Procedural Model for Selecting Enterprise Systems
Based on Project Management Software
Christoph Weiss Johannes Keckeis
AUB's German-language interdisciplinary Ph.D. programme Department of Strategic Management, Marketing and Tourism,
(Economics) University of Innsbruck
Budapest, Hungary Innsbruck, Austria
christoph.weiss@andrassyuni.hu johannes.keckeis@uibk.ac.at
Abstract - Project management software helps companies Many authors offer selecting consulting services, tools or
plan, execute and control projects. The simpler and more platforms (see table 6 in annex). The consultancy service often
efficient the processes for projects are executed, the more consists of requirement assessment and requirement definition
profitable and more successful the projects are for companies. for the selection of project management software.
Therefore, the process of defining and selecting requirements for
a project management software is an important success factor for The aim is to develop a procedural model for selecting
any company in any industry and company size. Based on a project management software from existing process models
qualitative analysis of existing procedural models for the and to validate it with two user cases. The introduction or
selection of project management software, a procedural model
implementation of the project management software is
for the selection of project management software is developed
and validated with two user cases. So companies can execute and excluded (Implementation phase included in five analyzed
support projects for the selection, implementation and procedural models (see Table 6 in annex).
continuous development of project management software even
more efficiently. II. METHODOLOGY
Keywords – activities, analysis, enterprise systems The analysis of different process models for selecting
evaluation, model, provider, procedural model, requirements, project management software takes place in two successive
requirements management. project, project management phases:
software, selection, software, tasks
• In the first phase, a literature analysis (see list of
I. INTRODUCTION literature) is carried out in order to find and identify
possible procedural models for the selection of project
Project management software is a type of software in the management software.
family of enterprise systems. The term Enterprise Systems
subsumes for example Business Intelligence, Customer • In the second phase, a detailed word analysis [5] is
Relationship Management, Enterprise Resource Planning, performed. Sources, phases, activities and tasks are
Product Lifecycle Management, Production Planning System coded, analyzed and finally summarized. As an
and many more. Enterprise systems therefore subsumes all example, the condensation of the term "define" is
software systems that are used to conduct and execute mentioned here:
business processes in a company [1].
Define: appoint, define, establish, form, etc.
Project management software is used for a wide variety of
projects in a company including enterprise systems projects to Based on the literature and word analysis, a sequence of
select, introduce and continuously develop them. identified and summarized phases for the new procedural
model for the selection of project management software is
Project management software is usually modular and determined. Three different calculation methods are used to
consists of various modules or components such as multi find a new procedural model for selecting project management
project management, project controlling, portfolio software [6]:
management, resource management, and so on. [2]. These
modules, with a variety of functions, are usually found in the • Mean from the first and last identified phase digit (see
original project management software but also in other column heading A in Table 1)
enterprise systems types such as Enterprise Resource • Average valuation with sum of the multiplication per
Planning. They are sold and implemented by different vendors phase location in the order and number of phase
(manufacturers and implementation partners) [3]. designations (see column heading B in Table 2)
In contrast to Enterprise Resource Planning, there are less • Normalize (scaling to “one”, see Table 7 in annex) of
scientific publications for the selection and evaluation of phases per procedural model and average valuation
project management software [4]. In recent years (publication (see column heading C in Table 2)
year: between 2009 and 2016) different consulting companies
and consultants have dealt with the domain of selection and
introduction of project management software and have Nomination
developed their own process models with different phases and # Phase ∑ A R1
in phase
sequences as well as tasks and activities (see table 5 in annex).
These models can be found mainly on their websites or in Tab. 1: Grid to order the phases of the procedural model for selecting project
special journals. management software I
Copyright © 2020 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
AESP20: 1st Workshop on Requirement Management in Enterprise Systems Projects @ SE20, Innsbruck, Austria 24
∑: Number of entries in the eleven previous models Tab. 4: Phases of the new procedural model for selecting project
analyzed management software II (in alphabetical order)
R1: Order Column A D: Mean A+B+C
# B R2 C R3 D R4 P2
P1 Project P3 P4
Requirement
initialization phase Analyze phase Presentation phase
Tab. 2: Grid to order the phases for procedural model for selecting project definition phase
management software II
P5 P6 P7
R2: Order column B Test phase Selection phase Decision phase
R3: Order column C
Figure 1: Seven phase procedural model for selecting project management
R4: Order column D software (R4)
III. ANALYSIS The analysis of the results shows that the phase of the
requirement definition is the most important, since with ten
A. Selection phases of the procedural model for selecting
mentions in eleven models it is most common in all models. It
project management software can be concluded that you cannot get passed the requirement
The analysis and subsequent formation of an order of the management. The second most important phase besides the
eleven procedural models for selecting project management requirement definition is the selection phase with nine
software results in a new procedural model for selecting responses followed by the analysis phase with five responses
project management software with seven selection phases (see in the eleven models.
