ANALISIS KELAYAKAN RENCANA PENERAPAN MICROSOFT DYNAMICS SL 7.0 DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN METODE INFORMATION ECONOMICS (STUDI KASUS : PT. ROYSTON ADVISORY INDONESIA) Suryono Santoso Binus University, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Shandy Binus University, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Abstrak PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia sebagai salah satu perusahaan layanan jasa profesional yang independen di Indonesia. Perusahaan ini bergerak di bidang pemasaran, strategi, dan komunikasi, membantu berbagai perusahaan maju dan berkembang di Indonesia. Khususnya dalam mengatasi permasalahan relasi dan hubungan dengan publik, serta menjaga investasi perusahaan klien di Indonesia. Guna mewujudkan visi perusahaan dan berkembang menjadi lebih baik, perusahaan memerlukan sistem manajemen proyek yang terintegrasi. Tujuan dari penulisan skripsi ini adalah menghasilkan sebuah nilai kelayakan terhadap rencana penerapan aplikasi ERP project management dan financial accounting, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0. Nilai kelayakan didapat dari hasil analisis perhitungan dengan menggunakan metode Information Economics yang ditulis oleh Parker et al (1988). Metode ini akan menghitung nilai Simple Return on Investment serta penilaian domain bisnis dan domain teknologi dari aplikasi Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 yang
akan ditampilkan dalam Information Economics Scorecard untuk menentukan nilai akhir skor proyek. Simpulan dari penelitian pada skripsi ini didapatkan skor 2 (351,78%) pada Simple ROI dan bobot 59 pada Information Economics Scorecard, yang berpredikat baik (dalam skala Likert).
Kata kunci: Studi Kelayakan, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0, Information Economics
1. Pendahuluan Layanan jasa profesional atau biasa disebut Professional Services berkembang menjadi pasar yang menjanjikan pada era sekarang ini. Bidang usaha ini berkembang karena kebutuhan pasar terutama perusahaan maju dalam mencari solusi bisnis untuk mengatasi permasalahan yang terjadi dalam usaha bisnis mereka. Layanan jasa profesional ,yang terdiri dari sekumpulan sumber daya manusia yang memiliki berbagai keahlian dan pengetahuan yang spesifik, menyewakan jasa mereka untuk memberikan bantuan layanan solusi bisnis. Dalam menjalankan usaha, professional services erat kaitannya dengan proyek. Layanan yang diberikan berupa kegiatan yang bersifat sementara yang dilakukan untuk menghasilkan suatu jasa. Kegiatan ini memiliki tujuan tertentu, memiliki masa awal dan akhir, dan membutuhkan sumber daya dari berbagai keahlian dan bidang. Sebuah professional services harus dapat merencanakan dan mengelola proyeknya dengan baik. Waktu, ruang lingkup serta biaya adalah hal-hal yang harus diperhatikan dalam sebuah project management. Ketepatan waktu dalam menyelesaikan proyek, penghitungan biaya yang tepat, dan jasa yang diberikan sesuai dengan harapan pelanggan menjadi titik kritis dalam kesuksesan sebuah project management. Project management yang baik akan memberikan kepuasan pelanggan guna meningkatkan citra perusahaan professional services pada umumnya.
2. Metodologi Untuk mencapai tujuan dari analisis kelayakan penelitian ini adalah: -
Menganalisis sistem informasi berjalan dan perhitungan corporate value.
-
Menganalisis biaya dan manfaat untuk melakukan perhitungan Simple ROI.
-
Menghasilkan nilai kelayakan terhadap rencana penerapan aplikasi Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 pada PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia yang akan ditampilkan dalam Information Economics Scorecard.
2.1.
Perhitungan Corporate Value Corporate value digunakan untuk menentukan nilai atau pembobotan yang diberikan kepada nilai dan resiko pada teknologi informasi. Nilai dan resiko dilihat dari dua domain pada suatu perusahaan, yaitu domain bisnis dan domain teknologi untuk menghitung manfaat-manfaat yang tidak dapat dikuantifikasikan secara finansial karena nilai dan resikonya bersifat intangible. Terdapat 2 sumber dalam penentuan corporate value, yaitu : •
Menentukan nilai berdasarkan corporate culture Nilai ini didapat dari sebuah sistem atas dasar kepercayaan bersama yang terdiri dari sejarah perusahaan, kepercayaan dan nilai. Corporate culture mencerminkan kekuatan elemen organisasi. Aspek-aspek dari corporate culture meliputi : − Organization, yaitu apakah hubungan pelaporan secara tradisional atau matrix dan apakah tanggung jawab fungsional yang ada dibutuhkan untuk melaksanakan strategi secara sentralisasi atau desentralisasi.
