er beesö as well as with management and relating back to the interviewees what you have learned from them, for their confirmation.
The software package might meet the organizationÆs needs thoroughly but still be the wrong package for other reasons: lack of user-friendliness making it difficult to learn and use, poorly designed code that precipitates frequent errors, inflexibility to adapt to the organizationÆs unique data, or poor documentation. The impacts of these faults could be a long learning curve with a concomitant long return on investment, frustration and data errors associated with system errors, and the need to alter the code or buy additional add-ons to compensate for inflexibility. The best way to mitigate this risk is to do a thorough review of each package before selection, including in-house trials with real data.
A third risk would be buying a package that is too functionally restricted for the organizationÆs needs or one that is more robust than needed. Too little functionality would mean the need for software modification or add-ons; too much functionality would likely mean a system that costs more both software- and hardware-wise than needed to do the job. The impact of either wrong choice would be additional cost, and an additional impact of the too-robust system would likely be unnecessary added complexity. Again, the best way to mitigate this risk is to thoroughly analyze and try the software up front.
A fourth risk would be size of the project. Should the project be too big to accomplish successfully with the size of the staff, the budget, or the timeframe, it would be at r
...