, making timing important. Spring and summer, when builders close the most homes, are the worst months for a cutover.
Problems Across Implementation Phases
Markus et al. (2000) studied ERP adopters and found that problems occurred in each phase, from project chartering through configuration and rollout to onward and upward operation, and that success measures differed by phase. Firms that declared success at go-live often faced later problems in using the system to improve business performance.
Critical Success Factors
Umble et al. (2003) reviewed ERP implementations and identified critical success factors, including clear understanding of strategic goals, commitment by top management, excellent project management, organizational change management, a strong implementation team, data accuracy, extensive education and training and focused performance measures.
Tri-State's Requirements
Requirements include multi-plant planning, configure-to-order product structures for semi-custom cabinets, barcode tracking through production, integration with the BI dashboard and builder portals, quality data capture and financial consolidation.
Option One: Extend the Legacy System
Adding modules and integrations to the existing system costs less upfront but leaves an aging platform with limited vendor support and poor multi-plant planning. It postpones rather than solves the problem, and every year of delay adds more custom workarounds that will later need to be untangled.
Option Two: Cloud ERP for Manufacturers
A cloud ERP designed for discrete manufacturers offers configure-to-order capability, multi-plant planning and regular updates. Costs include subscriptions, implementation partners and internal time, estimated at $4.5 million over three years.
Customization Versus Standardization
Heavy customization raises costs and complicates upgrades. Tri-State will adopt standard processes where possible, customizing only for its configure-to-order rules, which define how cabinet options combine and are central to its business.
Process Redesign
Implementing ERP requires agreeing on common processes across plants: one order entry process, one scheduling method, one way to record production and quality. Cross-plant teams will design future processes before configuration begins.
Data Migration
Product data, customer records and open orders must be cleaned and migrated. Inconsistent style codes found in Week 2 must be standardized first. A data team will own cleanup and validation.
Total Cost of Ownership
The $4.5 million estimate includes subscriptions, partner fees and hardware, but internal costs are often larger than expected. About 25 Tri-State employees will spend significant time on design, testing and training, and backfilling some of their roles adds about $900,000. Ongoing costs include subscriptions, a small internal support team and periodic retraining. Presenting the full cost prevents surprises that erode leadership support midway through the project.
Governance and Leadership
The chief operating officer will lead a steering group of plant managers, finance, IT and sales leaders, will make scope and priority decisions. A full-time project manager and an implementation partner will run the work day to day. Top management support, a success factor in research, means more than approving funds; it means leaders attending design sessions, resolving disputes between plants and explaining the reasons for change to employees.
Resolving Plant Differences
Each plant has its own habits, and standardizing them will create disagreements. The Winchester plant, for instance, schedules finishing by color, while York schedules by order. Design teams will choose the method that best supports on-time complete delivery, using data from Week 2, rather than the method of the largest plant or the most senior manager.
Integration With Customers
Large builders want to place orders and check status through portals. The ERP will connect to a builder portal so customers can see order progress, reducing calls to customer service and giving builders confidence in delivery dates.
Protecting Customers During Cutover
Go-live weeks will include a temporary order freeze for new styles, extra staff in customer service, daily checks of every builder order in the new system and a fallback plan to schedule manually for up to two weeks if problems arise.
Phased Rollout
Implementation will begin with the York plant, which handles the most builder orders, in the slow winter season, followed by Hagerstown and Winchester at six-month intervals. A phased approach limits risk and allows learning.
Training and Support
Training will be role-based and hands-on, with super-users in each plant and extra support for the first eight weeks after each go-live, when most questions arise.
Vendor and Partner Selection
Tri-State will shortlist three cloud ERP vendors with manufacturing customers of similar size, require scripted demonstrations using its own configure-to-order examples and check references from cabinet or furniture manufacturers. The implementation partner matters as much as the software; partners will be evaluated on manufacturing experience, the specific consultants proposed and willingness to tie part of their fees to milestones.
Risks
Risks include scope growth as plants request special features, data cleanup taking longer than planned, key staff leaving mid-project and a deeper dip than expected. Responses include a change control process, starting data work six months before configuration, retention bonuses for project team members and contingency time in the schedule.
Measuring Benefits
Measures include on-time complete delivery, lead time, inventory turns, schedule adherence and finance close time, tracked before and after each plant's go-live to assess benefits beyond go-live.
Research Questions
Further study could ask how configure-to-order manufacturers balance standardization and customization and how phased multi-plant rollouts affect the depth of the post-implementation dip.
Conclusion
A modern ERP can provide the integrated planning and data Tri-State's delivery strategy needs. Research shows benefits but also a dip after go-live and problems across phases. Standard processes, careful data migration, a phased winter rollout, strong training and benefits measures address the success factors research identifies.
