MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Beyond ERP Implementation

2010· book-chapter· en· W2504762922 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in business information systems and analytics book series · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssimilation (phonology)Knowledge managementGrounded theoryQualitative researchProcess managementBusinessComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research about ERP post-implementation and ERP assimilation is very limited. Similarly, scant research investigated ERP experiences in developing countries. Based on a qualitative research methodology grounded in the diffusion of innovations theory, the present study aims at investigating the determining contextual factors for ERP assimilation. A cross-case study analysis of four firms in a developed and a developing country suggests that in both contexts, the primary factor for encouraging a successful ERP assimilation is top management support. Other factors such as post-implementation training and education, IT support, organizational culture, managers and users involvement, strategic alignment, external pressures and consultant effectiveness are also identified as factors that influence ERP assimilation. Several assimilation impediments that should be watched are also specified.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.021
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it