By Gregory A. Farley

The readership survey conducted by APICS -- The Performance Advantage in 1996 showed that essentially all of you (99 percent) use computers in your work. That's no surprise. What is interesting is that not all of you use computers in the conduct of the discrete duties that define your position. That is, some of you whose title is "scheduler" don't use a computer to perform your scheduling tasks. Some of you "material managers" manage your firms' materials without the aid of a digital buddy.

So what do you all use your computers for? Mostly for word processing, database management and other generic, front-office, clerical-type duties. And that makes sense. Personal computer technology earned its wings in the front office, automating the creation of accounting documents and form letters. Computers made these tasks so easy and so simple that even the professionals in an organization could manage them.

But do your bosses pay you for writing letters or managing a database? Does an integrated suite of office productivity software packages (such as Microsoft Office or Claris Works) make you better at your job? Does it increase your utility? Does this type of software make your job easier.

In a lot of cases, the answer has to be "no." Microsoft Word Version 6.0 is so bloated with functionality and features that even when stripped to its bare essentials it takes up almost six megabytes of hard drive space on my Macintosh (a full install would take 16 megs). And it loads in about the same amount of time it takes Mr. Coffee to brew up six cups of java. Mastering Word is an undertaking that few who work for a living have time for. And what's the big idea behind including Power Point presentation software in Microsoft Office? Does any company want to leave its presentations in the hands of a clerical worker? Does any executive or decision maker have time to master presentation software? Is there any bottom-line benefit to putting Power Point into more hands?


It's all about integration
Microsoft Office illustrates an interesting dichotomy: Software is growing too complex for most users, but it's getting easier to share information between software packages. Certainly, the degree of integration between the Microsoft Office modules sets a goal that resource management software vendors should strive to emulate. Object technology is making integration between and among packages easier, and is making interfaces between products almost seamless in some cases. The tragedy is that competitive forces in the world of manufacturing won't allow you to wait until all the bugs are ironed out. You've got to leap into the fray now, put your trust in your MIS or IT staff and commit to throwing real money at the solutions they identify.

But while integration is a good idea in software packages, it is an absolute must in industry and the world of resource management. Where functional silos are being torn down and replaced by goal-oriented cross-functional teams, integration of functions and responsibilities is mandatory. Where downsizing has decimated work forces, those who remain must master the functions and responsibilities of their departed co-workers while still doing their original jobs. Materials managers are having to work as human resource directors, schedulers are fulfilling new responsibilities as procurement managers, receiving personnel are forced to perform maintenance chores. Where the competitive nature of business narrows the margin of error, every link within every supply chain must work closely together to achieve a common goal, which is generally "survival." Like it or not, integration is being forced upon us. It is a paradigm that we must adopt.

And while the circumstances that bring it about may make us wistful of the good old days, integration is a good thing. To remain oblivious to the downstream effects of our actions is foolhardy. To assume that we cannot control what happens upstream of our enterprise is unnecessarily fatalistic. Real competitive advantage lies not in improving the efficiency of a process, but in improving the efficiency of the enterprise. That's what integrated resource management means. It's what supply chain management means. It's what the Theory of Constraints preaches.


Back to the desktop
The point is that if workers in an enterprise are expected to master processes that cross functional boundaries and to embrace a holistic view of the enterprise, its suppliers and its customers, then they probably won't have the time (or the brain cells) necessary to master all the applicable software packages, unless they are all neatly, seamlessly integrated. Anything less than a tidy, easy-to-use, intuitive software package is going to rob you of your productivity and diminish your ability to enhance your expertise, and thus your value to your employer. The solution that you need is one of the promises that technology has so far failed to deliver on. Certainly some packages out there will come close to meeting your needs, and certainly others will make you long for the Bronze Age. Shop carefully.

Copyright © 2020 by APICS — The Educational Society for Resource Management. All rights reserved.

Web Site © Copyright 2020 by Lionheart Publishing, Inc.
All rights reserved.


Lionheart Publishing, Inc.
2555 Cumberland Parkway, Suite 299, Atlanta, GA 30339 USA
Phone: +44 23 8110 3411 | br> E-mail:
Web: www.lionheartpub.com


Web Design by Premier Web Designs
E-mail: [email protected]