million" (Caldwell, 1998; p. 63). This action, however, was wholly inconsistent with thewoefully separate procurement systems existing at individual manufacturing sites.
The problem with all of this is that Harley-Davidson was unable to gain benefits of quantity pricing as a company overall. Not only were the individual sites treated as separateentities, but their insistence on behaving that way prevented Harley-Davidson from gainingany benefit of quantity pricing or preplanning based on total sales forecasts. The companyneeds a means of operating with greater internal efficiency.
Alternatives and Score Matrix
The SiL'K team already had determined that Harley-Davidson was in need of amodified ERP; it also was adamant in the beginning that it was "not seeking a full ERPsolution, that the scope was well defined and those suppliers shouldn't waste time pitchingadditional functionality" (Sole, Cotteleer and Austin, 2003; p. 9). Harley's ArchitectureIntegration group reviewed all possibilities to ensure compatibility with existing systems. Of the eight potential suppliers responding to Harley-Davidson's RFP, the company narroweddown its choices to three.
Provider1's "representatives asked appropriate questions, they clearly acknowledgedHarley-Davidson's values, and seemed comfortable with the casual but competent Harley-Davidson style" (Sole, Cotteleer and Austin, 2003; p. 11). Provider1 addressed every issueraised in Harley-Davidson's RFQ, and tailored its solutions perfectly to the requirements setout by Harley-Davidson.Provider1 did not offer the highest form of functionality, and did not offer "'web-enablement' directly but its team proposed integrating a partner solution" (Sole, Cotteleer andAustin, 2003; p. 11). On the other hand, Provider1 was comfortable with the changemanagement issues that would arise in making the changes that the company sought.