much of his energies “managing upward—making sure
management understood what we were doing and why we
were doing it.” Palacios created “powermaps” to help mon-
itor communication. These graphic representations dis-
played each important person on the MaxFli team, how
they were all related, and what communications were
essential. These maps helped Palacios keep management
informed about the current struggles and successes of the
project. This style worked well, according to GM Friere:
“Everyone was well informed throughout the [different]
stages of the process. It was not a ‘black box’ where we put
in the money and hoped we got the right system.”
This was important because MaxFli was intended to
be a solution for many direct distribution markets in Latin
America. By “managing upwards” Palacios secured the
approval and protection of the most powerful force in the
MaxFli implementation, the strategic steering committee.
There were several challenges to effective communi-
cation during the MaxFli development effort. First was the
geographical distance between the design team based in
London and the development team based in Santiago.
Frequent teleconferences, video conferences, and pan-
Atlantic trips helped to moderate the effect of time and
distance on communication between designers and devel-
opers. A second constraint could not be moderated by
travel or telephone. Most of the design team were native
Spanish speakers while the development team in the
United Kingdom were primarily English speakers. This
issue was moderated somewhat by the fluent bilingual lan-
guage skills of Friere, Palacios, and others on the team.
Processes and People
Palacios insisted that MaxFli was not primarily a technology
innovation, but a business-process change project supported
by technology. Therefore, successful implementation
depended on much more than having a strong IT function to
support it. He argued, “[T]o capture its full potential
[MaxFli] requires an in depth revision of current TM&D
processes, organizational change and a strong commitment.”
This view is illustrated by Exhibit 3, which Palacios
used in describing MaxFli. It displays the role of the
MaxFli system and the role of the implementing end market
in determining system success with MaxFli. The unshaded
areas represent end-market responsibilities for success
while the shaded areas represent MaxFli’s contribution
toward system success. Accordingly, almost 75 percent of
the final outcome depends on the efforts of the local end
market, apart from MaxFli. MaxFli was not expected to
single-handedly increase market share, streamline pro-
cesses, and manage trade marketing in the end markets. It
was a technological tool that enabled these desiderata but
did not command them.
Palacios planned the implementation as a 13-month,
3-phase plan, consisting of awareness, presystem business
preparation, and in-market implementation. Over 50 percent
of the total effort was expended in end-market business
process improvements and preparations before the system
went live. The first 2 months were spent in developing
awareness, studying the business case, and choosing a man-
agement team. The next 5 months were spent reviewing and
optimizing current organizational processes to be ready to
implement the system. Finally, the system implementation
itself required 6 months and led to well-aligned processes,
people, and systems.
Palacios gave considerable attention to training and
support. Training in the new business processes as well as
the MaxFli tool itself were offered in parallel with the
process improvements for all employees who would useSustainAchievePeople Process SystemMaxFli
End-MarketEnd-Market
ResponsibilityEXHIBIT 3 Clarifying MaxFli and End-Market Responsibilities for
Implementation SuccessCase Study IV-6 • The Challenges of Local System Design for Multinationals 651