Factors that resist change business essay

This chapter discusses the change management process implemented in Shell Pakistan. It also highlights the issues of necessity to change, the risks faced during the transformation and the effectiveness of change management. The behavioral responses and attitude of stakeholders towards change management in the industry have also been covered in the report with a comprehensive analysis on the features that have helped or hindered the changed process within Shell. The findings presented here are mostly based on the research conducted through 20 interviews includes both the face to face interviews and questions being asked through telephone and recording feedback. I tried to interview people who are closely related to the topic of change in the business. In addition, twenty five questionnaires are distributed amongst employees as well in order to understand the change process that took place from converting from JD Edwards to SAP within the organization.

4. 2-Factors that resist change

One of the most common problems which business executives face during implementing plan is the employee resistance to change. Such resistance could be in different forms like persistent reduction in output, increase in the number of ” quits” and requests for transfer, chorine quarrels, sullen hostility, wildcat or slowdown strikes, and, of course, the expression of a lot of pseudo logical reasons why the change will not work. All this actions can result in a negative outflow or a reduced net worth of any organization. A survey was conducted by the author in Shell Pakistan to identify the most common factors from the employees which act as a resistance while adopting change. The approach adopted for this research was more direct as one to one session of interview was held with the individuals. The feedback received was mixed. The most common reasons for the resistance were as followsLack of communication between the management and staff on change issueFear of losing the task after change is implemented is always thereFear or losing their job status and job security is also a concernToo much pressure and work load is tough to handleChange of working environment and disruption in culture is a concern. Conflicts of personalitiesBenefits are not communicatedOthersResults are illustrated below by using a pie chart and followings are the findingsSo according to the results illustrated by the pie chart, it is clearly understood that the fear of losing and the concerns regarding job status and job security are suppose to be the biggest barriers for managing change. After that the benefits of change not being communicated properly, act as a resistance to change. Rest of the reasons identified through the survey were more linked to the human behaviour, like mental stress, personal conflicts, culture disruption etc

4. 3- Necessity of change in Shell

In any organization managing change process, asks for planning before implementing the change steps. Every organization has different circumstances and the change situation varies a lot but still there are few logical steps which could be used during change management process. The process of change normally starts with a change Trigger. The change trigger highlights the necessity of change in a specific organization. The change trigger included two types of events. These are the external and the internal events:

External Events:

Changes in economic conditions (Inflation, GDP, Interest rates, etc)Changing laws and regulations, influencing the business cycleStrong competitive strategies from competitor and threat from a new entrant in the industryTechnology introduced, changes in Research and Development

Internal Events

Changes in top level management giving rise to different operational strategies, changes in priorities, and new leadership styles. Introduction of a new technology and having a changed working style and environmentOpening more branches of business both in the same country and overseasIntroducing new diversified products or servicesThese triggers will push management to opt for change. The questions which is to be answered by management is if they really think change is required to improve the situation, or if it could be handled without implementing change. Shell being a global organization wanted to streamline & standardize its processes around the world. Prior to the use of SAP the organization had been using different ERP in different parts of the world like JD Edwards in Asia, Oracle in Australia etc. This made the operational & reconciliation processes different but since the organization has the vision of standardizing & simplifying its processes it prompted the top management to implement SAPAlso SAP had been customized for Shell & is being implemented with the name of GSAP i. e. Global SAP. It helps the organization in simplifying operations & standardizes its processes around the globe. In short, the following are the factors which pushed Shell to opt for change to accomplish their goals more efficiently: Simplification of the operational process by removal of a lot of redundant activities, and getting rid of activities which were not adding value to any product or service of shell. Standardization of processes across the Globe, this helped Shell in removing complexities which arose from using different systems. Cost Cutting & Saving with standardization of processes and removal of non value adding activities. Adapting to the latest of technology in the ERP World i. e. Use of SAP. Reducing the fixed overheads is helpful for any organization in terms of Cost Savings. In the case of Shell Pakistan, organizational restructuring resulting in reduced head count due to process simplification e. g. Prior to SAP implementation there used to be two General Managers for Supply & Distribution for operations in Pakistan but now there is only one General Manager for Supply & Distribution who covers India, Pakistan Oman & Dubai.

