Investing in TUFS

Should Northern have invested in TUFS€
Yes
Reasons the Technical underwriting Financial system was targeted at
bringing to the organization efficiency in underwriting process and also
bring in new opportunities that would improve the company performance
and play a great role in the company development. In addition to this,
investing in TUFS would streamline the underwriting process and further
provides the company with strategic e business capabilities. In addition
were it not for the failure of the management to insist the underwriters
to utilize the system was one of the reason that had led to the failure
of the system and its lack of giving a return on investment. The
underwriters were reluctant and slow in adopting TUFS thus leading to it
failure to pick as anticipated (Schwartz, 2004). Therefore, I do believe
it was wise to invest on TUFS and to also promote it use among the
underwriters.
No
The Northern should not have invested on the TUFS simply because it is
clear in the case study that the underwriter were not in favor of it
use. For a company such as Northern to invest on such a huge project the
views of those who were meant to benefit from the project were of
important. In addition, the system was not efficient and failed to meet
the basic needs of underwriting. In addition the decision to adopt the
system was done hurried in order for the company to have a e-business.
What went wrong with the TUFS investment and what can be done to prevent
these problems in the future?
The demand by the management that the technicians hurry up the project
caused the deferment of some of the most crucial functionality in order
for the team to meet the deadline. In addition to this the addition of
extra cost through training and help desk to provide the underwriters
with support of any questions arising would have been avoided by
encouraging the participation of the underwriters in putting up the
system (Holmes, 2001).
The Northern spent millions of dollar on TUFS yet the system failed to
give a return on investments through the reduction of underwriting cost.
To collect the management ought to take the initiative of campaigning
for the use of the project. This would mean that all the underwriters
would be forced to use them. Moreover, the management ought to insist
that the underwriting department collaborate with the technicians and
bring them up to speed on what they need.
Another thing that went wrong is that there were unanticipated
changes in the system that caused failure in the system. To prevent such
problems the following ought to be done
Good governance this starts with placing good sponsor to foresee the
success of the project a good team headed by one person is
recommendable. Good governance would offer direction, give guidance
critically review the project and how the project is progressing on.
Good implementation is essential for any project to be successful. In
addition constant reminding of the benefit the project will yield is
paramount in encouraging the employees to embrace the project and make
use of it (Triantis, 1999). Other measures that can be taken include:
making timely decision, managing expectations and making consideration
for smaller projects. Lastly monitoring the environment can play a huge
role in preventing the failure of a new project.
What does Northern need to do to realize the benefits that were
projected for TUFS
The northern had anticipated that by adopting the system they would gain
in terms of reduction of cost of underwriting thus the company through
the use of the system would make savings. Additionally the company hoped
that by using the system the company would be able to streamline the
process of underwriting and be offered strategic e-business
capabilities. Furthermore the Northern hoped for growth opportunities
and efficiency through the adoption of the system. Even though this has
not been achieved the company can still realize these benefits by
introducing training programs for the underwriters. Moreover the
company ought to adopt the technician recommendation that the
underwriter participate in the making of the system and in its
implementation by providing information on what is necessary to the
technicians. In addition to this all the functionality that was
originally intended to be included in the system should be brought in.
Other steps that the Northern ought to take to realize the project
benefit include management support for the implementation of the system.
In addition, the underwriters that are reluctant to embrace change
should be laid off to avoid dragging the company progress forward
(Dinsmore & Cooke-Davies, 2006).
How can they measure these benefits
Measuring whether TUFS was successful can have a big impact on Northern
company to measure the benefit brought by the TUFS can be done using the
following steps. Evaluating whether the employees plus other
stakeholders are satisfied and gaining from the project, this can be
done by asking the parties that are involved efficiency and inefficiency
of the project. Another way to measure the benefit derived is through
determining whether the project by the time it’s in full
implementation has met the business objectives it was meant to.
Evaluating the end user adoption is another way to measure the benefits
this is done by reaching out to those expected to utilize the project
and finding out the gains they make from the project(Simms, 2006).
Lastly, evaluating the final delivery is paramount as it will help in
knowing whether apart from yielding positive results does the project
cause headache to the user.
Reference
Triantis, J. E. (1999). Creating successful acquisition and joint
venture projects: A process and team approach. Westport, Conn: Quorum.
Schwartz, E. S. (2004). Real options and investment under uncertainty:
Classical readings and recent contributions. Cambridge, Mass [u.a.: MIT
Press.
Holmes, A. (2001). Failsafe IS project delivery. Aldershot: Gower.
Dinsmore, P. C., & Cooke-Davies, T. (2006). The right projects done
right!: From business strategy to successful project implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Simms, J. (2006). Solving the Benefits Puzzle. Capability Management Pty
Ltd.
INVESTING IN TUFS PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 6
INVESTING IN TUFS 1

Close Menu