− Systems, yaitu apakah proses perencanaan dan pembuatan anggaran berjalan secara formal atau informal dan apakah pengawasan kinerja karyawan dan sistem penghargaan bersifat partisipatif atau diktatorial. − Resources, apakah sumber daya kunci yang dibutuhkan untuk melakukan suatu kegiatan dapat secara langsung diperoleh atau harus melalui proses persetujuan birokrasi dan apakah filosofi terhadap karyawan berjalan stabil atau terjadi perekrutan dan pemecatan. − Culture, yaitu apakah cara pengambilan keputusan dilakukan secara konservatif atau dengan mengambil resiko dan apakah cara penentuan target yang akan dicapai menyukseskan perusahaan baik dalam jangka pendek atau jangka panjang. •
Menentukan nilai berdasarkan fungsi dari misi perusahaan Terdapat 2 sudut pandang untuk menentukan kuadran, antara lain : − Dari lini bisnis dengan melihat lini bisnis tersebut menguntungkan dan dalam keadaan baik atau tidak. − Dari dukungan komputer yang digunakan dalam lini bisnis dengan melihat keefektifan dukungan komputer tersebut.
2.2.
Perhitungan Simple Roi Perhitungan didapat dari analisis terhadap manfaat tangible dan quasi-tangible sedangkan manfaat intangible akan dinilai pada bagian berikutnya berdasarkan IEKuisioner Domain yang didapatkan dari hasil wawancara. Perhitungan manfaat tangible menggunakan metode traditional cost benefit analysis dan pada akhirnya
akan menghasilkan total manfaat dengan pengurangan biaya operasional pada perusahaan. Sedangkan manfaat quasi-tangible akan dihitung melalui analisis terhadap value linking, value acceleration, dan value restructuring. Perhitungan manfaat quasi-tangible akan menghasilkan net economic benefit setiap tahunnya. Pada akhirnya, seluruh manfaat tersebut akan diformulasikan dengan biaya pengembangan dan biaya berjalan kedalam lembar kerja dampak ekonomis (Economic Impact Worksheet). Lembar kerja dampak ekonomis ini akan menghasilkan skor ROI yang menjadi salah satu perhitungan bobot kelayakan aplikasi. Tabel dari Economic Impact Worksheet: A. Net Investment Required (From Development Costs Worksheet)
Rp1.288.017.000
B. Yearly Cash Flows : based on five 12 month periods following implementation of the proposed system. Cash flow can be negative (Nilai dalam Rupiah (Rp)) YEARS TOTAL Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Net economic Benefit 4.061.249.994 4.314.509.543 4.594.119.362 4.880.608.647 5.184.963.402 Operating Cost Reduction 164.394.000 174.645.609 185.568.178 197.140.210 209.433.874 =Pre tax income 4.225.643.994 4.489.155.152 4.779.687.540 5.077.748.857 5.394.397.276 (-) On-going expense from worksheet 231.604.900 246.047.782 261.391.322 277.691.685 295.008.539 =Net Cash Flow 3.994.039.094 4.243.107.370 4.518.296.218 4.800.057.172 5.099.388.737 22.654.888.591 C. Simple ROI, calculated as D. Scoring, Economic Impact
2.3.