4. 4-Models dealing with resistance to change

There have been many different approaches of managing the resistance to change. Below included are few models presented by different authors during their time which were used as a tool for managing the process of change. Kotter &Schlesinger; s (1979) Presented a 6 step model which is used to reduce, eliminate or minimize the resistance. The following steps were suggested in this model for managing resistance. Education & Communication: The resistance is the result of ignorance, and in order to control this it was suggested that communicating the vision of change and the potential benefits will help the cause and control resistanceParticipation & Involvement: The idea is to get people involved in the change process and their participation mattersFacilitation & Support: Offering counselling services to those feeling stress and difficulties is one major example of facilitate, support could involve training procedures, providing technical assistance etc. Negotiation and agreement: According to (Economist, 2003) long before the economic slowdown of 2008-2009 the United Auto Workers Union some extraordinary pay rises and improved medical health care in response to agreeing for managements closure of plants. The General motors and Ford were in competition with non unionized Japanese subsidiaries, and needed to improve their productivityManipulation & Co-optation: The resistance is controlled by the way information is presented or by a political processCoercion, Implicit & Explicit: This works best when the management is powerful, the change decision is enforced on the employees forcefully and they are left with no other option but to accept it. (BPP, 2008, P-402)Another model used for carrying out the change process was introduced by Kurt Lewin (1951), He presented a 3 stage model to explain the important steps to be taken while implementing change. Lewin’s concept about organizational change was based on the perspective of the organism metaphor. His model is widely used by managers in the industry. According to him an organization can go through three different stages during the process of change. Theses stages are: Unfreeze – Initiation Creation of the right EnvironmentLewin has linked this process of change to the human behaviour and believes that motivation should be put before planning and implementing the change process. The unfreeze process defined by Lewin should start with breaking down of the existing status of organization and start building up a new environment. Unfreezing was the process which was used by Lewin to present a new approach in shape of force field analysis. A force – field analysis is suggested by Kurt Lewin presented which helps in considerate of change in an establishment. According to Force field analysis a process of change in any organization is stuck in between two types of influencing forces (1) Driving force which is the positive force for change. The other force is the Restraining force which is an obstacle to change, so according to Lewin before the change process the forces are in equilibrium. Lewin also suggested that whenever the driving force is stronger compared to the restraining force, the equilibrium or the status quo will change. Making Sense of Change Management (2004, p. 110). The figure below illustrates the work of Lewin on Force field Analysis. This is and example of an operating organization. Thomas (1985) said regarding the force field analysis that the model has been widely used in very different contexts but there is not link of this model to the overall strategy. Maslen and Platts (1994) used force field analysis and applied this to the manufacturing strategy. forceFieldAnalysis

Force Field Analysis Model

Change – Adoption, Supporting change to required stateLewin knew that change was a process rather than a one off event. He termed this process as transition. According to Lewin at this stage the people are unfrozen and moving towards a new beginning. He also suggested that at this stage people are also uncertain and fearful so this is also the hardest stage of the model as it is tough to convince people for change John B Miner (2004, p. 110). Re-freeze – Acceptance strengthening to anchor the changeThe refreezing stage is concerned with establishing and maintaining stability once the change process has been implemented. The top management support is required in during this process. Besides that those sources must be identified which supports change and also the barriers supporting the revolution must be identified). The figure below shows the 3 staged model presented by Lewin. RefreezeUnfreezeChange

Lewin’s Model of Change: http://picsicio. us/image/58bf1359/

Lewin’s work has been widely accepted and is more frequently used in the industry by management during the change implementation process. However the 3 staged model is not the only one used for managing change and Gremini’s 4R’s is another approach used in the industry. Gouillart and Kelly were Management Consultants and they describe the process of business transformation (major change) in four different stages. The framework presented by them is known as Gremini’s 4 R’sAccording to the framework a conversion process should establish a new corporate vision, bring in new opportunities for an organization and new ways of performing activities should be carried out. Gouillart and Kelly suggested that such a process will require four ‘ Rs’ to be present if it is to be successful.