References
Hitt, L. M., Wu, D. J., & Zhou, X. (2002). Investment in enterprise resource planning: Business impact and productivity measures. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(1), 71-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045716
Markus, M. L., Axline, S., Petrie, D., & Tanis, C. (2000). Learning from adopters' experiences with ERP: Problems encountered and success achieved. Journal of Information Technology, 15(4), 245-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960010008944
Umble, E. J., Haft, R. R., & Umble, M. M. (2003). Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2), 241-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00547-7
What the BUS 721 Week 3 instructions ask
For Week 3, BUS 721 asks doctoral candidates to examine ERP as a lever for better operations. Common requirements include explaining what ERP systems do, reviewing research on their business value and implementation, evaluating an organization's needs and options, addressing process redesign, customization, data and people and recommending an approach with risks and measures. Some prompts ask students to compare vendors or deployment models. Synthesize research, apply it to the organization's processes, weigh customization against standardization and support claims with APA-cited research. Name the business outcomes the ERP is meant to improve, so success can be judged by more than go-live.
How this BUS 721 Week 3 example is built
A manufacturer whose plants cannot share schedules or inventory considers replacing its legacy system with a modern ERP, and the paper evaluates the decision with research. ERP integrates order management, planning, inventory, production and finance in one system. Research finds that ERP adopters tend to outperform nonadopters, but productivity often dips after go-live. Studies of implementation identify problems in each phase and success factors such as leadership support, clear goals, process redesign, data accuracy and training. The paper compares a cloud ERP for manufacturers with extending the legacy system, recommends a phased cloud implementation with standardized processes, estimates total cost including internal time and plans for data, training, cutover and benefits measurement.
BUS 721 Week 3 grading rubric: where the points go
Strong ERP papers connect the technology decision to operational goals and use research on value and implementation to shape the plan. Faculty credit a clear explanation of ERP's integrating role, accurate use of research on business value and post-implementation dips, attention to problems and success factors across phases, a reasoned comparison of options, a stance on customization and plans for data, change and benefits measurement. Recognizing that ERP success is organizational as much as technical shows maturity. Precise language and APA references round out the work. Faculty also notice whether the plan protects the business during the transition, for example by timing go-live for a slow season and keeping parallel processes briefly, and whether it names who will own benefits after the project team disbands.
BUS 721 Week 3 help: mistakes to avoid
Students often treat ERP as a software purchase. Explain the process changes it requires. Another frequent gap is assuming benefits appear at go-live; research suggests a dip first. Plan for it. Students also ignore data migration, a common cause of failure. Address data quality. Avoid heavy customization without justification; it raises cost and upgrade risk. Define success measures beyond go-live. Plan training and support for the first busy months on the new system. Finally, connect the ERP to the strategy, since technology chosen for its own sake rarely delivers value. Plan how the business will keep serving customers during cutover. Assign someone to own each benefit after the project ends.
Related BUS 721 sample papers
Other BUS 721 week samples
- BUS 721 Week 1: Operations and Corporate Strategy
- BUS 721 Week 2: Business Intelligence
- BUS 721 Week 4: Implementation Success and Failure
- BUS 721 Week 5: Process Improvement
- BUS 721 Week 6: Data and Decision Making
- BUS 721 Week 7: Research on Operations Excellence
- BUS 721 Week 8: Optimizing Operations Recommendations
More DBA sample papers
- BUS 700 Week 3: Scholarly Writing and APA Style
- BUS 733 Week 3: Resources and Capabilities
- FIN 711 Week 3: Venture Financing Needs by Stage
- MGT 711 Week 3: Platforms and Digital Markets
BUS 721 Week 3 questions, answered
What does BUS 721 Week 3 usually cover?
It usually covers enterprise resource planning: what ERP does, research on business value and implementation, needs assessment, options, customization, data, change management and measures of success.
Where can I find a free BUS 721 Week 3 sample paper?
This page presents a complete ERP analysis for a three-plant manufacturer, with research notes. You can request a complimentary draft of your own ERP paper.
Do ERP systems improve company performance?
Research has found that ERP adopters tend to show better performance and market value than nonadopters, though productivity may dip during and after implementation before benefits appear.
What are critical success factors for ERP implementation?
Common factors include top management support, clear goals, strong project management, process redesign, accurate data, user training and effective change management.
Should ERP systems be customized?
Many experts recommend minimizing customization and adapting processes to standard software where possible, because customization raises costs, delays and complicates upgrades.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All BUS 721 week samples · All courses