Implementation Revision Notes

Implementing a new information system is a critical phase in the systems life cycle. The method chosen to introduce the new system affects risk, cost, time, and user acceptance. There are four widely recognised implementation methods: direct changeover, parallel running, pilot running, and phased implementation. Each method has distinct characteristics and is suitable for different organisational contexts. Understanding these methods helps in planning a smooth transition from an old system to a new one.

• Implementation methods determine how and when the new system replaces the old one.
• Choosing the right method balances risk, cost, and operational continuity.

Direct changeover involves stopping the old system and starting the new system at a specific moment. This method is straightforward and fast, as the organisation switches completely to the new system immediately.

For example, a small retail shop might replace its old point-of-sale software with a new one overnight.

The main advantage is speed and simplicity, requiring less time and fewer resources during the transition. However, it carries high risk because if the new system fails, there is no fallback, potentially causing operational disruption.

• Old system is completely replaced at once.
• Fast and simple to implement.
• High risk due to lack of fallback.
• Suitable for small organisations or low-risk systems.

Parallel running means operating both the old and new systems simultaneously for a period. This allows users to compare outputs and ensures the new system works correctly before fully retiring the old one.

For instance, a bank might run its new transaction processing system alongside the old one for several weeks to verify accuracy.

The advantage is reduced risk, as the old system can be used if the new system encounters problems. The downside is increased cost and resource use, since both systems require maintenance and operation during the overlap.

• Both systems run at the same time temporarily.
• Reduces risk by providing a fallback option.
• Increases operational costs and workload.
• Useful for critical systems where errors are costly.

Pilot running introduces the new system in a small, controlled part of the organisation first. This allows testing and resolving issues before full-scale implementation.

For example, a university might implement a new student records system in one department before rolling it out campus-wide.

This method reduces risk by limiting exposure to potential failures. However, it takes longer to complete full implementation and may require additional coordination to integrate pilot results into the wider system.

• New system tested in a limited area first.
• Allows identification and correction of issues early.
• Slower full implementation process.
• Effective for large organisations with multiple departments.

Phased implementation introduces the new system gradually in stages or modules. Each phase replaces part of the old system until the entire system is new.

For example, a manufacturing company might implement a new inventory module first, then add purchasing and sales modules over several months.

This method balances risk and complexity by spreading changes over time. It requires careful planning to manage dependencies between phases and may prolong the transition period.

• System introduced in stages or modules.
• Spreads risk and workload over time.
• Requires detailed planning and coordination.
• Suitable for complex systems with modular design.