(22.654.888.591 / 5 / 1.288.017.000)
x 100%
Score
Simple Return on Investment
0 1 2 3 4 5
zero or less 1% to 299% 300% to 499% 500% to 699% 700% to 899% Over
351,78%
Information Economic Scorecard Setelah melakukan perhitungan ROI serta analisis nilai dan resiko korporat perusahaan maka langkah selanjutnya adalah dengan memasukkan hasil pembobotan dan skor hasil analisis ke dalam Information Economics Scorecar. Di dalam
Information Economics Scorecard
inilah akan didapatkan skor akhir yang akan
menentukan nilai kelayakan aplikasi terhadap perusahaan. Faktor pengali merupakan bobot setiap nilai dan resiko korporat yang diharapkan oleh perusahaan. Bobot ini didapat dari hasil wawancara dan telah dianalisis. Untuk nilai bobot (Weighted Value) didapatkan dari bobot proyek (ROI sederhana, dan hasil pembobotan nilai dan resiko aplikasi) yang dikalikan dengan faktor pengali. Skor pembobotan proyek (Weighted Score) didapatkan dari penjumlahan semua nilai yang dikurangi dengan penjumlahan semua nilai resiko pada baris weighted value. Tabel dari Information Economic Scorecard: Evaluator factor
ROI
SM
2
4
Business Domain Technology Domain
2
Weighted Value
4
Business Domain CA MI CR
6 4
16
2 4
24
4 5
10
Technology Domain SA DU TU IR
OR
-1 3
12
1
-2
-1
Weighted Score
-1
1
-1
5
1
4
5
5
-2
-4
-5
59
ROI Measurement ROI Enhanced simple return on investment score Business Domain Factors SM Strategic Match CA Competitive Advantage MI Management Information CR Competitive Response OR Project or Organizational Risk Technology Domain Factors SA Strategic IS Archictecture DU Definitional Uncertainty TU Technical Uncertainty IR IS Infrastructure Risk
2.4.
Skala Likert . Untuk mengukur predikat kelayakan tersebut, diperlukan suatu ukuran yang menjadi dasar atas penilaian tersebut. Ukuran tersebut diambil dari hasil pembobotan nilai korporasi yang diharapkan oleh perusahaan.
Jika terdapat beberapa alternatif proyek teknologi informasi, maka hasil perhitungan skor akhir proyek dapat dibandingkan di antara beberapa proyek teknologi informasi tersebut. Proyek yang memiliki skor paling besar merupakan proyek yang menjadi prioritas utama untuk diimplementasikan. Konsep pemilihan alternatif proyek ini mirip dengan studi kelayakan bisnis yang sering dilakukan oleh para analisis bisnis. Tetapi karena penelitian yang dilakukan sekarang hanya terdapat satu proyek saja, maka perlu dibuat suatu tabel predikat untuk mengkategorikan skor kelayakan tersebut. Tabel Predikat Aplikasi: Kategori Skor 77 s/d 100 53 s/d 76 29 s/d 52 5 s/d 28 (-20) s/d 4
Predikat Sangat Baik Baik Cukup Baik Kurang Baik Tidak Baik
Terdapat lima kelas dalam tabel predikat aplikasi Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0, yaitu tidak baik, kurang baik, cukup baik, baik, dan sangat baik. Nilai tersebut dimasukkan ke dalam Skala Likert dengan nilai maksimum, nilai tengah, dan nilai minimum berdasarkan perhitungan diatas. Besarnya pengaruh Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 dapat dilihat pada Skala Likert berikut ini :
Tidak Baik Kurang Baik Cukup Baik
Baik
Sangat Baik
40 -20
4
28
52
76 59
100
3. Kesimpulan Berdasarkan tujuan kami pada penelitian ini, yaitu menghasilkan sebuah nilai kelayakan terhadap rencana penerapan aplikasi Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 pada PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia, maka didapatkan skor 2 (351,78%) pada Simple ROI dan bobot 59 dari bobot maksimum 100 dan bobot minimum -20 pada Information Economics Scorecard. Nilai kelayakan tersebut telah diklasifikasikan ke dalam tabel predikat aplikasi (dalam skala Likert) dan didapatkan kesimpulan bahwa analisis kelayakan rencana penerapan Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 pada PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia, mendapatkan predikat Baik yang berarti rencana penerapan Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 dinilai layak dan bermanfaat pada PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia. Penerapan aplikasi ERP, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0, dapat memberikan manfaat yang bernilai bagi perusahaan guna memperbaiki sistem yang berjalan, meningkatkan keunggulan kompetitif, dan mencapai tujuan strategis perusahaan serta memberikan nilai korporasi pada posisi strategic.