Gemini 4Rs is as follows:

ReframingRestructuringRevitalizingRenewalReframingReframing will give rise to questions about the nature of the organization and what its reason for existence. Following elements should be present in reframingAchieving Mobilization: Giving rise to the will and having desire to changeCreating a Vision: Current status of the organization must be reviewed in detailBuilding a measurement system: Progress will be measured and compared against the set targets


This will start removing the non value adding activities from the organization. The fundamentals are to consider the organizational structure but it might also look at cultural change. The activities involved in Restructuring areBuilding of an economic model: This is to look at how the assets are organized and is more focused on the financial aspectsAligning the physical infrastructure with the long term plan. Creating value: redesigning the overall work architecture in order to make processes interact to create valueRevitalizing: This portion is concerned with exploring the new products and markets, and making sure a good fit with competitive environment. Activities will include: Focused on exploring new opportunities in marked. Inventing in new businesses and products. Using the knowledge to change the directions of rivalryRenewal: This section talks about the procedure of developing individuals, to make sure that their skills are aligned with the organizational requirements. Activities should include: Building a system for remuneration to focus on staff motivationIntroducing organizational learning to progress learning as competence within the organization

4. 5-Change Management Process at Shell

A Project Based team was formed in all functions i. e. Supply, Distribution, Retail, Finance, HR etc. Each team was headed by a change manager with the general manager taking the direct responsibility of the success of its function to get smoothly transformed to GSAP. The Project Based team after getting first hand knowledge & training of SAP provided training to every individual of the organization. The training was conducted on job based on training need analysis. The job description & profile of each employee were redesigned to meet the SAP requirements. After the on job training a training evaluation was done to check its effectiveness by providing the trainees with real time assessments to use SAP. A learning department was set up headed by a learning manager & people from various organizations like Siemens, IBM etc were hired to support the shell employees in learning & grasping the new technology as soon as possible. There was an overlapping period for 3 months in which both the old ERP (JD Edwards) & SAP were running together. These 3 months helped the organization to completely shift from JD Edwards to GSAP with protecting the old data. A step by step process implemented in Shell could be described as follows. Need identification – Various Shell Organizations around the globe using different ERP i. e. JDE, Oracle, MS for product reconciliations, terminal operation with no standardization. A lot of redundant activities were being done & chances of error were more. Conducting User Survey – Interviewing various employees of Shell around the globe for their feedback on existing ERP & their readiness for a change. Hiring of SAP consultants to review the existing set up & see of SAP can be customized to suit Shell operations globally. Global Board of Director approval to implement SAP in all countries where Shell is operating. Set up of a SAP team headed by a global programme director & country programme managers leading SAP in every country. Formation of an SAP team in every country headed by country SAP programme manager with people from various departments like Supply, Distribution, Retail, Finance, HR etc part of the SAP team. Announcement by country Shell Chairman that SAP will be launched in their country, introduction to SAP, SAP team & overview of the time line & various milestones. The SAP implementation in PK was a 24 month programme constituting of various milestones, overlap period b/w JDE & SAP for six months. Training & Development of the Shell PK employees for the new ERP, case studies for real time scenarios, organization & job redesign, removal of redundant processing, organization restructuring, and use of SAP. Testing of SAP along with overlap of JDE.

4. 6-Risks faced by Shell during the change process

Risk it the possibility that the result of the selected activity will be a negative one and will turn out to be an undesirable outcome. Implementing the change process in Shell was a huge project and the process brought risks along itself. Followings are some of the major risks which were found during and before the implementation stage by researchThe cost of the project to implement SAP globally was more than Euros 100 Billion, and the risk attached with this was of matching that cost with the expected return, what if the project fails to deliver its objectives. Shell is a huge name internationally in the oil and gas industry, and these big names have to take special care of their reputation. The reputation risk was also attached to this process, if the process fails then Shell would have spoiled its name in the industry. Risk associated with the users of the new system, and the question to be answered was, will the users be able the grasp & use SAP as a new technology who have been using JDE for more than 10 years. Changing individuals attitude and influencing his or her behaviour is not as easy as seen, another risk found in this process was of resistance to change by the employees who are currently in their comfort zone with the existing set up. Maintaining data integrity was another risk and the query to be answered was how Safe & effective would SAP result in terms of confidentiality of the stored data. Would SAP actually result in simplifying & streamlining the process rather than making it more complex was another risk linked to the transformation process. Would SAP be able to provide flexibility to end user in case of any human errors while reconciling the products, price revisions of fuel, daily & monthly reporting etc. What if the customized training program for end users is not effective & the people don’t feel confident using SAP after the training received. Would SAP be able to run effectively & at a quicker pace on the existing operating systems & the existing industrial computers as the computers are not being upgraded? Would SAP help more efficiently in traceability of the data in case of a product quality incident occurs & would the user be able to track it. Will the existing preventive maintenance program of Plant equipment become more effective after implementation of SAP or will the plant breakdown increase.