Figure 1, Table 3 and 4). Only phases are included, which are
used at least in four existing procedural models for the B. Selection activities of the procedural model for
selection of project management software. selecting project management software
The present and analyzed procedural models for selecting Different tasks and activities are performed at each stage
of the calculated project management software selection
project management software have a minimum of two phases
process. The analysis of eleven procedural models for the
and a maximum of nine phases. Looking at all eleven
selection of project management software presents those tasks
procedural models (see Annex) for selecting project
management software, the average is 4.72 phases compared to and activities that are mentioned at least twice in the
the seven phases of the new project management software procedural models (each in alphabetical order).
selection process. Project initialization phase
# Phase
Nomination
∑ A R1 • Define goals
in phase
• Describe degree of maturity of the project
3 Analyze 1, 2, 4 5 2,50 2
• Nominate project team
4 Decision 5, 6, 8 4 6,50 7
• Start project
5 Presentation 4 4 4,00 4
Requirement definition phase
Project
6 1, 2 4 1,50 1
initialization • Analyze processes
1
Requirement
1, 2, 3, 5 10 3,00 3 • Analyze requirements
definition
• Capture processes
2 Selection 2, 3, 4, 6 9 4,00 4
• Conduct interviews
7 Test 5, 7 4 6,00 6
• Conduct workshops
Tab. 3: Phases of the new procedural model for selecting project
management software I (in alphabetical order)
• Create request catalog
• Document requirements
# B R2 C R3 D R4
• Identify requirements
3 2,40 3 0,19 3 2,67 3
• Prioritize requirements
4 6,25 7 0,97 7 7,00 7
• Structure requirements
5 4,00 5 0,64 4 4,33 4
6 1,25 1 0,05 1 1,00 1
1 2,10 2 0,18 2 2,33 2
Analyze phase
2 3,33 4 0,85 6 4,67 6
• Analyze benefits
7 5,50 6 0,79 5 5,67 5
• Analyze costs
AESP20: 1st Workshop on Requirement Management in Enterprise Systems Projects @ SE20, Innsbruck, Austria 25
• Define demand IV. USE CASES
• Define stakeholders The analyzed and calculated procedural model for
selecting project management software has been validated in
• Define target two user cases.
• Perform actual analysis In the first company, a service company in Austria, the
application of the procedural model for the selection of a new
Presentation phase
project management software was applied as part of a
• Assess evaluation consulting project.
• Comment presentations The second company, a large company in the industry of
plant engineering and construction with its headquarters in
• Design evaluation Germany and several subsidiaries all over Europe, the new
• Evaluate presentations procedural model for selecting project management software
was used in the evaluation of the existing project management
• Moderate presentations software in the course of evaluating the entire enterprise
systems landscape.
• Perform presentations
In the planning phase of both projects for the selection of
Test phase project management software, the companies identified two
• Document tests gaps in the procedural model for selecting project
management software in form of the evaluation phase and the
• Obtain test positions contract phase, as these are two common phases in each
selection project for both companies. Therefore, these two
• Perform tests
phases for the implementation of the selection project were
• Schedule tests additionally added in the procedural model for the selection of
project management software.
Selection phase
In the course of the project initialization phase, it was
• Analyze software favorite apparent, that the analysis phase had to be carried out before
• Carry out test positions the requirement definition phase and not the other way around
to the service company at the beginning and to the plant
• Decision engineering company at the end of the project initiation phase.
Therefore, this should be taken into account in the new
• Compare requirements procedural model for selecting project management software.