DAFTAR PUSTAKA [1] Alter, S. (1999). Information System : A Managerial Perspective, Third Edition. Addison – Wesley. USA. [2] Anderson, G.W. and Danielle Larocca (2006). Sams Teach Yourself SAP in 24 Hours. Pearson-Education, Inc., New-Jersey. [3] Anonymous. (2004). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. 3rd Edition. Project Management Institute Ince, Pennsylvania USA [4] Anonymous. (2009). Guidebook Microsoft Dynamics SL. Nucleus Research, Boston. [5] Anonymous. (2011). Microsoft Dynamics SL. http://www.microsoft.com/enus/dynamics/erp-sl-overview.aspx [6] Apshankar, Kapil, April 17, 2002, Enterprise Resource Planning and Web Service, http://www.webservicearchitect.com/content/articles/apshankar01print.asp [7] Bishop,Michelle S. (2011). The Total Economic Impact Of Microsoft Dynamics CRM 2011. Forrester Research, Inc., USA. [8] Brady, Joseph A.,Monk,Ellen F.,Wagner,Bret J.(2001).Concepts in Enterprise Resource Planning. Thomson Learning, Canada [9] Connolly, Thomas, Carolyn Begg. (2005). Database Systems: A Pratical Approach to Design, Implementation, and Management, 4th Edition. Pearson Education, Essex. [10] Eddy, Rudolph, Y., Young, M. S., & Rantetana, M. (2008). Analisis Sistem Informasi Pada PT XYZ Menggunakan Perangkat Information Economics (IE). Jurnal Piranti Warta , 388-405.
[11] Graeser, Valerie, Leslie Willcocks, Nikolaos Pisanias. (1998). Developing the IT Scorecard. Business Intelligent Ltd, London. [12] Hidayat,Stella Leonita., Widjaja, Erveline., dan Vera. (2009). Analisa Kelayakan Rencana Implementasi Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi Terintegrasi Dengan Menggunakan Metode Information Economics (Studi Kasus : SAP Modul Human Capital Management pada Divisi Human Resource di PT. Bank Sinarmas).Universitas Bina Nusantara. Jakarta. [13] Jeffrey L. Whitten, Lonnie D. Bentley, Kevin C. Dittman (2001). Systems Analysis and Design Methods 5th edition. Mcgraw Hill. New York [14] Keown, Arthur J dan David F.S. (2000). Dasar-dasar Manajemen Keuangan. Terjemahan Chaerul D. Djakman. Salemba Empat, Jakarta. [15] Lau, Linda (2005). Managing Business with SAP : Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey. [16] Laudon, K.C and Laudon, J.P. (2006). Essentials of Management Information Systems.Managing A Digital Firm. 9th ed. Sine Nomine. [17] Marakas, George M, O’Brien, James A.(2004). Management Information System, 6th edition, Pearson-Education Inc.New-York. [18] Mathiassen, L., Madsen, AM., Nielsen, PA. dan Stage J. (2000). Object Oriented Analysis & Design, edisi ke-1. Marko Publishing, Denmark [19] McLeod, Jr Raymond. (2001). Sistem Informasi Manajemen, Edisi ke-8. Diterjemahkan oleh Hendra Teguh. PT. Prenhallindo, Jakarta [20] Olson, David. (2004). Information Systems Project Management International Edition.Mc Graw Hill, UK. [21] Parker, Marylin M., Robert, J., and Trainor, H., E. (1988). Information Economics : Linking Business Performance to Information Technology. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
[22] Remenyi, Dan., Money, Arthur., Twite, Alan. (1995). The Effective Measurement and Management of IT Cost and Benefits. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. London. [23] Remenyi, Dan., Money, Arthur., Twite, Alan. (2000). The Effective Measurement and Management of IT Cost and Benefits. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. London. [24] Schwalbe, Kathy (2006). Information Technology Project Management - 4th Edition.Course Technology, Boston Massachusatts [25] Sugiyono. (2004). Metode penelitian bisnis (6th edition). Alfabeta, Bandung. [26] Wawan Dhewanto, Falahah. (2007). ERP Menyelaraskan Teknologi Informasi Dengan Strategi Bisnis. Informatika, Bandung. [27] Whitten, Jeffrey L., Lonnie D. Bentley, Kevin C. Dittman. (2004). System Analysis and Design Methods, 6th Edition. McGraw Hill Companies Inc, New York. [28] Yulia.(2005).Kajian Kelayakan Investasi Proyek Teknologi Informasi Dengan Menggunakan Metode Information Economics.Jurnal Informatika,110-114.