4. 7-JD Edwards as a flexible tool for carrying out daily activities for oil products reconciliations

Questionnaire was distributed amongst the JD Edwards twenty five user in Shell Pakistan, and their response was recorded, most of the users felt that JD Edwards was not the best tool for meeting their objectives, the reasoning behind their response was that, as the reconciliation involves a lot of processes i. e. receipt of product, storage & handling & dispatch in various forms like truck (road), rail, packed form & sea it is important that the oil products are reconciled without an error. Even a small difference can make a big impact on price so the ERP needs to be very flexible to incorporate even after the product leaves terminal as the shortage has to be booked after days it leaves the terminal & reach the end user in case of exports. Thus ERP flexibility is needed to carryout the reconciliation on daily, month & annual basis. JDE does not provide that flexibility for shortage booking for product & it is found to be pretty rigid. This question was asked to 18 users, 13 users said that they do not agree with the fact that JD Edwards is the best tool for their daily activities, 3 users were partially of agreed that they were happy with the performance of the software and faced no trouble in terms of flexibility, 2 users maintained a neutral approach and did not answer the question, the results are illustrated below by using a pie chart.

4. 8-JD Edwards as a reporting tool & for analysis of data with respect to fuel products

This question was also part of the questionnaire distributed and the 21 user’s response was recorded here. 16 out of 21 people maintained that they were not satisfied with JD Edwards as a reporting tool and the reason provided by them was, since JD is not very flexible for data interpretation & analysis it only helps as a data base for data storage. It’s not really intelligent software & the individual using it needs to have a strong background, understanding, knowledge and skills to interpret & analyze the data provided by the software. JD Edwards can just present the results without any analysis what so ever, and in such a huge global organization like Shell, those systems are required for reporting which provides the maximum analysis for management and assist them in decision making.

4. 9-JD Edwards in product traceability in terms of product quality

Product traceability can be tracked in JDE only if the batch number of the product is entered along with attachment of the certificate of analysis (COA) of the batch. This is however not a pre requisite in JDE thus it is only dependent on the individual who is entering the data. If the batch number & COA are missed the product cannot be tracked or traced. The employees at Shell Pakistan were open to use an ERP which makes batch number & COA as a compulsion to enter during product receipt & dispatch.

4. 10-Attitude towards change if another ERP is implemented in Shell

These findings are based on the response taken from the individuals and the response of the employees recorded was mixed. 19 individuals answered this question and 14 of them said that yes they were open to change, 3 individuals disagree that implementing change was the best thing and 2 people were not sure about the decision. The reasons given by the individuals who were happy with change was, if the new ERP is user friendly, makes reconciliation flexible & makes product traceability easier then they are open to a change. They believed that such a change should be implemented across all functions with SHELL & across all Shell operations. This would also help reducing communication gap among Shell organizations operating in various parts around the globe. The results of this finding are being shown in a pie chart below.

4. 11-Training provided in terms of using SAP and the feedback on learning managers

The group of individuals involved in the change process in Shell Pakistan was questioned on this and the reply given by the majority was a common one so a united single response from the majority has been considered and recorded, they believed that, so far the training is effective & the learning team & manager are working hard to impart knowledge of SAP to them. However the team wanted them to share more case studies of real time scenarios which happened in other parts of Shell while SAP implementation. This would have helped the individuals to learn from their mistakes & make the implementation a success in the first attempt.

