The objective of this paper is to provide a foundation for understanding the management of inflexibility in an integrated process by using sales compensation process as a studied case. The majority of process integration studies have focused on the design and management of an efficient operation by taking the advantage of information technology. Little was known about the downsides of process integration. It is necessary to build deep knowledge about the management of integration inflexibility so that risks of integration failure can be minimized.
By summarizing literature and industry experiences of process integration and enterprise flexibility and inflexibility, three types of inflexibility are proposed. They are operational, organizational, and system inflexibilities. The sources of these inflexibilities can be categorized into two types: nature of IT-enabled integrating and technological barriers. These two sources of inflexibility, observed in the studied case, are interrelated and can correlatively affect business performance.
Companies that intend to apply process integration to their sales compensation process would aim for eliminating the risk of integration downsides by examining the sources of inflexibilities in the IT-enabled process. Only with a solid and thorough view of the system, could companies achieve their goals of rolling out the packaged service in the compensation plan process. This paper analyses the up and down sides of process integration and plans to provide guidance for further application of process integration packages.

1. Bruce Claremont (1992), Understanding the Business Aspects of Software Migrations.
2. Deloitte (2007) 2006 Strategic Sales Compensation Survey “Building a Sales Compensation Plan That Works”, 2007 Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation
3. Garner (2004) The Mission and Future of Integration.
4. Goodhue, D. L., Wybo M. D., and Kirsch L. J. (1992) The Impact of Data Integration on the Costs and Benefits of, MIS Quarterly, 16, 3, 293.
5. Hecht, B. (1997) Choose the right ERP software, Datamation, 43, 3, 56.
6. Kern, Harris (2001), IT Organization: Building A World class Infrastructure, Prentice Hall.
7. Michael Dunne (2006) Introducing the Concept of Sales Performance Management, Gartner Inc., 21 June 2006.
8. Moore, J. E., and Love, M. S. (2005) IT professionals as organizational citizens, Association for Computing Machinery, Communications of the ACM, 48, 6, 88.
9. Roldán, J. L., and Leal, A. (2003) A validation test of an adaptation of the DeLone and McLean’s Model in the Spanish EIS field. In Jeimy J. Cano (Eds.). Critical Reflections on Information Systems: A Systemic Approach. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
10. Shang, S. (2005) A comparative study on users' role in of ERP software and BPM software implementation, eBusiness Journal, 2005, 331-351.
11. Shang, S. (2007) The “What” and “Why” of the inflexibility of IT-enabled Process Integration, working in progress
12. Sheth, A. P., and Larson J. A. (1990) Federated Database Systems for Managing Distributed, Heterogeneous, and Autonomous Databases, ACM Computing Surveys, 22, 3,184-236.
13. Singletary, L. A. (2003) Empirical study of attributes and perceived benefits of applications integration for enterprise systems, Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College: United States – Louisiana.
14. Singletary, L. A. (2004) Applications Integration: Is it Always Desirable?, Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
15. Smith, Jack P. (2006), Building a sales compensation that works.
16. Spathis, C., and Constantinides, S. (2003) The usefulness of ERP systems for effective management, Industrial Management + Data Systems, 103, 8/9, 677.
17. Sushil, (2001) Enterprise Flexibility, Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 2, 4, 53.
18. Sundaram, V. Liu, F. Dalmia, S. White, G.E. Tummala, R.R. (2001) Process integration for low-cost system on a package (SOP), Electronic Components and Technology Conference, 2001. Proceedings., 51st.
19. Themistocleous, M. (2004) Justifying the decisions for EAI implementations: a validated proposition of influential factors, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 17, 2, 85.
20. Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M., and Elmes, M. B. (2005) Understanding enterprise systems-enabled integration, European Journal of Information Systems, 14, 110-120.
21. Waring, T. and Wainwright, D. (2000) Interpreting integration with respect to information systems in organizations - image, theory and reality, Journal of Information Technology, 15, 2, 131.