Which implementation method is likely to be more expensive with the drawback that users may not let go of the old system?

The chosen answer, phased implementation, can indeed be more expensive and has the potential drawback of users holding onto the old system. In phased implementation, new processes or systems are introduced in stages over time rather than all at once. This approach can require significant resources and budget to manage multiple systems simultaneously during the transition period. As users may be accustomed to the old processes, they might resist fully adopting the new system, leading to potential inefficiencies and inconsistencies as both systems operate side by side. This dual-layer approach demands careful planning, training, and support to ensure users are comfortable with the changes, and the overall costs can accumulate due to ongoing maintenance of the old system while the new one is being introduced incrementally.

In distinction to other methods, such as direct changeover, which involves a complete switch from the old to the new system at once, or parallel running, where both systems are used at the same time for a specific period, the phased approach extends the transition, making it more resource-intensive and complex. Understanding the potential challenges related to user adaptation and system management is crucial for effective process improvement and system implementation.