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS MICROSOFT DYNAMICS SL 7.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN USING INFORMATION ECONOMICS (CASE STUDY : PT. ROYSTON ADVISORY INDONESIA) Suryono Santoso Binus University, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Shandy Binus University, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia
Abstract PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia as one of the company's independent professional services in Indonesia. The company is engaged in marketing, strategy and communications, helping companies in Indonesia developed and developing countries. Particularly in addressing issues and relations with the public relations, as well as keeping the client company's investment in Indonesia. In order to realize the vision of the company and evolve into better, the company requires an integrated project management system. The purpose of this thesis is to produce an implementation plan of the feasibility of application of ERP project management and financial accounting, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0. Values obtained from analysis of the feasibility of calculations using the method of Information Economics, written by Parker et al (1988). This method will calculate the Simple Return on Investment as well as evaluating the business domain and technology domain of Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 applications that will be displayed in the Information Economics Scorecard to determine the final score of the project. The conclusions of
the research in this paper obtained a score of 2 (351.78%) in the Simple ROI and the weight 59 on the Information Economics Scorecard, which is categorized as good (Likert scale).
Key word: feasibility, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0, Information Economics
1. Introduction Professional services or so-called Professional Services developed into a promising market in the current era. Line of business is evolving as the needs of developed markets, especially companies in finding business solutions to solve problems that occur in their business. Professional services, which consist of a set of human resources who have a wide range of expertise and specific knowledge, lease their services to provide support services business solutions. In running the business, professional services closely related to the project. The services provided in the form of a temporary activity undertaken to produce a service. This activity has a specific purpose, has a beginning and end, and need the resources and expertise from various fields. A professional services must be able to plan and manage the project properly. Time, scope and cost are the things that must be considered in a project management. Timeliness in completing the project, calculating the exact cost, and services rendered in accordance with customer expectations to be a critical point in a project management success. Good project management will provide customer satisfaction in order to improve the image of professional services firms in general.
2. Methodology
To achieve the objectives of the feasibility study were: -
Analyze current Information System and calculating Corporate Value.
-
Analyze cost and benefit to calculate Simple ROI.
-
Giving feasibility score to application implementation plan for Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 at PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia which would be shown in Information Economics Scorecard.
2.1.
Corporate Value Corporate value is used to determine the value or weighting given to the value and risks in information technology. Value and risk viewed from the two domains in an enterprise, namely the business domain and technology domain to calculate the benefits that can not be quantified financially because of the value and risk is intangible. There are two sources in the determination of corporate value, namely: •
Determine the value using corporate culture This value is obtained from a system based on mutual trust which consists of the company's history, beliefs and values. Corporate culture reflects the strength of organizational elements. Aspects of corporate culture include: − Organization, that is, whether traditional or reporting relationship matrix and whether the existing functional responsibilities required to implement the strategy of centralization or decentralization. − Systems, is whether the process of planning and budgeting runs formal or informal and whether monitoring employee performance and reward systems are participative or dictatorial.
− Resources, whether key resources required to perform an activity can be obtained directly or go through the bureaucratic approval process and whether the philosophy of the employees was stable or place of recruitment and dismissal. − Culture, namely whether the decision to do so conservatively or by taking risks and whether the method of determining the target company's success will be achieved both in the short or long term. •
Determine value using organization function and mission There are 2 point of view to determine quadran, such as : − From line of business, by looking at the line of business is profitable and in good condition or not. − From computer support which is used in line of business, by looking at the effectiveness of computer support.
2.2.
Simple Roi Calculations obtained from an analysis of the tangible benefits of quasitangible and intangible benefits will be assessed while in the next section based on the IE-Domain Questionnaires obtained from interviews. Tangible benefit calculations using traditional methods of cost benefit analysis and will ultimately result in total benefits to the reduction in operating costs at the company. While the quasi-tangible benefits will be calculated through an analysis of value linking, value acceleration, value restructuring and. Calculation of quasi-tangible benefits will result in net economic benefits annually. In the end, all benefits will be formulated with
development costs and the cost runs into the economic impact of the worksheet (Economic Impact Worksheet). Economic impact of this worksheet will generate ROI score that was one of the feasibility of calculating the weight of the application. Table Economic Impact Worksheet: A. Net Investment Required (From Development Costs Worksheet)
Rp1.288.017.000
B. Yearly Cash Flows : based on five 12 month periods following implementation of the proposed system. Cash flow can be negative (Nilai dalam Rupiah (Rp)) YEARS TOTAL Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Net economic Benefit 4.061.249.994 4.314.509.543 4.594.119.362 4.880.608.647 5.184.963.402 Operating Cost Reduction 164.394.000 174.645.609 185.568.178 197.140.210 209.433.874 =Pre tax income 4.225.643.994 4.489.155.152 4.779.687.540 5.077.748.857 5.394.397.276 (-) On-going expense from worksheet 231.604.900 246.047.782 261.391.322 277.691.685 295.008.539 =Net Cash Flow 3.994.039.094 4.243.107.370 4.518.296.218 4.800.057.172 5.099.388.737 22.654.888.591 C. Simple ROI, calculated as D. Scoring, Economic Impact
2.3.
