MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Social and Cultural Challenges in ERP Implementation

2012· book-chapter· en· W4244924776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sapna Poti, Sanghamitra Bhattacharyya, T.J. Kamalanabhan

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnterprise resource planningContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementAdaptation (eye)Information and Communications TechnologyChange management (ITSM)AccountabilityBusinessPublic relationsPolitical scienceMarketingPsychologyComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the differential practices of change management in organizations of western origin and compares it with the best practices prevalent in Indian organizations, with special emphasis on social and cultural challenges faced in these countries. Since Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), as part of an information and communication technology (ICT) initiative, is frequently associated with organization change and transformation in relation to its adaptation, it has been used as the context in this study. The impact of social factors and cultural challenges on change management processes and elements are compared and contrasted using multiple case studies from USA, Canada, European (Western/Eastern) and Indian organizations who have adopted ERP technologies. The conceptual framework highlights cultural and social factors that affect ERP implementation, and offers suggestions to researchers to empirically test these influences using sophisticated analytical methods and develop change strategies and practices in response to these challenges. Further, it also draws attention to the need for a contemporary, result-oriented, quantitatively measurable framework of change management at the individual and enterprise levels. It is expected that such an approach would result in better buy-in from all stakeholders in terms of increased accountability.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicERP Systems Implementation and ImpactFrench-language works237,207