4. 12-Commitment and support from Line Mangers in Shell during the transformation stage.

Mostly the team involved in transformation from JD Edwards to SAP felt that, yes the line manager were supportive & took a personal accountability for the implementation of SAP. One of the reasons for this is that the change from JDE to SAP was one of most important and key objectives for that particular year & performance of managers will be evaluated on it. They were very keen on the issues of completing training and start using SAP as quickly as possible.

4. 13-Comfort level of using SAP before the implementation of change

In order to identify the level of ease of the employees who were suppose to use SAP, question was raised to the individuals related to the task about what they feel before the actual implementation took place. A common reaction from the them was recorded and that was, they were comfortable but not very confident that they will be independently able to run SAP as most of them believed that they still need some more time & some real time scenarios to practice using SAP in order to get command over it and reduce chances of errors. The deadline for SAP implementation was quite stringent & stretching but the fact that there would be an overlapping period of running both SAP & JDE for three months made the staff more comfortable. Another common response with regards to technical infrastructure was that in information technology the staff thought they need to learn what it takes to run a critical global system, such as the basic infrastructure and architecture. Other companies are more sophisticated.

4. 14-SAP implementation as a good change and success.

To examine the effectiveness of the change process and to identify was the implementation of SAP worthy enough, interview took place with the users who used both JD Edwards and ERP, and out of 27 people answering my questionnaire, 19 felt that the change was a good one and helped Shell in various ways. 5 individuals felt that the change was a long and stressful process and should not have taken place while rest of the 3 users stayed users and were not sure enough to give their verdict on the implementation of ERP. People who thought that the change was required and SAP implementation was a successful one, thought so because they believed that SAP has resulted in streamlining & standardizing the process globally. Everyone in the Shell world now speaks the same language making communication easier. Even there has been job simplification & alot of data is being analyzed & interpreted which did not use to happen previously. The organization has been redesigned into much more effective & efficient work place compared to before and the moral of most of the users of SAP has been high since they were kept equally involved during the implantation stage. The results of my findings are illustrated below by the use of a pie chart.

4. 15-SAP role in process simplification

One of the main objectives’ of Shell during the transformation was to simplify the processes in its operations. In order to identify if Shell has really accomplished its objective I interviewed the key members at Shell involved in the system change process. 29 people were asked to give their opinion and out of them more than 75% felt that yes the implementation of SAP resulted in process simplification. Four out of 29 individuals felt that such a massive investment in transformation, actually did not really help the cause and two people reserved their comments on this answer. People who thought that the transformation helped in process simplification were of the view that SAP is an intelligent ERP. It automatically interprets a lot of data. It provides data tracking. The reconciliation is a lot faster & quicker along with lesser chances of error. Many numbers can now be added values for interpretation. The preventive maintenance plan is being implemented in true sense resulting in lesser breakdown & efficient terminal operations.

4. 16-SAP role in making products reconciliations more accurate

The post implementation reports of Shell suggest that yes the reconciliation of products have become more accurate. As the reconciliation involves a lot of processes i. e. receipt of product, storage & handling & dispatch in various forms like truck (road), rail, packed form & sea it is important that the oil products are reconciled without an error. Even a small difference can make a big impact on price so the ERP needs to be very flexible to incorporate even after the product leaves terminal as the shortage has to be booked after days it leaves the terminal & reach the end user in case of exports. Thus ERP flexibility is needed to carry out the reconciliation on daily, month & annual based SAP does provide that flexibility for shortage booking for product as all changes are incorporated based on product temperature & density rather than gallons. The temp & density do impact the product & the reconciliation is done automatically with the product reconciliation calculator. This feature did not exist in JDE.