(22.654.888.591 / 5 / 1.288.017.000)
x 100%
Score
Simple Return on Investment
0 1 2 3 4 5
zero or less 1% to 299% 300% to 499% 500% to 699% 700% to 899% Over
351,78%
Information Economic Scorecard After performing ROI calculations and analysis of the company's corporate value and risk the next step is to incorporate the results of weighting and scoring the results of the analysis into the Information Economics Scorecar. Information Economics Scorecard in this will get the final score will determine the feasibility of the application against the company. The multiplier is the weight of each value and corporate risk expected by the company. The weights are derived from interviews and have been analyzed. For the weights (Weighted Value) obtained from the weight of the project (simple ROI, and the weighting value and risk of application) is multiplied by the multiplier. Score
weighting of the project (Weighted Score) obtained from the sum of all values are reduced by the sum of all values of the risk weighted value on the line. Table Information Economic Scorecard: Evaluator factor
ROI
SM
2
4
Business Domain CA MI CR
6
2
Technology Domain SA DU TU IR
OR
4
-1
1
Business Domain Technology Domain
2
4
4
5
3
1
Weighted Value
4
16
24
10
12
-1
-2
-1
Weighted Score
-1
5
1
4
5
5
-2
-4
-5
59
ROI Measurement ROI Enhanced simple return on investment score Business Domain Factors SM Strategic Match CA Competitive Advantage MI Management Information CR Competitive Response OR Project or Organizational Risk Technology Domain Factors SA Strategic IS Archictecture DU Definitional Uncertainty TU Technical Uncertainty IR IS Infrastructure Risk
2.4.
Likert Scale . To gauge the feasibility of such predicates, we need a measure that became the basis for that judgment. Size is taken from corporate value weighting the results expected by the company. If there are several alternative information technology projects, the final score calculation results of the project can be compared among several information technology projects. Projects that have the greatest score is a priority project to be implemented. The concept of selection of project alternatives is similar to a business feasibility study is often done by the business analysis. But because the research is done now there is only one project alone, it needs to be made a predicate table to categorize the feasibility scores.
Table Application Scoring: Kategori Skor 77 s/d 100 53 s/d 76 29 s/d 52 5 s/d 28 (-20) s/d 4
Predikat Sangat Baik Baik Cukup Baik Kurang Baik Tidak Baik
There are five classes in the table predicate Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 application, which is not good, not good, fairly good, good, and very good. Value is inserted into the Likert Scale with maximum values, mean, and minimum values based on the calculation above. The magnitude of the influence of Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 can be viewed on the following Likert Scale :
Tidak Baik Kurang Baik Cukup Baik
Baik
Sangat Baik
40 -20
4
28
52
76
100
59
3. Kesimpulan Based on our objective in this study, the feasibility of producing an implementation plan of the Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 applications on the PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia, then earned a score of 2 (351.78%) in Simple ROI and weight 59 of the maximum weight 100 and minimum weight -20 in Information Economics Scorecard. Feasibility of value has been classified into the table predicate applications (Likert scale) and obtained the conclusion that the analysis of the feasibility of the implementation plan of Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0 at PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia, achieved Good rating that means
Microsoft Dynamics SL implementation plan 7.0 judged feasible and beneficial to the PT. Royston Advisory Indonesia. Implementation of ERP applications, Microsoft Dynamics SL 7.0, can provide valuable benefits for the company to fix a system that works, increase competitive advantage, and achieve corporate strategic objectives and corporate value in strategic positions.