• Conduct call for proposals In certain cases, from the point of view of both companies,
these two phases could also be conducted in parallel.
• Create evaluation
Furthermore, in the course of the two selection projects, it
• Create longlist was apparent that a specific tendering phase is necessary and
should not be included in the selection phase. Therefore, this
• Create shortlist
further phase has been added in the procedural model for
• Finalize software favorite selecting project management software.
• Interview reference customers From the point of view of the two companies, possible
reductions of different phases from the proposed procedural
• Make presentations model for the selection of project management software were
• Make selection not necessary, as all planned phases are considered
indispensable.
• Negotiate contracts
V. EXPERIENCED MODEL FOR THE SELECTION OF
• Obtain test positions PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE
• Perform feasibility analysis The ten phase process model for selecting project
management software, derived from qualitative analysis and
• Perform fine selection validation by two use cases, is shown in Figure 2. The
• Pre-selection calculated procedural model with seven phases for selecting
project management software was supplemented by three
• Visit reference customers phases (marked gray) and the order of two phases were
Decision phase changed (analysis phase follows requirement definition
phase).
• Decision P3
P1 Project P2 P4 P5
•
Requirement
Document presentations initialization phase Analyze phase
definition phase
Tendering phase Presentation phase
• Evaluate presentations P6 P7 P8 P9 P10
Test phase Selection phase Evaluation phase Decision phase Contract phase
• Perform presentations
AESP20: 1st Workshop on Requirement Management in Enterprise Systems Projects @ SE20, Innsbruck, Austria 26
Figure 2: Ten phase procedural model for selecting project management selection
software
From the two use cases, the tasks and activities for the Selection help
three complementary phases (contract, evaluation and Company
[8] for PPM 4 Steps
folder
tendering) that were used in both user cases were determined. software
This also applies to the additions to the requirement phase
The six steps to
(each in alphabetical order). the right project
[2] 6 Steps Journal
Requirement definition phase (supplements) management
software
• Analyze vulnerabilities
[9] Project process 4 Phases Book
• Analyze potentials
Concept for
• Create specifications selecting a
[10] project 2 Steps Slides
• Define technical requirements management
software
• Define data management
Selection and Website
• Document procedural requirements [11] introduction 6 Steps consul-
process tant
• Weight requirements
Selection
Tendering phase process for
[12] project 9 Process Journal
• Get initial offers management
software
• Market research (providers)
Selection of
• Market research (systems) project
Website
[13] 5 Levels consul-
management
Evaluation phase software
tant
• Carry out evaluation Software
Website
• Create evaluation criteria [14]
Launch
2 Phases consul-
Procedural
tant
Contract phase Model
• Negotiate project management provider Procedural
model pmcc
and/or implementation partner Presen-
[15] consulting PPM 6 Steps
tation
• Negotiate project management software software
selection
contracts
Expiration of a
• Obtain final offers [16] PM software 6 Phases
Lecture
document
• Review contracts selection
VI. FURTHER RESEARCH Tab. 5: Investigated procedural models for selecting project management
software I
The two user cases have shown that the calculated order of
the determined phases for the new procedural model for Selection Evalu-
Implementation Evaluation
selecting project management software is a basis for practical Autor
phase
consul-
platform
ation
application in companies. It is worth mentioning whether so tation tools
many phases are really necessary for the selection of a project [7] X X X
management software. This depends on the size of the
company and the specific requirements or affinity of [8]
stakeholders in relation to project management software. The
new ten phase model for selecting project management [2] X
software should therefore be confirmed in a broad and deep [9] X X
analysis. This can be qualitatively verified either by a
quantitative survey or by expert interviews. Further use cases [10] X X
can certainly support the results.
[11] X X X
VII. ANNEX
[12] X X
Selection Number Docume
Author Procedure
model name of phases nt type [13] X X X
Parameta [14] X X X X
procedural White
[7] 2 Phases
model for paper
[15] X
software
AESP20: 1st Workshop on Requirement Management in Enterprise Systems Projects @ SE20, Innsbruck, Austria 27
[16] X [5] P. Mayring, Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse (Grundlagen und Techniken),
Beltz, 12., überarbeitete Auflage, Weinheim und Basel, 2015.
