IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 46, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 1999 407 Transition and Change During the Implementation of a Computer-Based Manufacturing Process Planning System: An Analysis Using the Equity Implementation Model Kailash Joshi and Thomas W. Lauer Abstract—Implementing changes in technologies, systems, work practices, and organizational structures is vitally important for the survival of organizations in today’s competitive environ- ments. However, introducing changes in organizations is not easy. Employees often resist changes. This paper presents a case study of the implementation of a computer-based manu- facturing process planning system in an automotive assembly plant. The paper employs an equity implementation model to understand resistance to the system by zone supervisors and quick acceptance by plant engineers, two major employee groups who were affected by this change. Factors affecting employee reactions to the change are identified and analyzed on the basis of the equity implementation model. The paper concludes that the equity implementation model provides a useful framework for understanding and explaining resistance and acceptance behavior of employees. The model can also be useful in assessing the job- related impacts of a system or technology implementation. The paper also discusses suggestions for implementers in developing successful change implementation strategies. Index Terms— Change management, equity implementation model, implementation, information systems implementation, manufacturing systems, resistance to change. I. INTRODUCTION I N today’s competitive environments, an important require- ment for organizations is to identify and implement new systems and technologies for improving productivity. Survival of organizations is increasingly dependent upon their ability to adopt changes to take advantage of new technologies and management concepts [26]. However, implementing changes in organizations is not an easy task [5], [20], [25]. Organizations often encounter resistance from many quarters, including union employees, nonunion staff, and sometimes even managers. On the other hand, benefits of new systems and technologies cannot accrue unless they are implemented and accepted by concerned em- ployees [7]. Therefore, understanding reasons for employees’ reactions to the implementation of a change and developing Manuscript received October 14, 1997; revised November 1998. Review of this manuscript was arranged by Editor-in-Chief D. F. Kocaoglu. K. Joshi is with the School of Business Administration, University of Missouri, St. Louis, MO 63121 USA (e-mail: joshi@umsl.edu). T. W. Lauer is with the School of Business, Oakland University, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 USA (e-mail: lauer@oakland.edu). Publisher Item Identifier S 0018-9391(99)08289-6. strategies for successful implementation of change is a key area of information systems (IS) research. Researchers have identified many difficulties in implement- ing changes. Broadly, these can be classified as technical and behavioral. Both types of problems are encountered in implementing new technologies. However, technical problems, once identified, can be solved relatively easily with appro- priate resources. Outside consulting help, when needed, is also relatively easily available and can be used effectively to address such difficulties. On the other hand, behavioral problems are difficult to diagnose and even more difficult to resolve. Once employees’ attitudes are set, they are difficult to change. Even outside consulting help is of very limited use in such circumstances. Various researchers have noted the primacy of behavioral problems in implementing changes involving new systems or technologies [1], [2], [6], [12], [20], [31]. Behavioral problems may involve employees who do not use a system because they are unable or unwilling to adjust to a change in their jobs, work relationships, or organizational environment that results from the new system. These implementation problems have been attributed to various factors ranging from individuals’ resistance to change [13], [19] to political issues [3], [4], [21], [22]. In studying implementation some researchers focus on factors that inhibit or support implementation, for example: top management support [29]; employee participation [14], [15], [17], [23]; training [16]; and implementation approaches [25]. Others have examined implementation in terms of the quality of the process used to implement changes [8], [9], [32]. Difficulties in implementation have also been attributed to differing political interests of the parties involved with the resulting conflict [27], [28] and employees’ efforts to engage in resource politics and information politics [4], [18], [21]. Davis et al. [5] examined ease of use and usefulness of the new system as key issues in the acceptance of a new system or technology in their technology acceptance model (TAM). These research efforts have been directed toward fulfilling the need for developing an appropriate model to help understand, explain, and predict employees’ reactions to an implementation and to develop strategies to implement changes successfully. Unless implementation difficulties are properly diagnosed and clearly understood, it is difficult to deal with them. Man- 0018–9391/99$10.00  1999 IEEE