REFERENCES [1] Alter, S. (1999). Information System : A Managerial Perspective, Third Edition. Addison – Wesley. USA. [2] Anderson, G.W. and Danielle Larocca (2006). Sams Teach Yourself SAP in 24 Hours. Pearson-Education, Inc., New-Jersey. [3] Anonymous. (2004). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. 3rd Edition. Project Management Institute Ince, Pennsylvania USA [4] Anonymous. (2009). Guidebook Microsoft Dynamics SL. Nucleus Research, Boston. [5] Anonymous. (2011). Microsoft Dynamics SL. http://www.microsoft.com/enus/dynamics/erp-sl-overview.aspx [6] Apshankar, Kapil, April 17, 2002, Enterprise Resource Planning and Web Service, http://www.webservicearchitect.com/content/articles/apshankar01print.asp [7] Bishop,Michelle S. (2011). The Total Economic Impact Of Microsoft Dynamics CRM 2011. Forrester Research, Inc., USA. [8] Brady, Joseph A.,Monk,Ellen F.,Wagner,Bret J.(2001).Concepts in Enterprise Resource Planning. Thomson Learning, Canada [9] Connolly, Thomas, Carolyn Begg. (2005). Database Systems: A Pratical Approach to Design, Implementation, and Management, 4th Edition. Pearson Education, Essex. [10] Eddy, Rudolph, Y., Young, M. S., & Rantetana, M. (2008). Analisis Sistem Informasi Pada PT XYZ Menggunakan Perangkat Information Economics (IE). Jurnal Piranti Warta , 388-405.
[11] Graeser, Valerie, Leslie Willcocks, Nikolaos Pisanias. (1998). Developing the IT Scorecard. Business Intelligent Ltd, London. [12] Hidayat,Stella Leonita., Widjaja, Erveline., dan Vera. (2009). Analisa Kelayakan Rencana Implementasi Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi Terintegrasi Dengan Menggunakan Metode Information Economics (Studi Kasus : SAP Modul Human Capital Management pada Divisi Human Resource di PT. Bank Sinarmas).Universitas Bina Nusantara. Jakarta. [13] Jeffrey L. Whitten, Lonnie D. Bentley, Kevin C. Dittman (2001). Systems Analysis and Design Methods 5th edition. Mcgraw Hill. New York [14] Keown, Arthur J dan David F.S. (2000). Dasar-dasar Manajemen Keuangan. Terjemahan Chaerul D. Djakman. Salemba Empat, Jakarta. [15] Lau, Linda (2005). Managing Business with SAP : Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey. [16] Laudon, K.C and Laudon, J.P. (2006). Essentials of Management Information Systems.Managing A Digital Firm. 9th ed. Sine Nomine. [17] Marakas, George M, O’Brien, James A.(2004). Management Information System, 6th edition, Pearson-Education Inc.New-York. [18] Mathiassen, L., Madsen, AM., Nielsen, PA. dan Stage J. (2000). Object Oriented Analysis & Design, edisi ke-1. Marko Publishing, Denmark [19] McLeod, Jr Raymond. (2001). Sistem Informasi Manajemen, Edisi ke-8. Diterjemahkan oleh Hendra Teguh. PT. Prenhallindo, Jakarta [20] Olson, David. (2004). Information Systems Project Management International Edition.Mc Graw Hill, UK. [21] Parker, Marylin M., Robert, J., and Trainor, H., E. (1988). Information Economics : Linking Business Performance to Information Technology. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
[22] Remenyi, Dan., Money, Arthur., Twite, Alan. (1995). The Effective Measurement and Management of IT Cost and Benefits. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. London. [23] Remenyi, Dan., Money, Arthur., Twite, Alan. (2000). The Effective Measurement and Management of IT Cost and Benefits. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd. London. [24] Schwalbe, Kathy (2006). Information Technology Project Management - 4th Edition.Course Technology, Boston Massachusatts [25] Sugiyono. (2004). Metode penelitian bisnis (6th edition). Alfabeta, Bandung. [26] Wawan Dhewanto, Falahah. (2007). ERP Menyelaraskan Teknologi Informasi Dengan Strategi Bisnis. Informatika, Bandung. [27] Whitten, Jeffrey L., Lonnie D. Bentley, Kevin C. Dittman. (2004). System Analysis and Design Methods, 6th Edition. McGraw Hill Companies Inc, New York. [28] Yulia.(2005).Kajian Kelayakan Investasi Proyek Teknologi Informasi Dengan Menggunakan Metode Information Economics.Jurnal Informatika,110-114.