4. 17-Standardization of processes with implementation of SAP at Shell

Shell undertook this massive implementation in order to standardize its processes globally and now the post implementation reports suggest that all the terminals across Shell which have undergone SAP implementation speak the same language. Three of the employees from Shell plant in Pakistan said that he is based in Kemari Terminal (Karachi – Pakistan) with his counterpart in Berlin (Germany) and both of them now have an easier communication and they understand the terminal issues much more closely even the language is no barrier. Thus the findings suggests that Shell has been able to achieve its planned objectives successfully and the implementation of SAP globally which demands for a massive investment still ended up being a successful transformation

4. 18-Role of SAP in maintaining data security

When questioned an employee at Shell involved with the operations of SAP, it was found that SAP was a strong system in regards to saving confidential company information and also providing protection from the threats of hacking etc. Users of SAP at Shell said, since all screens with being password protected are also protected with the token whose digits change every minute. This is the second level of security of SAP, as now two passwords are needed to have an access. Also SAP only accepts strong password (10 digits, upper & lower case, alpha numeric) it is more difficult to hack & two passwords i. e. password & secure token are needed to enter. Thus it is more resistant to hacking & confidential data can be stored

4. 19-Importance of SAP in Shell

It was realized that with the implementation of SAP people tended to realize the importance and usability of the ERP Software because it helped them in several ways. It was noted that the three elements of usability of the software, namely flexibility, reporting and traceability, helped the employees to perform better in their tasks. The response set for the questionnaire included the following indicating that these elements were considered important by employees as they started using SAP:

Elements of Importance


Not so Much

Not at all






1371In this response set, several corroborative questions were asked including whether training was important, whether it was imparted and whether it has helped the organization to improve or not. It was known that several training modules were imparted within the organization to ensure that the ERP could be used more effectively within Shell. Moreover, employees felt that the training would help them in their work, making them more productive, and allow them to utilize the abilities of the ERP software more appropriately. 90% of the employees believed that they were given appropriate training for the ERP software SAP and their work was positively impacted because of this training. They also indicated that more training programs should be introduced in order to improve on the ways through which SAP should be used. They also mentioned that because the top management has provided complete support along with the international parent organization, employees feel more secure and capable to use the software more independently during their day to day activities.

Chapter-5, Analysis

5. 1-Resistance to change

In the very beginning it is already mentioned in the finding of this report about the factors which cause resistance to change. The two major reasons apparently identified for resistance to change are the fear of losing the job status and job security. The mentality of an individual varies accordingly and there are multiple factors which influence the human thinking. Attitude towards change is a similar example of this and not everyone take it positively. Fear of losing here refers to the risk of carrying out the change process unsuccessfully. The moral of the individuals could go low if the results of the change are unsuccessful and the individuals are mainly scared of failure so they don’t want to experiment new things which acts as a barrier to change. Another major reason found which resists change was the job security and the job status of the employees. Here the fear is that the individual could lose their strong position and command due to change being adopted and most of the employees in the organization are not really keen to risk their status or job itself. As far as literature is concerned on this topic Lewin’s (1940) views were in support of this research, he presented his views on resistance to change linked to the human behavior which was also the case at shell, the staff resisted when the idea was presented to implement SAP over JD Edwards. Besides that the findings can also be related with the research of Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn (2005) who said that the individuals resist change to protect their interests and also to defend the elements which are valuable to them, findings in this research present a similar picture as it can be concluded from the research that individuals resist change mainly because of fear of losing and protecting their job and job status. Eight step reasons identified by Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn (2005) are also very similar to all the reasons for resistance to change mentioned in the findings section. Coch & French (1948) also researched on this topic and their research was conducted in Virginia in a Harwood, manufacturing company, their findings suggests that the individual’s lack of interest in the change process and no participation from their side is the major cause of resistance to change. Somehow there is a disagreement with his concept on this as the findings above do not include any such factor of lack of interest or participation in the list of resistance to change. His work was also challenged by Lawrence (1954) and he said that the findings of Coch and French were misleading as they were away from the reality in their research. He then suggested a list of reasons why people resist change, that list is mentioned in the literature review section and again a disagreement on his concept as his reasons given were also close to the findings above. The most important reason suggested by Lawrence was that people resist change because the outcome is unknown to them and the other major reason given was that there is a lack of trust amongst staff and thus they resist change and this reason was also mentioned in the findings so the idea of Lawrence on resistance to change is in support of this research .

