Critical success factors in enterprise resource planning implementation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to consolidate the critical success factors (CSFs) as published in enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation case studies. The authors perform the analysis and propose the final CSFs based on the reported ERP implementation process stages. Design/methodology/approach – The paper follows the eight category coding steps proposed by Carley (1993) and utilizes only ERP implementation case studies to identify a distinct set of critical success factors. The 37 case studies used in this paper provide a reasonable sample from different countries and contexts. Two methodologies were followed, one for the literature review process and the other for the analysis and synthesis. Findings – Out of 64 reported CSFs that were extracted from the literature and subsequent detailed analysis and synthesis the authors found a total of 22 factors that are distinct. These factors which encompass change management, are proposed with five ERP implementation stages. Research limitations/implications – The final set of success factors proposed in this study gives a consolidated and unified view of the significant variables to be considered during all the stages of ERP implementation. The research is limited to case study literature and does not account for ERP implementation models and frameworks. Another limitation would be the scope of the literature searched which is that of the Management Information Community. Practical implications – The proposed CSFs can be used by practitioners in five ways: assess implementation of an ERP; ex-ante assessment; comparative analysis with other implementation experiences; utilize CSFs from model as part of key performance indicators; and utilize the model to establish a concise strategy to project management process for the ERP implementation. Social implications – ERP implementation is complex. The promise has not yet been fully realized. An ERP-enabled organization entails primarily strategy and change management. To that effect, all stakeholders are impacted by ERP implementation. This paper, identified CSFs extracted from cases of ERP implementation and proposes a model to support its project management, user satisfaction and sustainability. The results aim at reducing costs, maintaining timeline, reducing employee anxieties and with a successful implementation, better service to customer base. Originality/value – This paper is the first attempt to present a consolidated list of CSFs and mapping them to the stages of an ERP implementation as reported from the industry. It originality is its focus on utilizing rigorous published case studies with the hope that future case studies would utilize the work to report on the same factors. The value is that as the case studies are increased, comparison and differentiation between is enhanced.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,021 | 0,064 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».