Week 1-Information System Integration

According to the Hasselbring paper, enterprise systems integration could involved three different levels of integration which are : the intra-organizational process integration, the enterprise application integration (EAI), a semantic level integration, the middleware integration. Hasselbring article also addresses the application layer,as the integration among ERP packages Heterogeneity. Due to the differences among the various disciplines involved of component systems, heterogeneity occurs at various levels and for various reasons. On a technical level, heterogeneity comes from different database management and operating systems utilized, as well as the design autonomy among component systems.

The paper also argues that borderline between the second and third level sometimes not precisely like the Object Management Architecture could be deployed for both middleware integration and high-level services in Enterprise Application Integration.

Davenport article “Putting the enterprise into the Enterprise systems” presents a new model of corporate computing. They allow companies to replace their existing information systems, which are often incompatible with one another, with a single, integrated system. By streamlining data flows throughout an organization, these commercial software packages, offered by vendors like SAP, promise dramatic gains in a company's efficiency and bottom line. It's no wonder that businesses are rushing to jump on the ES bandwagon. But while these systems offer tremendous rewards, the risks they carry are equally great. Not only are the systems expensive and difficult to implement, they can also tie the hands of managers. Unlike computer systems of the past, which were typically developed in-house with a company's specific requirements in mind, enterprise systems are off-the-shelf solutions. They impose their own logic on a company's strategy, culture, and organization, often forcing companies to change the way they do business. Managers would do well to heed the horror stories of failed implementations. FoxMeyer Drug, for example, claims that its system helped drive it into bankruptcy. Drawing on examples of both successful and unsuccessful ES projects, the author discusses the pros and cons of implementing an enterprise system, showing how a system can produce unintended and highly disruptive consequences. Because of an ES's profound business implications, he cautions against shifting responsibility for its adoption to technologists. Only a general manager will be able to mediate between the imperatives of the system and the imperatives of the business.

References:

• Hasselbring, W., Information System Integration. Communications of the ACM, 2000. 43(6): p. 32-38.
• Davenport, T.H., Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System. Harvard Business Review, 1998. 76(4): p. 121-131
• Lee, J., K. Siau, and S. Hong, Enterprise Integration with ERP and EAI. Communications of the ACM, 2003. 46(2): p. 54-60.