5. 2-Models for dealing with resistance to change

There are many models which have been suggested by different scholars to deal with the resistance to change. Kotter & Schlesingers six step model is widely accepted in the industry besides that Lewins 3 stage model is very popular as well. Few other models for dealing with resistance covered in the research are force field analysis, Greminis 4 R’s, Greniers Organisational growth for organisational learning etc. However after conducting the research and surveying in the industry and getting feedback from individuals from different organisations, it can be concluded that the Kotter six steps and Lewins three stage model of unfreezing, change and refreezing are the most accepted and understood models for change used in the organisation. These two models cover all the important aspects which are normally required in an organisation when dealing with change. Discussion has been made in the findings on the concepts of organisational learning and organisational growth and the Greniers model for organisational growth since these topics are no different from the subject of change management. The findings from the research conducted in Barclays and Reckitt Benckiser is in support of Kotter idea of managing resistance, the commonly found resistance in both the companies is usually managed by one of six steps presented by Kotter or sometimes multiple steps could be used to deal with resistance.

5. 3-Business Process Re-engineering

The topic has been covered in the literature review since the case study of Shell is an example of business process re-engineering. BPR usually involves radical redesigning of a process in terms of cost, quality, speed or service to improve the conditions dramatically within no time, the BPR process also requires fundamental rethinking of the ways operations are carried out in an organisation. Shell desired to change its ERP system JD Edwards and implemented SAP over it in order to standardize its process and remove complexities, this could be termed as an example of BPR. The primary findings of this research can be related to the literature presented by Hammer and Champy, and Wenrich and Ahmed, they felt that the concept of BPR is usually linked to the ERP implementation and the case in Shell was one example of this. Besides that this concept is also supported by the idea of Chan and Peel who conducted their research on this topic in many different companies and their findings suggests that the main reason for BPR is improving on the organisational efficiency in operations and also raising the level of customer service. Shell implemented the BPR to increase its efficiency.

5. 4-Risks related to change management in Shell

There are various risks related to the transformation process in Shell which have been identified in the findings section, the major ones being the reputational risk, high project cost and desired results not being achieved. As Shell is a big name in the global market and holds a respectable reputation in the industry so failure to carry out this process would have damaged the reputation of the organisation and as the investment was of more than 100 billion euros so the level of risk went higher with the massive cost. Primary findings of this report are more close to the views presented by Butterworth-Heinemann, as he has described the risks related to the system changeover in his research and the risks covered by him are very similar to findings above. He has only focused on the risks related to the system changeover and the common risks identified in the findings above and his research are data conversion, user acceptance of change, system interfaces and integration and end user involvement. So in comparison to Proscis concept discussed above, it is clear that Butterworths idea of risks faced in change management is more agreeable as the literature is more similar to the research above. On the other hand Proscis view on risks is more general and related to the specific project and the organization as a whole. The risks identified by him are more general like the customer and supplier view, resistance in general, budgeting issues, negative impact, stress, conflicts and misunderstandings amongst staff, etc, it is not specifically linked to the system changeover so the primary findings are in more support of Butterworths work over Proscis concept

5. 5-Change Process at Shell

Shell transformed its ERP JD Edwards to SAP as discussed above, and the primary reason being to increase the efficiency and to standardize the global policies. The reasons for the change have already been discussed above and to sum up, the major factors which pushed Shell towards the change were simplification of processes and make the use of latest technology. The change at Shell would be classified as a planned change, various views have come in front regarding planned change but the most attractive view on the topic was presented by Burke & George Latwin, and Kotter. Burke & George presented a model in which the change was classified as transactional or transformational. The change adopted in Shell could be termed as transactional change, as the fundamentals of the organisation remained same and only some features of the company changed. Another scholar making sense is Kotters, he presented his ideas on planned change in the eight steps model and all of the components in that model are all completely linked to the heart of the organisation and are specifically focused on the concept of change. The other theories discussed in the literature review are mostly the example of incremental change which is the change applied in steps, and after conducting the research on the types of change it was found that Quinn concept seemed appropriate, he suggested that the incremental change was leading to a slow death while the radical change headed towards irreversible transformation. The change at Shell was not an incremental change. In Shell Pakistan the change was implemented in formal steps and a proper procedure was being used which has been discussed above in the findings. At the end of the research it was found that the process of change in Shell was much organised as the management conducted surveys, authorities and responsibilities were very clearly defined and they made the use of a change agent who initiated the process and pushed the others to follow it. The change at Shell in terms of organisational level was an example of operational change. This can said since the operational change talks about the concepts of BPR, TQM, continuous improvements, JIT etc, and all these were considered at Shell during the transformation stage. Pettigrew differentiated the types of change and said in his research that the operational level change are taken at a small score and are not important in the organisation. I firmly disagree with his ideas and feel that the operational level change is equally as important as change at any other level. The change in Shell was an operational level change but it was very much required and wasn’t a small scale project since a massive investment was made, the findings suggest that the change implemented was very effective and the organisation succeeded in achieving their goal.

