Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems and teamworking both entail significant changes to work on the shopfloor. However, a study of 24 Danish manufacturing enterprises found both change programs were rarely explicitly tuned to each other, with little direct interaction in a majority of cases. A case study shows the importance of, and the micropolitical difficulties involved in getting companies to configure ERP-systems to support teamworking.

No abstract

Executives and information technology (IT) specialists often manage IT projects in project teams. Integrative IT systems provide opportunities to manage and restructure work functions, but the process of change often causes serious problems in implementation and diffusion. A central issue in the research presented in this article, conducted in a Danish manufacturing company, is how an IT system could be con.gured to support shop.oor teamwork and enhance the quality of work. The approach is based on participatory design and the concept of ‘model power’. This concept facilitates an understanding of power of speci.c actors, during participation in IT project development. Model power may be an obstacle to different interests and perspectives being taken into consideration. The case study presented illustrates the point that it is possible to counterbalance model power and, thus, it has been possible to put issues such as team functions and quality of work on the agenda. Simultaneously, participation competencies seem to have been enhanced.

No abstract

Consulting Engineers and Architects are currently experimenting with the concept of "Integrated Design Process" (IDP). This paper views Integrated Design Process as a process tool and a concept for management and organization of the green energy engineering process. Moreover such a concept is understood both as systematic knowledge and a symbolic device for enabling change. The paper briefly reviews international variants, and focus on two variants present in Denmark: an architect and engineering variant of IDP. The differences between the concepts include different roles for main actors, the use of information technology, the relation to lean, and forms of collaboration. The paper discusses two building projects focusing on teams of engineers and architects in the early conceptual phase. One develops a solution focused on energy saving technologies, the other on energy producing. It is argued that in this practical context, IDP is viewed as ambiguous and not well defined, and the architects and engineer work hard understanding and using the concepts even when directly involved. It is difficult to reach consensus on how to do it. The various players agree that an increased interdisciplinary interaction in the design team is necessary in order to comply with the increased complexity of green energy building design. IDP shows potential as a driver for green energy engineering and technologies, as traditional roles and responsibilities in the design process is changed, and sustainable solutions for green buildings can reach a higher standard and quality and are integrated earlier in the design process.