Tab. 6: Investigated procedural models for selecting project management [6] C. Weiss, M. Kofler, R. Friedemann, Qualitative Analysis of different
software II ERP Evaluation Models. In (Piazolo, F., et.al.): ERP Future 2016:
Innovations in Enterprise Information Systems Management and
Engineering (5th International Conference), Hagenberg, 17-25, 2016.
[7] M. Streng, Projektmanagement-Software herstellerneutral auswählen
# phase Division # phase Division # phase Division # phase Division (Whitepaper), https://pm-blog.com/wp-
1 0,0000 1 0,0000 1 0,0000 1 0,0000 content/uploads/2013/06/whitepaper-selectppm.pdf, Stand:
2 1,0000 2 0,5000 2 0,3333 2 0,2500 08.06.2017.
3 1,0000 3 0,6667 3 0,5000 [8] A. Gaide, Auswahlhilfe für PPM-Software, https://pm-united.de/wp-
content/uploads/2013/06/Auswahlhilfe-PPM-Software.pdf, Stand:
4 1,0000 4 0,7500 08.06.2017.
5 1,0000 [9] W. Weber, Beratungsleistungen beim Einsatz von PM-Software. In:
(Wagner, R., Hrsg.): Beratung von Organisationen im
# phase Division # phase Division # phase Division # phase Division Projektmanagement, Symposion, 1. Auflage, S. 405-429, 2015.
1 0,0000 1 0,0000 1 0,0000 1 0,0000 [10] A. Gobert, Anforderungen und Auswahlkriterien für
2 0,2000 2 0,1667 2 0,1429 2 0,1250 Projektmanagement-Software am Beispiel von Chipkartenprojekten,
3 0,4000 3 0,3333 3 0,2857 3 0,2500 https://www4.in.tum.de/~kuhrmann/gi2008/final-gobert.pdf, Stand:
08.06.2017.
4 0,6000 4 0,5000 4 0,4286 4 0,3750
[11] A. Frick, PPM-Software Auswahl und Einführung;
5 0,8000 5 0,6667 5 0,5714 5 0,5000 https://projektforum.de/de/Beratung/PPM-Software-Auswahl-und-
6 1,0000 6 0,8333 6 0,7143 6 0,6250 Einfuhrung.htm, Stand: 28.05.2016.
7 1,0000 7 0,8571 7 0,7500 [12] P. Berleb, R. Wolf-Berleb, Projektmanagement-Software kompakt,
Projekt Magazin kompakt, Januar 2015.
8 1,0000 8 0,8750
[13] M .Bunge, Auswahl von Projektmanagement Software,
9 1,0000
https://projectplant.de/ppmatch.html#info, Stand: 28.07.2017.
Tab. 7: Normalization table [14] M. Meyer, A. Voßmeyer, Erfolgreich Software einführen Schritt für
Schritt, https://pm-software.de/tipps-und-tricks/so-gehen-sie-vor,
VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stand: 28.07.2017
[1] B. Ramdani, P. Kawalek, Predicting SMEs’ adoption of enterprise [15] P. Borbely, J. Schauer, http://www.pmcc-
systems, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 22 No. consulting.com/de/_downloads/newsletter/1611/pmcc_NL1611_Soft
1/2, 10-24, 2009. ware.pdf?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campai
gn=pmcc+Newsletter+1611, Stand: 08.06.2017.
[2] M. Streng, PM-Software muss zum Anwender passen – nicht
umgekehrt, manage it, 5-6, 2011. [16] U. Aßmann, Einsatz von Projektmanagement-Software, Fakultät
Informatik, Technische Universität Dresden, https://st.inf.tu-
[3] J. Verville, R. Palanisamy, C. Bernadas, Halingten, A., ERP dresden.de/fles/teaching/ss10/SWM/MMsoftware.pdf, Stand:
Acquisition Planning: A Critical Dimension for Making the Right 08.06.2017.
Choice, Long Range Planning 40, 45-63, 2005.
[4] M. Pérez-Salazar, I. Rivera, Cristóbal-Vázquez, I. ERP selection: a
literature review, Int. J. Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 13,
No. 3, 309-324, 2013.
AESP20: 1st Workshop on Requirement Management in Enterprise Systems Projects @ SE20, Innsbruck, Austria 28