Organization Factors for ERP Projects in a Developing Country: A Case Study Jordan
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The organization factors integral to the successful implementation of ERP systems are identified in this paper, and the organization factors under scrutiny include: Change Management, Business Process Management, and Top Management Support. Survey questionnaires were circulated to ERP users in companies in Jordan, which led to the collection and analysis of 314 responses in total. The results evidence significant relationship between change Management and top management support with ERP implementation success. However, the outcomes did not support the relationship between Business Process Management and ERP implementation success. This study could assist ERP vendors and consultants in developing countries in preparing certain strategies for dealing with the oddity between their ERP products and ERP adopting organizations. Also, both ERP adopting organizations and managers could attain awareness regarding the intricacies that are inherent in ERP installations in order to prevent obstacles while increasing the possibility of attaining the looked-for results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it