5. 6-JD Edwards

From the findings above it can be concluded that the employees in Shell Pakistan were not very satisfied with the performance of JD Edwards as an ERP. The feedback was taken through a questionnaire completed by them to find out how they feel about the system and to summarize their views in a nut shell they did not feel that JD Edwards was a flexible enough tool for the product reconciliations and it they also felt that it was not the ideal system which could be used for reporting purposes. Rowena Hawksley had a different view about the system and She said it is a valuable system for the business to use for Asset lifecycle management, inventory control, supply chain execution, manufacturing and engineering purposes etc, but a disagreement is reached from his ideas as the findings in this report on Shell differs from the views presented.

5. 7-ERP

With regards to ERP many scholars have presented their views and few of them have also been covered in my literature review, ERP was best described by Gale, he viewed ERP as an important tool for business to manage operations, which will integrate used in Shell Pakistan during the implementation of SAP. According to Richard Goekey and Robert Faley the SAP implementation in chemical and Pharmaceutical industry has not been very successful in terms of inventory management in the organisation, it can not be agreed as the implementation of SAP in organisation from any industry has resulted in dramatic turnarounds and even in Shell the results obtained after the SAP implementation has been positive and the objectives were achieved. Duplagia and Astani said that the integration between functional areas and information system is the primary reason for companies implementing ERP, the same was the case at Shell as the organisation planned to standardise its processes so implemented ERP, therefore the views of Duplagia and Astani could be related to the research conducted above.

5. 8- Effectiveness of SAP implementation

SAP implementation has been successful in Shell Pakistan and the results obtained have been positive. The moral level of the users has improved and the implementation has resulted in cost saving and reducing complexities in the organisation. Suzanne Gaut, presented a best practice approach for the SAP implementation, the approach was split into two major categories defined as the key individual required in the SAP implementation and the important elements needed in the implementation stage. The details have been discussed above and the best practice support was pretty much followed in Shell Pakistan during the implementation of SAP. Suzanne focused on the fact that the project manager, users of the system, maintenance member, account member, etc should all be involved and participate during the implementation phase to get the desired results. The findings of this report suggests that yes Shell had most of its key members involved during the implementation and the survey undertaken describes the attitude of staff towards of change, it says that most of the members were open to change and welcomed the idea of SAP implementation. The line managers were assigned responsibilities in Shell for the SAP implementation and the staffs expressed their satisfaction with their performance and accepted that the managers fulfilled their responsibilities properly and also were keen to provide training and transfer knowledge on the project in order to help the group as a whole and make this project successful. The other part of the practice suggested by Suzanne was including important elements required in the SAP implementation. Few of the important elements were aim and objectives of the project, people expectations, purchasing, operational, financial and contracting strategies, and computer based training etc. Again the case at Shell seemed to be following all these instructions and the management got all the important procedures completed before and during the implementation. The change agent appointed by Shell helped in carrying out the process and helped in selling the idea of change and recorded the vital steps to be understood and carried out. At Shell the control methods were in place to protect the data loss and only authorise individuals were granted access. The use of multiple passwords of ten digits each was made to maintain the integrity. Results obtained in Shell post implementation of SAP were better and the issues of product traceability, reconciliations and flexibility were resolved which was not the case when JD Edwards was in use. The views of Suzanne Gaut are more related to the implementation process carried out in Shell, most of the points presented by Suzanne have been covered by Shell during the implementation.